To fully understand a problem like terrorism, you need to accept complexity, a sprawl of general factors — personal, historical, cultural — converging in a specific movement or a single actor. The kind of mass-murdering, effectively-suicidal terrorism that has taken hold in America in the 23 years since Columbine is no different, even if it doesn’t wave a flag or make political demands.
The cascade of mimetic violence, the despairing anti-politics, the horribly vulnerable targets, the young men willingly becoming monsters — so much is implicated here: our media ecosystem and our education system, religion and technology and fatherhood and relations between the sexes, a tangle of roots in poisoned soil.
But an important truth about policymaking — a conservative truth, in many contexts — is that you don’t have to fully understand a problem’s roots in order to do something about it. …
So don’t give me a fanciful general war on guns or a general “hardening” of elementary schools. Give me policies, the simpler the better, that would stand between some meaningful percentage of mass shooters and their arsenals.
We have a decent sense of what those policies might be. The people drawn to this kind of terrorism are overwhelmingly of a type — young, troubled, socially awkward men. They are not necessarily gun experts, prepared to retrofit any weapon they acquire for maximal lethality, nor are they necessarily experts at navigating black markets to acquire weapons they can’t get legally. And they often expose their instability and intentions in advance.
Yes, some will overcome all obstacles or strike without warning. But many others, including those like the Uvalde shooter, seem potentially deterrable at the point of weapons acquisition. As the University of Alabama criminologist Adam Lankford told The Dispatch, “if you make buying a firearm more difficult for people who find it difficult to do anything socially, that makes a difference.” …
So I would like to see experiments with age-based impediments rather than full restrictions — allowing would-be gun purchasers 25 and under the same rights of ownership as 40- or 60-year-olds, but with more substantial screenings before a purchase. Not just a criminal-background check, in other words, but some kind of basic social or psychological screening, combining a mental-health check, a social-media audit and testimonials from two competent adults — all subject to the same appeals process as a well-designed red-flag law.
— Ross Douthat in Ross Douthat: A Simple, Practical Way To Keep Guns From Young Men Who Shouldn’t Have Them
WTF is “Ross Douthat” and who cares what he has to say? OH! NY Times? BS/irrelevant and DONT care. And posted on msn.com? Most certainly irrelevant prog BS.
RE: “So I would like to see experiments with age-based impediments rather than full restrictions — allowing would-be gun purchasers 25 and under the same rights of ownership as 40- or 60-year-olds, but with more substantial screenings before a purchase. Not just a criminal-background check, in other words, but some kind of basic social or psychological screening, combining a mental-health check, a social-media audit and testimonials from two competent adults — all subject to the same appeals process as a well-designed red-flag law — Ross Douthat ”
ross douthat’s Eugenics and outright discrimination based rant falls right in line with Jim Crow…If you’re Black you ain’t getting no gun and if you are a Black deemed to be a misfit it’s off to Eugenics Camp for you. Or in nazi-germany if you are a Jew you and yours were unarmed easy pickings and subjects for the most unmentionable live human experiments ever conducted on earth…brown shirts and the like were well aware Jews did not have squat to defend themselves and were easy pickings like schoolkids in Uvalde did not have squat to defend themselves. And if left up to ross douthat 18-25 year old parents or 18-25 year old residing with a grandparent, etc. wouldn’t have the proper means to protect their residence and loved ones.
Today the very people responsible for setting up and making soft fluffy targets out of school children are coming after the means of self defense for you and yours. Well in America we do not drop to our knees and cater to criminals who criminally misuse anything they can get there hands on or do we cater to an agenda rooted in racism and genocide known as Gun Control.
As for ross douthat and his omni-directional age discrimination Gun Control rot…The actions of an 18 year old insane individual clearly has put ross douthat in the position of needing new knee pads.
Young and SOCIALLY awkward. That covers about 25% of the human race right there. And who’s to decide what or what is not SOCIALLY AWKWARD just because somebody does not fit into popular perception.
Why not just ‘fess up and admit that vthere are just far and away too many firearms in circulation.
Nobody actually NEEDS anything more tha ONE good 9mm or .38 for home defence and a suitable calibre five shot BOLT ACTION rifle for hunting Nobody need to possess any more than 25 rounds of ammunition for either for immediate use. AS for peresonal ‘street’ defence unless yhou are allowed to have a handgun ‘in hand at all times a handgun, though it might well instil some kind of misplaced confidennce is pretty damned useless in a real-life situation and is more than liable to turn a threat into a kill with YOU getting a one way trip to the city morgue. That BAD guy or gal [or indeed a Police Officer!] pointing a gun at you is every much into self preservationas you are. Please remember that. Just how many shooting incidents have been STOPPED by members of the public? Very very few. To few to even have any available statistics. In any situation the guy or gal with a gun in hand will always have the advantage.
Life is NOT like the Wild West as portrayed by HOLLYWOOD and you are not John Wayne or Clint Eastwood. The Lawmen of the Old West, such as they were, had the firmly entrenched attitude of never giving the ‘Suckers an Even Break’ mostly the Bad Guys were picked of by the ‘Gun That Won the West’ -the underlever repeating rifle or, like Wyat Earp, [who must have had something going for him because he died in bed at an advanced old age] with his long range Buntline Special Colt from cover.
AND the one gun limited /ammunition suggestion DOES NOT, as far as I know, break the conditions of the American Constitution.
What expertise do you have in firearms? Seriously,?
In a neighboring city a ring camera captured four men kicking down a door and invading a residence. Four pistol armed men vs my 6 shot k frame. I live in a largely rural state with a long border with Mexico. Many ranchers choose AR pattern rifles because multi suspects are a reality.
I asked about your experience mine includes a tour as a Infantry Officer, Police Officer and an armed citizen.
Limiting citizens to one”approved self defense gun” and 25 rounds does in fact Infringe our rights . It certainly flies in the face of a citizen’s militia. By the way please cite your sources on concealed carry
Albert Hall(aka a.h.) said, “Nobody actually NEEDS” and exposed his ignorance once again. Limey get it through your head, It is the BILL OF RIGHTS and not needs. Rights that every person has bestowed by God.
