Raising the age for purchasing guns, eliminating assault weapons and tightening screening for people wanting to purchase guns might be good things. But none of those measures would have prevented this incident. Unfortunately — sadly — we have developed a culture of violence, intolerance and a lack of restraint in personal behavior. Conflicts — on the highway, the internet or in the classroom — too often are addressed by violence or the threat of violence.

We need to find our way to a different approach to both our personal and to the world’s problems. We need a foreign policy in which military threat no longer is considered a reasonable option. In which we seek to understand the viewpoint of others and try to find ways to help rather than to simply expect acquiescence to our demands.

Joe Douglas
May 27, 2018
Letter to the editor: Culture of violence
[I am perplexed. Could this person really be this naïve? Or is it a case of crap for brains?

What if the viewpoint of others is, as it is in some cases, “Convert to our religion or die.”? Or “Give me all your money and maybe I won’t kill you.”? Or, “We are implementing the final solution to the Jewish problem.”?

Or how about in our everyday life? “Obey law or we will use as much violence as is needed to put you in jail and/or force you to pay a fine.”

Violence, or the threat of it, is an essential part of a modern civil society. Public shaming and ostracizing people may come close to working in a small tribe. But as the “community” gets larger it loses it’s effectiveness. Once there are population centers of 1000s or tens of thousands and some with millions of people violence is the thread by which the social fabric is created.

It is required that the individual be willing and able to enforce civility when the criminals, private, or government sponsored, make clear their intentions to violate the social fabric of civil society. This is why we have a government guarantee, for whatever that is worth, that our right to keep and bear arms will not be infringed.—Joe]

Only hardcore right wing extremist belong to the NRA, over 98% of gun owners want nothing to do with the NRA and it’s unhinged extremist political agenda.

EisenhowerConservative
May 18, 2018
Comment to Parkland father calls out Trump, McConnell, Ryan after Santa Fe shooting
[Interesting claims. Nearly all the gun owners I know who don’t have NRA memberships say the reason is because they NRA gives up our rights too easily. The others I know say it’s because they don’t want to be on a list the government might someday get access to and use to confiscate their guns.

Going on to the next portion of the sentence, the NRA claims they have something like 6 million members. If that represents only 2% of gun owners then EisenhowerConservative is of the belief there are 300 million gun owners in this country out of a population of about 325 million, of which about 35 million are under the age of 18. So, EisenhowerConservative  believes the entire adult population and a significant portion of teenagers are gun owners.

Hence, we must conclude EisenhowerConservative is a liar and/or has crap for brains. It is my hypothesis that one or both attributes are prerequisites for being a gun control advocate. EisenhowerConservative is just one more data point confirming that hypothesis.—Joe]

It is ridiculous to suggest guns are part of the solution to knife violence.

Dr. Karim Brohi
May 7, 2018
At NRA Convention, Trump Slams Gun Control Laws in France & U.K.
[Apparently this crap for brains doctor has never heard the phrase, “Never bring a knife to a gun fight.”

I would like to suggest the good doctor should visit a USPSA match in the U.S. carrying a knife and see how much knife violence is possible.—Joe]

The AR-15 is modelled after a military grade M16 assault weapon. It’s designed to be able to shot at a long distance, with high-capacity magazine attachments that can spray many, many bullets in rapid fire, at a velocity that’s three times that of a regular pistol and can shoot the front and back through a helmet.

Kris Brown
Co-president of Brady Campaign and Center to Prevent Gun Violence
April 30, 2018
How The Gun Lobby Uses Van and Knife Attacks To Shut Down Gun Control And why experts are calling bullshit on it.
[Yet another example of where they have ignorance, drama, and deception.

We have SCOTUS decisions, data, and inalienable rights.—Joe]

Reason demands that true courage be defined by a person’s willingness to defend the life and liberty of himself and those around him.

Disarming law-abiding citizens demands, on the other hand, that courage be defined by a person’s trust in the police to imprison the correct suspect after the person is already dead.

That is not only absurd, but dangerous.

Amy Swearer
April 13, 2018
Why Is London Imposing ‘Knife Control’? Because Gun Control Hasn’t Worked
[Also of note in the same article:

It’s important to note that comparisons of homicide rates between the United States and the United Kingdom are difficult because since 1967, the U.K.’s official definition of homicide for crime reports has been relatively unconcerned with the actual number of dead bodies.

Instead, the country only counts as homicides those instances where a person is convicted of murder—meaning justifiable homicides and deaths where no suspect is caught or convicted are excluded.

Never give up your guns.—Joe]

AR-15’s present day popularity is not constitutionally material.

William Young
U.S. District Judge
April 6, 2018
Judge rules: Massachusetts’ assault weapons ban doesn’t violate 2nd Amendment
[I am reminded of US v. Miller (emphasis added):

The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. “A body of citizens enrolled for military discipline.” And further, that ordinarily, when called for service these men were expected to appear bearing arms supplied by themselves and of the kind in common use at the time.

And of US v. Heller (emphasis added):

as we have
explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those
“in common use at the time.”

I find it odd that a U.S. District Judge has such poor reading comprehension skills. Perhaps Alzheimer’s has taken it’s toll and it’s time for him to get professional care. Or was it someone had blackmail material on him?

Unless it was some sort of serious health issue he should be prosecuted.—Joe]