No New Gun Control Bills Will Pass This Congress

To all those endorsing a certain age for firearms ownership lets remember that the Las Vegas shooter that killed 60 people was 64 years old.

 

I do find it interesting that a database of mass shootings from 1982-2022 which I found at Mother Jones.com listed 133 mass shootings of which 28 of them were 21 years of age or younger. If indeed this is accurate information it would seem the juveniles are the outlier. Making legal policy based on raising minimum age for this or that firearm makes no sense whatsoever.

 

No, there's a logic to it--you can politically disenfranchise people at the ends of an age range far easier than any "in the middle" group. What are they going to do, vote for/against "you" in even smaller numbers than they do now?

The question then becomes, does that then mean, maybe 21-25 will be the next target?

This is all entirely political, and that's the true tragedy of it. It's cloaked in Public Good and every manner of societal benefit.

 

Yep, it is indeed tragic, and to further the tragedy I'm sure they would take such action knowing darn well that there is no public good or societal benefit from it.

 

The Wild Card is that we don't know what future events may hit the headlines and stir anti gun sentiment. I am NOT saying that more infringement on our rights is the answers but many others will.

 

“No man's life, liberty, or property are safe while the legislature is in session.”

― Gideon J. Tucker
tags: government, humor, politics

 

Reconstruction was an abject failure.

 

The majority of those over 21 are responsible enough to own a gun but a tiny minority are not. Should they also suffer more restrictions for the promise of a more safe society?

 

That is an extreme misreading of history.
Reconstruction provided the framework to force 3 constitutional amendments through that would never have passed otherwise.

 

Actually that came up in the extended NG posting to DC, where the guardsmen were being housed in motels (privately owned structures) without compensation.

 

An "assault weapon ban" is set to start its way through congress next week.

 

The media hid that one really well! This is the first I've heard of that one.

 

And those amendments had little to no effect for about a century.

Vagrancy laws allowed southern governments to force unemployed former slaves back to work on plantations. The sharecropping labor/economic system (even though it applied to both poor blacks and poor whites) maintained slave-like conditions until WWII. African Americans could not reasonable expect to vote until after the 1960s. Yes, Reconstruction allowed African Americans to serve in elected positions in the South in the aftermath of the Civil War, when the US Army ended its occupation, by about 1877, Reconstruction completely collapsed.

The point I'm making, and to apply it the 2A issue and community, is that kind of change can't come from the top down. As someone stated at the beginning of this discussion, that kind of change has to come from the bottom up by winning popular support and changing voters' attitudes. Much like racist attitudes int he south didn't end at the passing of the Reconstruction amendments, anti 2A attitudes (and every attempt of legal trickery to limit the 2A) will not end just because the Supreme Court says so. Ultimately, the make up of the Supreme Court will change, and it will over rule itself-as we have seen repeatedly through its history. (Brown reversed Plessy, Dobbs reversed Roe, etc.; what will be the case that reverses Bruen?)

 

That's certainly true.
And the Crown had been deliberately quartering troops in citizens' houses to deprive them of goods and wealth.

There's historical evidence that "house" in the context of the 3rd would have included any real estate in private ownership. Much as "quartering" included feeding the troops as well as sheltering them. So, barns & outbuildings were no-go, too.

In the DC situation, the motel owners were having to turn down pre-paid Reservations at higher Tourist Season rates to retain the Guardsmen. Who were also going through the vending machine stock at significantly higher rates than "typical traffic." The "free breakfast" was bankrupting the innkeepers, too.

 

Now the dem party is trying to ram an AWB ban through.These people will never stop the infringements .I am very concerned as the rinos helped with last bills! I hope this fails ,but i thought the red flag would fail also.

 

So am I. One of my Senators voted for the last bill. Sen Blunt is showing his true colors now that he is not running for re-election.