First, Albert, understand that as far as murdering innocents goes government entities kill on a level far above private citizens.
How are we going to disarm the state?
You have no idea what you are talking about, which is given away by your meandering speculations about how many times members of the public have stopped shooting incidents. In fact, mass-shootings themselves are so rare that no reliable statistics can be kept, but a nontrivial percentage of them are in fact stopped by armed citizens. Usually, if a citizen does not stop or deter a mass-shooter, he will inflict the full measure of his animus and damage on innocents, because the police simply almost never get to the scene quickly enough, and even when they do, as Eve seen at Uvalde, they create a perimeter to contain the shooter, rather than rapidly zeroing on and eliminating him with overwhelming force. I can think of numerous cases off the top of my head where would-be mass shooters were limited to a single kill (themselves) by the presence of a “good guy with a gun”.
And that, of course, is but a tiny set of the much larger body of incidents in which armed citizens have defended themselves or others from assaults, burglaries, robberies, home invasions, sex attacks, and the like. The incidents number in the millions.
And that, of course, is all gravy, because citizens have a 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms, whether or not people like you think they do more harm than good and choose to remain unarmed, or whether you calculate that there is some statistical utility in their possession of guns.
You also make a ludicrous assertion about no one needing more than 25 rounds of ammo at a time: how about at the gun range, when practicing either for pleasure or to hone their abilities so they can responsibly wield their weapons when the situation demands it? Should we only shoot 25 rounds at a time, and should we have to visit the ammo store, and fill out forms and wait for a background check to be performed, per every 25 rounds? That is a beyond stupid idea and a massive infringement on our 2nd Amendment rights.
Likewise with your statement about people only needing a single handgun and a single bolt-action rifle. So does a family of four get to own 8 firearms in your book? I wonder, do you think people really need to speak on all the topics they hold forth on in public and online? Does anyone really need a Twitter account, or a Facebook account? Does anyone really need the individual ability to petition the government? Couldn’t we just restrict the right of public speech to certain government-appointed group spokespersons? That way we could avoid all the messy back and forth, and hurt feelings and insults and arguments and conflicts that characterize free and open speech by citizens on whatever topics they choose to whomever and wherever. What’s that, you say? It’s an inherent human right, confirmed by the 1st Amendment? And it doesn’t matter if any instance of speech is strictly “needed” because it’s a general principle that people have a right to speak their minds? Well so too with the 2nd Amendment, sir: people have an unalienable right to self-defense that preexists and supersedes government and the common law. And just because our country must contend with the twin problems of 1) a very small number of very troubled people imitating each other in ritual nihilistic erasure of the miracle of human life, and 2) a criminal pathology in a certain very specific, easily identifiable section of society, does not mean that the rest of us, the 99.9999999% (and that’s my real calculation of the scope of problem #1 on an annual basis) who are not deranged death-worshipping punks, and are not also the maybe 0.5% of the population living the urban, gang lifestyle (problem #2) where playing shoot’em up—bruut bruut—is a right of passage, should have to surrender our right to self-defense, nor comply with nonsensical, ineffective regulations (which only affect the law-abiding) limiting the number of guns or ammo we can possess, or limiting our magazines to purely arbitrary numbers just so some people can feel like they are “doing something” about the problem, even though they paint with a broad brush on the wrong canvas.
If you actually want to do something about gun violence:
1) harden schools with sensible cost-effective measures like making sure the buildings are secure;
2) rebuild our mental health system and it’s capacity to identify and house—on a permanent basis—the seriously mentally ill. This will also necessitate a reckoning about the autonomy of mentally ill people to refuse treatment;
3) fight the gang culture: support reviving the father’s role in the family; increase penalties for parents—maybe that means financial penalties, maybe in some cases even criminal penalties—and it gives me no pleasure to say this as a libertarian—who are not keeping their children under control at school or in public. 13 year olds should not be out running the streets at night. Stop illegal immigration so entry level jobs are again available to teenagers and so wages on the low end of the scale increase relative to the rest. Demand better discipline and study in schools, and if it is not forthcoming then more consequences need to follow, like maybe everyone who won’t get with the program eventually finds themselves in training schools. Stop excusing quality of life issues. Increase government support for job programs for felons and ex-cons: the biggest barrier to their successful reabsorption by society is their limited job prospects. Increase state-level penalties for gang participation. Instead of subsidizing gang members to serve as “community liaisons” or as “peace partners” or whatever other ridiculous euphemistic pay-offs are concocted in the “social justice” left, we need to do the opposite and deal harshly with gang behavior. Why is the mafia a shell of its former self? Well, the #1 reason is RICO and heavy prison terms from anyone caught participating in “honorable organizations”. Yet the government, in my opinion because of the identities of the people who comprise the membership of gangs, almost never hits these gang bangers with RICO or a state-level equivalent. This implicitly sends the message that gangs are tolerated—heck, even an integral part of the community, so long as they just tamp it down a bit. But indeed the #1 thing the government could do to decrease the homicide rate would be to target gangs aggressively and make it more of less impossible to live the quiet gang-banging lifestyle of you don’t want to be in prison from 15-45.
It’s much easier for the anti-gun left to make felons out of 100 million of their fellow citizens with feel-good, do-something laws like limiting magazine capacity but I guarantee you that such measures will not affect the murder rate.
N.B. I can swap magazines in less than 1 second with any standard semi-automatic pistol, and I can easily carry 8 magazines in my jeans pockets—so long as I have my belt tight. Therefore the idea that magazine limits are a silver bullet solution (pun intended) is fanciful.
But by all means, look where the problems actually are, not to me or my guns, because that is just punishing law abiding citizens who have nothing to do with the problem and who screwing with will do nothing to solve it.
Nobody ‘needs’ the pretentious opinions of some pompous foreigner who knows nothing about real American history but here you are yet again.
AMEN Debbie. You nailed it 100%.
What were you doing at age 18? I was working my way through college and on the Army Reserve. How do you justify disregarding other citizens Constitutional rights ?
Also you want to tie a right to some Facebook troll? Let’s screw young peoplees free speech, gun and privacy rights
“WTF is Ross Douthat”. Well, in addition to being another brainless Leftist/fascist, in the mould of dacian the stupid and MinorIQ, he is perhaps the nation’s most ardent Shrillary Clintoon fanbois. I believe he regularly commits onanism to his autographed Granny Maojackets poster. Perhaps he even sometimes visits the dacian/MinorIQ/nameless,brainless, d***less troll/jsled afternoon circle jerk.
Ignorant rants do your cause not good at all. If you cannot express yourself in literate terms don’t bother. Your entry makes you look a complete and loud mouthed idiot.
What or who for instance is DACIAN the STUPID. The word DACIAN refers to persons from a particular part of ROMANIA that was, way back in the day settled by the ROMAN DACIAN LEGION and the reason that ROMANIA has a ‘VULGAR’ LATIN [or ROMANCE] based language. [A little history does no harm at all for Dick Wavers like you]
As for commiting ONANISM [why not tell it as it is – ‘jerking off’] over an ‘item’ of clothing if indeed that is so, and which after all is not that rare in the USA I’d opine. I find that far more of a peaceful occupation than YOU and your ‘friendly’ neighbourhood gun freaks jerking off at the latest, unnessessry HANDGUN or SEMI-AUTO Rifle.
Says the fake Brit king of unhinged rants, as you yourself demonstrate above.
Or to a greater degree of likelihood, queen, given all the pearl clutching hysterics and odd propensity to focus with near exclusivity on penises.
Also, you seem to be under some self-delusional idea that we give a flying fuck what you think, or that you are even in slightest bit relevant, you insignificant little worm.
One more thing, claiming you don’t know of any Dacian, that’s your tell moron.
No way on this green Earth you have been coming here this long and missed the multiple massive incoherent screeds posted under that screen name several times per day. O’ w8 m8, exactly like yours.
Only Dacian would claim complete ignorance of her own panty wetting posts.
Albert Hall, Go fuck yourself.
You’re nothing more than a far left anti gun democommie who knows nothing about firearms, ignores any statistics that prove you wrong, who knows nothing about the US Constitution/Bill of Rights , why they were written and who appears to be trying to be blindly and ignorantly further Pedo Joe Biden’s and the drunk bitch Nancy Pelosi’s take over of our country. You don’t even qualify as an American IMO.
You, of ALL people commenting here, certainly know about “unhinged rants”, don’t you Albert the Subject???
Stop being coy, dipshit, you know EXACTLY who dacian the stupid is. And I am MORE than aware of what “Dacia” is, and from whence the name derives, so stick that right up your posterior, mate. I am also aware of the pathetic history of your subject monarchy, how you slaughtered hundreds of thousands, if not millions, trying to impose it on your “colonies” (and got your @$$es REPEATEDLY kicked in the process), and went from bloodthirsty colonizers, intent on “bearing the white man’s burden” to dickless p***ies intent on never taking responsibility for your own lives.
Sod off, swampy. And I actually know enough about firearms to know you are a lying poseur, who knows f***-all about firearms or shooting, so, once again, sod off, swampy.
Lil’dtard/subject AH (AKA: gunposer)………
Wear that crown and sash proudly, you earned them. 🤣
You forgot one JC.
Yet another supporter of tyranny offers his advice. Feel free to ignore him. Laws can’t fix the problem, nor can the police or any other governmental organization, or omnipotent group of moral busybodies.
no, NEW laws can’t fix theproblem. But enforcing/inolementing some of the existing ones WOULD help.
Thins like putting violent felons behind bars for a few years, then closely monitoring them for a few more years once spring.
How about certain implementatnio of the DEATH penalty for those who murder? No five years out on good behaviour. Anyone can toe the line in the hoosegow. Not much opportunity for crime in there.
ny mass killer, or other wilful attacker who tries to kill randomly, must fce the deathpenalty. Firing squad, No hood. Face the line. Ten whooters, five rounds each. On command fire at will. Televise it so other putative killers can get a good idea wof what they are facing when caught.
On, and a blanket muzling of all forms of media. The NAME of the killer will never be mentioned in any reporting. He will be the Uvalde School Killer of 2022. Nothing more. Nohtinr less. Or maybe,even more generic, give the perp’s last six digits of his booking number as his “name”. So this clown in Uvalde would be known as 593412. (made up number for illustrative purposes). Had that been done wiht the Columbine killers, far fewer copycats would have surfaced. What? They’ll ONLY know me by six random numbers? Nah….
Damnatio memorie. All references to the perp in public records will be expunged. They cease to exist. No fame or infamy. Just fading memories.
AMEN Debbie. You nailed it 100%.
SO what can solve the problem then? You do not have the right to criticise if you cannot come up with alternatives.
Some of the suggestions on gun control and mine are no exception may or may not be workable for any number of reason in practice BUT at least they are suggestions with some logic behind them. But the truth is that a great deal of suggestions by persons who do not have the full informatiion are not ultimately workable and come to nought.
However it is increasingly obvious that something will have to be done if the incidences of GUN CRIME, including MASS SHOOTINGS, is not to forever spiral upwards. To me, on the other side of the Pond the most obvious first step is to make ALL firearms less available to the public legally held or other wise.
Albert the Brainless, D***less Subject,
First, let’s define “the problem”. What “problem”, PRECISELY, are you positing exists? Once we define “the problem”, we can debate whether it actually IS a problem, whether you understand it, or just pretend to, and what “solutions” to “the problem” might actually make it better – since many of the “solutions” proposed by you Leftist/fascists actually make your alleged “problems” much worse (.c.f., Senile Joe Biden’s “solutions” to Afghanistan, energy policy, immigration policy, supply chain issues, crime rate, civil disobedience, inflation, etc. Shall I go on??).
If you are talking about the “gun violence problem”?? Again, define it, @$$hole. The problem of “urban youth” committing crimes, including murder, with illegal weapons that shouldn’t, under our EXISTING LAWS be permitted to possess??? Is THAT “the problem”, brainless, d***less subject?? Or did you have some OTHER problem in mind, moron??
So who gets to pass judgement on these arbitrary tests? And who oversees the appeals process?
Facebook and Twitter style content moderators! Voted for Trump, follow certain web groups or personalities, posted against COVID vaccine mandates, don’t believe climate change doomsayers, etc… This could give you negative social points, mean you are a threat to society, and prohibit you from purchasing certain firearms.
China has implemented a similar “social points,” system to rate their subjects using the huge surveillance state they’ve assembled. Caught on camera Jay walking or littering? Your rating moves down towards the social degenerates that need to be “re-educated.” Post something on social media outside the party line? Thats a big bump down.
Mental health screenings and support are important, but we can’t create the thought and morality police to exercise fundamental rights.
You forgot the constant CAPTCHA puzzle solving. Ya know, to prove you are that person. Actually, these social sites need that shit. I wonder how many tweets would be deterred if they got asked to prove they are not a bot for every one. Like “how to stop me from drunk texting”.
“A practical way to keep guns from young men who shouldn’t have them.”
Exactly, Pcn. The title of the article says all you need to know.
“…way to keep guns from…” and “…who shouldn’t have them.”
The only entity that could accomplish that is the government and the entire article is about how the government could go about setting up the rules to make that happen.
Almost as though no one has ever read the Second Amendment at all – “…SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.”
Scary and dangerous and unstable people will find a way to strike out, whether that be guns or some other means. Giving the government the authority to infringe on their ability to do that means you also have to give the government the authority to infringe on the rights of other citizens who they have decided are scary, dangerous or unstable, by their own arbitrary standards.
But historically the most scary, dangerous and unstable entities in society have turned out to be the very governments who have been granted or who have taken this very power of decision from the people!
The Second Amendment does not discriminate.
Properly exercised the people would be prepared to defend themselves, their neighbors and their community from those scary and dangerous and unstable people, be they the occasional socially awkward young men, or worse yet, the politicians and their fascist, Statist tendencies.
“But historically the most scary, dangerous and unstable entities in society have turned out to be the very governments who have been granted or who have taken this very power of decision from the people!
The Second Amendment does not discriminate.“
Yep, Republican authored, Republican signed into law:
“The Mulford Act was a 1967 California bill that repealed a law allowing public carrying of loaded firearms. Named after Republican assemblyman Don Mulford, and signed into law by governor of California Ronald Reagan, the bill was crafted with the goal of disarming members of the Black Panther Party who were conducting armed patrols of Oakland neighborhoods, in what would later be termed copwatching. They garnered national attention after Black Panthers members, bearing arms, marched upon the California State Capitol to protest the bill.”
Is your point that Republicans frequently betray the principles they claim to support? Because dude, we know.
Lol, one can argue the same for both parties though. But wait… No, that doesn’t help miners agenda. It does shut him up sometimes though.
Hey whinertard, sling your BS somewhere else 🐒.
The difference is that the Democrats have never claimed the pro-gun Highground as Republicans have.
Every Republican politician talks about their work to ‘defend the Second Amendment’, plenty of speechifying.
But when push comes to shove, the Republicans are the ones actually taking concrete steps to remove gun rights, from Gov. Ronald Reagan and the Republican’s Mulford Act to President Reagan banning the carrying of firearms on millions of acres of national land.
Oh sure, some extremist Democrats make wacky noises about banning all guns or taxes on ammo, but it was Democrat President Barack Hussein Obama and Joe Biden’s administration passage and signing of the 2009 CARD Act that repealed the Reagan era ban on firearms in national forests and parks across America.
It’s the blatant Republican hypocrisy that I object to.
Speaking of Obama, remember all the Republican activists and politicians saying no Muslim should ever enter our country, much less have a leadership role in the government?
And now the Republicans are running a candidate for the governorship of the state of Pennsylvania who is a Muslim Turkish citizen, who fought in the Turkish army and voted in the Turkish national election of 2018.
Hypocrisy, thy name is Republican.
“Oh sure, SOME extremist Democrats…”
“…remember ALL the Republican activists and politicians…”
“But when push comes to shove, the Republicans are the ones actually taking concrete steps to remove gun rights…”
House passes sweeping gun package in largely party-line vote
One steaming pile of BS after another.
At least you’re consistent whiner. 🙄
Hey Miner49, you and I both agree on something! We should absolutely condemn politicians who restrict 2A rights. We should praise politicians who grant more 2A rights (although in the text of the 2nd Ammendment the rights shouldn’t be infringed).
You and I should both go to the polls and vote for the man or woman who will roll back restrictions on gun rights.
Straight from the source.
Factual history seems to put a damper on agenda driven diatribes
“House passes sweeping gun package“
Did someone say Bill?
June 10, 2022 At 15:07
Straight from the source.
Factual history seems to put a damper on agenda driven diatribes’
Whiner proves he’s a lying POS with EVERY post.
Keep going whiner, everyone is laughing. 🤣
“Straight from the source“
So we should believe everything the anti-gun republican politicians say?
“Hey, dey ain’t no racists hereabouts boss man!”
Here’s another perspective:
“The author of the bill, Assemblyman Don Mulford, a Republican from Piedmont” rose to inform the Assembly that “[a] serious incident has just occurred. People with weapons forced their way into this chamber
and were ejected….. Mulford described the invasion as a “direct attempt” to intimidate him, and he later said that the Panthers’ actions inspired him to toughen the bill.’42 The police escorted the protesters to an office downstairs while the Panthers shouted that they had a constitutional right to bear arms.143
Governor Ronald Reagan appeared outside the Capitol as the group
was departing. When asked by reporters about the Panthers’ activities, Reagan agreed that there was a right to bear arms, but he added,
“There’s no reason why on the street today a citizen should be carrying loaded weapons.”‘ Reagan called it a “ridiculous way to solve problems that have to be solved among people of good will.”’45 He further declared, “Americans don’t go around carrying guns with the idea of using them to influence other Americans.”
So we are in agreement, Democrats are 100% anti second amendment and Republicans are just 50% of the way. Not being affiliated with any political party, ill take my chances with the Republicans.
Remember how many times you’ve been caught lying red handed Miner? We do.
About the brick pallets you claimed never existed in the Summer of Love, Burn Loot & Murder fest.
And don’t cite that socialist bullshit site Snopes lies as being some sort of proof against, when the evidence to the contrary is clear in video and images.
Blow it out your @$$, MajorStupidity. Now do Dianne Feinstein, Nancy Pelosi, Senile Joe, and Chuck the Schmuck.
Take your partisan blather and stick it where the sun don’t shine, Leftist/fascist liar.
You are aware that the law was passed fifty four years ago and every one involved with it is…dead? That argument is as compelling as saying Democrats are pro Confederate.
‘appeals process’ – WHAT appeals process? Most all of the red flag laws that are in place or proposed don’t even allow due process ahead of the seizures nor is there any mechanism for the victim to be able to see the ‘evidence’ against him or who dimed them out Oh I ‘almost’ forgot there is also no provision for properly notifying the victim until the SWAT team shows up at oh dark thirty in too many cases.
” ‘appeals process’ – WHAT appeals process? ”
Appealing the judgement after the restraining order and confiscation have occurred. that is the “due process”. Further “due process” is, if you win the appeal, you can apply for a court order requiring the cops to return your property (in whatever condition pleases LE). Then, you can serve LE with the court order, and await their “due process” for identifying your confiscated property, staging it, then setting a date/time for you to arrive, and pick-up your property.
There is, however, a teensey weensey possibility that LE “due process” calls for immediately destroying confiscated property that will not be used in trial proceedings. Sometimes your property remains available for return to you, but the cop house has no FFL, and no legal authority to transfer the property back to you. Or, so they might claim.
The ride is part of the punishment.
And that is why one never stores all his eggs in one basket….has access to multiple stash sites with no potential link to one’s self….takes battery out of one’s phone when visiting those dispersed stashes…..etc, etc. Watch “2000 Mules” and learn, apply lessons.
So they imagine that 1A and 14A are to vanish if one dares to beg two others who have no authority over one to exercise 2A?
Clearly lots of people in the US have no idea how rights work. We need to change that.
They say there is on such thing as a stupid question. Obviously, stupid ideas are alive and well.
My favorite riff on “there are no stupid questions” is: “But there certainly are inquisitive idiots.”
Gadsden, it;s the person asking not the question being asked. Stupid is as stupid does!
From the article:
“…and even if the right to a demilitarized childhood isn’t enumerated in the Constitution, it should be treasured and preserved.
Conservatives and libertarians should be especially aware of this given that they have spent two years arguing, reasonably, that the infliction of COVID security theater on children does more harm than good. If that logic applies to the low risk to children from the virus, it surely applies to the low risk of school terrorism as well.”
Except the mask and lock down mania (and government forced vax) didn’t work. If it did work, well then, it would have worked.
I read the entire article. He never once mentions policies designed to get to the root of the matter. That would involve teaching and promoting the idea of an intact family with a mother and a father, and valuing all life, including oneself. They refuse to go there because both of those ideas are at odds with the politics of the Left.
Yeah, to do that we would have to eliminate virtually all social programs, bureaucratic agencies, and government regulations. I can’t even get people who nominally support freedom to agree to all of that
And it would require bringing God into the equation in one manner or another, and you know, we just can’t have that.
The Young and Socially Awkward Should Undergo Enhanced Screening Before Becoming Computer or Cell Phone Owners.
The Young and Socially Awkward Should Undergo Enhanced Screening Before Becoming Car Owners Or Operators.
“… but some kind of basic social or psychological screening, combining a mental-health check, a social-media audit and testimonials from two competent adults — all subject to the same appeals process as a well-designed red-flag law.”
In other words, create more jobs for social workers and ensure another revenue stream for the mental health professional.
I just heard this on the radio the other day. This is from a nearby region. The number one cause of death is drug OD, about 80% of which is from fentynal. Number two was “car accidents” and number three was “gun violence.” Obviously some of the “gun violence” was from suicides. Some of the drug ODs were as well. It might be difficult to determine if a fentynal OD was intentional because it’s so easy to OD.
there were over 100,000 drug overdose suicides in the U.S. June 1 2021 to June 1 2022. Over 90% of them had access to a firearm in some manner, they chose drug overdose.
What is called ‘gun suicide’ is not as common as the gun-control industry wants to make it out to be, they tend to lump it under the term or context of ‘gun violence’ to make it appear more than it really is. Over 60% of ‘gun-suicides’ are later determined to have been accidents or homicide.
Statistically, in terms of prevention, there are more car accidents deaths and injuries each year than there are ‘gun-violence’ incidents.
According to The National Safety Council, cell phone use while driving leads to 1.6 million car accidents each year and 390,000 injuries occur each year from accidents caused by texting while driving. Using statistics from the NIH and factoring it in, over 52,000 of those 390,000 injuries will die each year due to complications from or related to those injuries. Using data from the NIH there are over 2,000,000 people injured in car accidents each year, ~ 1.2 million will die later as a result of or complications from ,or conditions related to, those injuries.
Using data from the NIH, car accidents overall result in over 90,000 kids under age 12 being killed or permanently disabled each year.
In relation to texting while driving accidents, and car accidents overall, in relation to per 100,000 of population and the average numbers of cars on the roads – a person is 97% more likely to be killed or injured in a car accident (even as a pedestrian).
If you spend at least 8 hours in public daily, you have encountered in the last three days in some manner, at least 37 people who have committed some form of a violent harmful act against another within the last 48 hours before you encountered them. You will also be targeted as a potential victim of a violent crime at least three times for every 8 hours you spend in public.
You have, on average, for every four hours you spend in public, a .000021% chance of encountering anyone who will become a ‘mass shooter’ or is considering committing a ‘mass shooting’ (no matter the definition used by government or gun-control advocates). On average, for every four hours you spend in public, you have an over 70% chance of encountering a person who will (possibly if given the chance) commit a violent act against you (not including mass shooting) either with or without a firearm.
Statistically, a person is over 97% more likely to be a victim of a wrongful police shooting than a victim of a school shooting.
In the aggregate; School AND mass shootings account for less than 2% of all violent gun acts. Crime against individuals by criminals account for over 90% of all violent gun events.
~7,000 people daily in the U.S. successfully employ DGU and save their life or the life of another from a violent criminal act.
On average, in the aggregate, nationwide in the U.S. ; ~13 people daily are not successful in their DGU in terms of saving their lives but are successful in stopping the bad guy from hurting others by their DGU before they went down – and – ~8 people daily fail completely in their DGU efforts.
What I listed was top of the hour quick radio news from a nearby region. They never bother going into detail. The takeaway for most listeners is probably drugs and guns bad, and the car stuff won’t happen to me because I’m not an idiot.
You can never expect to solve a problem without first properly identifying it. Most here understand that the only problem the pols are trying to solve right now is creeping disarmament.
“Over 90% of them had access to a firearm in some manner, they chose drug overdose.”
That makes sense. I knew some people that committed suicide. They had access to guns, but didn’t use them. They used drugs. One cut himself, but not until he was too numb to feel it, and was going to die from an OD anyway.
In 30 years, area where I live, we have had suicides.. 137 that I can find in research for my area. 97 were drug overdose, 21 were hanging, 10 were by slicing arms open, 8 were jumping from height, 1 was by firearm.
All had access to firearms in some manner.
The 1 by firearm was four years ago, he did not own a gun but borrowed one. From what they can tell he shot himself three times. First shot, he grazed his head.. second shot entered the lower jaw and out the cheek…. the pain must have been bad but he was comitted and the third shot did it.
112 of those gave no prior warnings or indications. The one that shot himself gave no prior warning or indications. Only two had attempted prevously.
Your first suggestion would go a long way in making them less socially awkward and likely remove the need for the rest.
“Social Media Audit” tell me how that plays out exactly? If I oppose the removal of Civil War monuments arguing it’s “heritage not hate” am I showing signs of latent white supremacy? If I am LDS and post that transgender education violates Biblical teaching am I a potential gay basher? Is membership in a conservative veterans organization evidence of violent anti government tendencies?
Sorry but at the end of the day I don’t trust you or the “guardians” you will put in place. We simply have no shared values
This guy may be out in left field, but maybe he’s not too far out. Most of us have agreed that mental health is an issue that needs to be addressed. Maybe some modest screening is in order during background checks. Kid comes into your store, says he wants a hunting rifle, but he can’t identify a chipmunk from a groundhog, maybe he’s not really into hunting. Has no idea where any range might be located, either a formal indoor range, or even an outdoor quarry, maybe he shouldn’t walk out the door with a gun. He doesn’t know a single other hunter, again, maybe he’s not really into hunting.
I know we’ve read stories of individual dealers who have done their own screening, and declined to sell a weapon to an individual. Maybe we do need to make those screenings a little more formal. Dig into the kid’s background a little bit. Maybe ask for references. If all his references are convicts, maybe he shouldn’t buy a gun. If he tells you teacher’s names, and the teachers tell you they are afraid of him, maybe you don’t want to sell him a gun.
I believe that I’ve read praise for dealers who have declined to make a sale, here at TTAG. Biden is only 98% wrong when he says the 2nd is not an absolute. NO ONE wants to hand a weapon to a wild eyed crazed fool who promises to make headlines with his new weapon. There should be some way to identify those crazed fools.
If I haven’t been clear enough, kudos to those dealers who go the extra mile, trying to ensure they don’t sell to a nutcase, or a criminal.
If you could somehow prevent 18 year old sociopaths from acquiring weapons until they’re 21 I don’t think giving them 3 extra years to plot their revenge on the world would turn out to be the advantage they think it would.
If they weren’t playing games, and were really sincere about “brain development,” then the age would be more like 24. That would also mean moving up the legal age to vote and purchase alcohol. That would never fly.
Maybe to real reason is that most 18yos aren’t mature enough to make adult decisions. Taking the age of majority back to 21 would be a good thing. Many “kids” get saddled with a felony(especially the type that has no jail time). If they can’t drink, or buy firearms, they are NOT adults. Treat them as children. Make a process where a 18-21 on his own can be an adult, just by filing some papers. Do you think a kid going to college on his parents’ money is an adult?
Do you think Democrat politicians would be okay with 18-20 year olds not voting? I’m surprised more people aren’t talking about that when the age limit conversation comes up.
They do want lower the voting age to 16.
Probably as a precursor to lowering or eliminating the age of consent.
What about the PFC deployed overseas? What about the volunteer firemen? What about the kid in an apprentice carpenter or electrical job? Are they adults?
I joined the Army Guard to help me pay for College and in my 18th summer I was at Ft.Knox learning the way of war.
Far more Americans work for a living then goe to Rocky Point for spring break
Hmmm…no gunz till 25 comrade? You want ’em to wear a star of David too? Just to be sure? What a maroon!
Ross Douthat, the slobbering Clintoon fanbois, being the ardent Leftist/fascist he is, has never met an infringement of inherent human rights he wouldn’t support . . . so long as it supports his narrative, and furthers his political ideology. Sure, deprive young men (men are evil, anyway, doncha know?), who YOU and YOUR PARTY made “adults” for purposes of obtaining a few more votes (and now that’s bitin’ y’all in the @$$, innit??) of basic human rights, equal protection and due process, because (i) they rank VERY low on your “oppression pyramid”, (ii) nobody likes white men, anyway, and (iii) ‘guns r evil’.
Go micturate up a cable, Ross Douthat, you pathetic soy-latte swilling c**t. Get a couple of Russian hookers to help you; I hear that really turns your queen, Granny Maojackets, on. You get a twofer . . . plus, it’s the only time you’re ever likely to be in the presence of an actual female, doing something vaguely sexual-ish.
It’s just amazing how at a certain age you are legally considered an adult, but not really… So which is it? Profile younger people and restrict their rights? Increase the age at which you are legally considered an adult – which includes joining the military, voting, paying taxes, ability to leave a household, etc etc… Or treat everyone equally? Asking for a friend.
That “adult” thing….
I think the UN is behind this BS, but in a lot of countries and adult isn’t really considered an adult adult and may remain dependent on parents for insurance etc until their 26th birthday, even though they can still do all manner of “adult” things (like join the army and go die) starting at age 18 or 21. And that minimum age for joining the military in some countries is still age 16.
“…..you don’t have to fully understand a problem’s roots in order to do something about it. …”
“One of the notable aspects of the democratic process is that one need not know anything about a subject in order to pass laws about it.” – the late COL Jeff Cooper.
“Doing something” and resolving the issue are not necessarily the same, and usually the twain never meet. Politicians are always doing something, usually thereby creating problems to justify doing some more. The proverbial perpetual government circle jerk.
With 50 years of engineering, business, operations, strategic vision creation, successful problem identification and resolution, I feel I know something about solving problems. The less one knows about the root causes of problems the more the solution becomes a “spray and pray” action. The problem with government “spray and pray” is it always manages to hit their shadowed agenda. Even a blind hog finds an acorn now and then, government not so often. Politicians would rather take the acorn from in front of the hog putting the hog on their Government Plantation Dwellers Free Acorn Extravaganza Program. Of course, in return for the hog vote.
StL – one ‘minor’ addition to your post – the hogs fail to realize that when their usefulness is over the WILL be turned into pork chops, bacon, chitlins and sausage (and will gladly vote for that as well).
How about screening politicians on the Constitution, Bill of Rights, God, country, family, Chevys….maybe, Fords and Dodges, and apple pie before placing them on the ballot. Politicians do far more absolute damage and carnage to America than dead kids in a school, bodies in a WallyWorld or on Shootcago streets. Their carnage is just more on the “down low,” not as flashy.
“Give me policies, the simpler the better, that would stand between some meaningful percentage of mass shooters and their arsenals.”
— Sounds fantastic!
“We have a decent sense of what those policies might be.”
— Sure, if we are willing to deny basic human rights to the general populace.
This entire mindset and approach is exactly the same as declaring that every post-pubescent male is a potential rapist which warrants the omniscient and all-benevolent Almighty State screening every male before he can be within 1000 feet of a female.
“Sure, if we are willing to deny basic human rights to the general populace.”
That’s a feature, not a bug. In fact, it’s the general goal.
Democrats would be all too happy to have those very same young men vote at 16.
Politicians are known for creating problems justifying their apparent “spray and pray” action which is in reality obfuscated justification for a precision “fish-in-a-barrel” shot at their shadowed agenda. Shoot East at a West target. Oopsie…missed the “target,” hit this unexpected bonanza.
Once is happenstance. Twice is coincidence. Three times is a pattern, or as James Bond noted…..enemy action. – Ian Fleming. Timing is the conformation. Nothing happens in government by accident. Ineptly, yes…..at least on the surface, but never accidentally.
A re-newed fusillade of mass shootings and prime time Jan6 reality shows just before mid-term elections…..with Dems sucking wind…..shouldn’t be written off as happenstance. Push gun control and take out the legs of probable future Presidential front runner before Dems loose hold in November. Don’t ever think your government couldn’t orchestrate troubled youngsters……ID them through FBI/LEO contacts, befriend, nurture, radicalize, incentivize, fund, enable, warehouse, and nudge into action at opportune moments….clustered for shockingly maximum effect. Of course your government wouldn’t. It wouldn’t run a Fast & Furious, Operation Choke Point, weaponize IRS against conservatives, fly pallet loads of cash to Iran in the dead of night, green light a Russia hoax, leave billions in arms to avowed terrorists, shut down the economy “for your safety”, throw free shit confetti money to the masses generating crippling inflation, ad nauseam. If one doesn’t consider the possibility, one facilitates the probability.
“prime time Jan6 reality“
Yes, there’s no question that the reality of the violent coup attempt on January 6 will definitely create anxiety in all rational Americans.
It’s difficult to deny the evidence of the video, as well as the statements by Trump appointee Attorney General of the United States Bill Barr.
And I found it especially compelling when Ivanka Trump stated that she accepted the Attorney General’s judgment regarding the election.
So sure, there’s many Trump supporters reexamining their beliefs, more to come…
Most Americans are apolitical and don’t even know about the Jan 6 hearings. The average American are more worried about the high inflation and gas prices under the current regime.
bidenflation is destroying the dreams and hopes of millions and miner is trying to distract from that pain with a clown show.
Calculated using the 1980 method “Core CPI” is now higher than the official top-line inflation (which went up this morning, LULZ!).
That 17%+ IRL is gonna hurt. Badly. And it’s only going to get worse. People have asked if Biden would live to another election cycle.
At this rate is cognitive decline will be eclipsed by his decline from the platform of a gallows or the back of a truck.
JWM, to leftists, politics is everything
There was no ‘insurrection’.
Oh, the cognitive dissonance. 🙄
I would bet this guy was all for the Jobama policies that made it impossible to expel problem students and nearly impossible to report violent incidents to LE, and have the incidents placed on permanent records.
Want to address gun violence and failed 4473 background check root causes? 🤔
Reverse these obsurd policies/laws, then come talk to us.
Barry did an awesome job of enabling violent youth, just as his pastor/spiritual leader taught him.
Pre-crime punishment is never out of fashion.
” . . . some kind of basic social or psychological screening, combining a mental-health check, a social-media audit and testimonials from two competent adults — all subject to the same appeals process as a well-designed red-flag law.”
Are you kidding me?
Easily one third of Americas of all ages would fail that screening for anything!
Why stop there? Apply the same screening to people who want to have kids, vote, own property, drive, run for office etc.
I bet that former director of The Ministry of Truth, she would of failed that screening.
MAKE IT SO KIDO’S CAN BUY ONLY 22LR , HAVE WAIT TILL 21 TO BUY LARGER CALIBER.
How is that Constitutional? Should we only allow voting in local elections until 21? What about military service? At age 18 I was at Ft.Knox Kentucky. Perhaps we should only allow people to be Eagle Scouts until 21. Seriously what other civil right are you willing to treat this way? Voting, jury duty, how about religious freedoms?
“Seriously what other civil right are you willing to treat this way?”
All if them. They’re pretty open about that if you pay attention to their overarching policy preferences.
“The people drawn to this kind of terrorism are overwhelmingly of a type — young, troubled, socially awkward men.”
What percentage of young men shoot up their school? But somehow it’s OK to discriminate against that group as a whole? By the author’s logic, every member of a definable group should be subject to stricter scrutiny and have to jump through hoops to enjoy their civil rights as long as that group is over-represented in violent crime. The sounds like a very dangerous argument to me.
“…is that you don’t have to fully understand a problem’s roots in order to do something about it.”
Well, no but it sure as hell helps to have a basic understanding of the problem.
The problem here, IMHO, is a social one (actually a large set of them) and laws cannot fix social problems. Society needs a “come to Jesus moment” to admit that Western society in general has gone badly astray from its principles and to begin to return to them.
But that’s a lot of work and people would rather do something else. Politicians don’t want to talk about it because there’s no way to enhance the pols wealth or .gov’s power.
The country, on the whole, is fat, lazy and brainwashed. Until something comes along that scares the absolute bejesus out of people, nothing productive will be done. Like an alcoholic we have to find rock bottom and then either change or die.
Shades of the witches from Macbeth, I guess.
By the pricking of my thumbs/
Something wicked this way comes.
strych9, Very good thought on what needs to happen in this country.
“So don’t give me a fanciful general war on guns or a general “hardening” of elementary schools. Give me policies, the simpler the better, that would stand between some meaningful percentage of mass shooters and their arsenals.”
Hardening schools IS a policy, dude.
I imagine Douthat would think installing bollards after a car drives through the front doors of a gov installation isn’t a policy?… that we need to instead focus on keeping people like the driver from acquiring cars?
DUMB. Or maybe just disingenuous. Or maybe both.
Read what he actually said.
His goal, like it or not, is policy that specifically will “…stand between some meaningful percentage of mass shooters and their arsenals”.
Bollards are not an appropriate analogy here. In the motor vehicle metaphor he wants to prevent such a person from acquiring the vehicle in the first place, not stop them from using it in an inappropriate manner.
The author’s goal here was to set the parameters of the debate in such a way that only gun control policies are acceptable solutions.
Anything else he can, and will dismiss, because it doesn’t cut off “some meaningful percentage of mass shooters” from access to the firearms they would use in a shooting.
What other rights should be deprived of the socially awkward? And who decides what socially awkward means?
I’ll volunteer for the job: Right off the bat, anyone who has registered democrat is socially awkward and denied the right to speak, the right to peaceably assemble, the right to be secure in their property and the right to remain silent when questioned…
And protection against ex post facto laws or writs of attainder, or of corruption of blood (see the PRC, where you can be condemned to the loggai for the actions of your grandparents, of of your grandchildren).
In all the years that Douthat has been writing I’ve never seen anything to indicate that he has any comprehension of the concept of rights.
For the record, joy riding shooting at people at night is not “socially awkward.” Neither is carrying around a bag of dead cats to get a rise out of people. That’s violent psycho behavior.
Socially Awkward behavior is things like making stupid jokes that no-one really finds funny, or telling random strangers about all of the intricacies of the Mark 14 Torpedo scandal. Yes it might be the biggest engineering scandal of the 20th century that no-one was ever held accountable for, but it’s stupidly technical and most people don’t care.
There’s a basic fundamental difference between someone who may make you want to chew your own leg off, and someone who’s likely to want to skin you and wear it as a hat.
Do not confuse the two.
Other than the obvious 2nd and 14th amendment violations here, I don’t think doing something else to make them feel like an outsider or castigated is a good plan to help them for reasons that aren’t complicated to understand.
“…I don’t think doing something else to make them feel like an outsider or castigated is a good plan to help them…”
Perfect plan to keep them dependent on others, especially government.
Kids are just gonna print guns.
Two points. Hardening schools has never really been attempted. Why not? Real Common Sense dictates that making a target more difficult to be penetrated, is a No Brainer. They’ve had no issue hardening the security around our so called (s)elected leadership.
Second point, nearly 80% of these Miscreants have been on the Radar, locally, State or Federally, yet nothing was done to prevent their crime, especially before they turned 18. That needs to stop. If they are making threats, they need to be Flagged regardless of their age. At the very least, it will prevent them from lawfully acquiring a weapon. They will learn that their Antisocial behavior as a minor has consequences as
an adult. That is how it should be. Will it prevent all attempts? No, but it will stop 80% of them.
That’s Applied Common Sense.
Open the high school records of all students who graduated and want to by any firearm. Even if they dropped out you can still check their employment history, income, and if they were ever arrested criminally. Any person who was must then wait until they’re 21 to be re-evaluated.
How many of you are dissing Mr. Douthat without reading the entire article? He makes many good points about mass shootings and shooters. They do share many common social/economic/family issues. He also acknowledges that some of the solutions he proposes would run contrary to the Constitution and some policies. I agree that schools should not become ‘military’ bases. Kids should be able to be kids without having to fear being at school. Definitely removing ‘Gun Free Zone’ designation would be a start. Guys, understand just hardening schools is not the solution. We, as a nation, need to do something to address these young men and get them the help they need. Many of his solutions are less intrusive than the bills proposed by Congress right now.
Billy – the ‘less intrusive’ concept is in the realm of ‘just the tip’ – wrong is wrong regardless of how ‘good’ of an idea it seems.
“Billy – the ‘less intrusive’ concept is in the realm of ‘just the tip’ – wrong is wrong regardless of how ‘good’ of an idea it seems.”
More importantly, I don’t want to hear/read anything that may have the potential possibility of causing me to re-think my set-in-concrete ideas about guns and stuff.
I am always right (and correct). Everyone else can sit on it.
Nobody needs more than 3!
Golf clubs, that is. A wood, an iron and a putter…and 10 golf balls.
We must stop golf club violence!
The problem is NOT guns.
It’s hearts without God.
Homes without discipline.
Families without two loving, mentoring parents.
Courts/DAs without Justice.
Schools without God, prayer….except during shootings, praying to God for good guys with guns to come……to actually enter, act.
ALL brought to you by anti-America Lefty Libturds since Johnson Administration.
“And that is why one never stores all his eggs in one basket”
Have never quite understood that rationale. Is it intended to secure weapons against the day armed rebellion is necessary, or simply to have a gun that one has made “illegal” after having been relieved by police action related to violation of a particular law?
In the latter case, identifiable use of the hidden firearm will surface the fact that you withheld information required under a law you violated, and have now used an illegal firearm in self-defense, or hunting, or some such. Maybe one is ensuring the availability of a firearm after being found to unjustly have been relieved of firearms in the first place?