• Welcome to the new Internet Infidels Discussion Board, formerly Talk Freethought.

Another Fucking Mass Shooting At US School

How the NRA Rewrote the Second Amendment - POLITICO Magazine - "The Founders never intended to create an unregulated individual right to a gun. Today, millions believe they did. Here’s how it happened." - May 19, 2014
“A fraud on the American public.” That’s how former Chief Justice Warren Burger described the idea that the Second Amendment gives an unfettered individual right to a gun. When he spoke these words to PBS in 1990, the rock-ribbed conservative appointed by Richard Nixon was expressing the longtime consensus of historians and judges across the political spectrum.

Twenty-five years later, Burger’s view seems as quaint as a powdered wig.

Many are startled to learn that the U.S. Supreme Court didn’t rule that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual’s right to own a gun until 2008, when District of Columbia v. Heller struck down the capital’s law effectively banning handguns in the home. In fact, every other time the court had ruled previously, it had ruled otherwise. Why such a head-snapping turnaround? Don’t look for answers in dusty law books or the arcane reaches of theory.
Instead,
The National Rifle Association’s long crusade to bring its interpretation of the Constitution into the mainstream teaches a different lesson: Constitutional change is the product of public argument and political maneuvering. The pro-gun movement may have started with scholarship, but then it targeted public opinion and shifted the organs of government. By the time the issue reached the Supreme Court, the desired new doctrine fell like a ripe apple from a tree.
Then going into the history around the 2nd Amendment.

The Federalists wanted a strong central government, but the Anti-Federalists didn't.
The foes worried, among other things, that the new government would establish a “standing army” of professional soldiers and would disarm the 13 state militias, made up of part-time citizen-soldiers and revered as bulwarks against tyranny. These militias were the product of a world of civic duty and governmental compulsion utterly alien to us today. Every white man age 16 to 60 was enrolled. He was actually required to own—and bring—a musket or other military weapon.

On June 8, 1789, James Madison—an ardent Federalist who had won election to Congress only after agreeing to push for changes to the newly ratified Constitution—proposed 17 amendments on topics ranging from the size of congressional districts to legislative pay to the right to religious freedom. One addressed the “well regulated militia” and the right “to keep and bear arms.” We don’t really know what he meant by it. At the time, Americans expected to be able to own guns, a legacy of English common law and rights. But the overwhelming use of the phrase “bear arms” in those days referred to military activities.

There is not a single word about an individual’s right to a gun for self-defense or recreation in Madison’s notes from the Constitutional Convention. Nor was it mentioned, with a few scattered exceptions, in the records of the ratification debates in the states. Nor did the U.S. House of Representatives discuss the topic as it marked up the Bill of Rights. In fact, the original version passed by the House included a conscientious objector provision. “A well regulated militia,” it explained, “composed of the body of the people, being the best security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, but no one religiously scrupulous of bearing arms, shall be compelled to render military service in person.”
So it was over most of the US's history, with the courts upholading laws on everything from where gunpowder could be stored to who could carry a gun.
Four times between 1876 and 1939, the U.S. Supreme Court declined to rule that the Second Amendment protected individual gun ownership outside the context of a militia. As the Tennessee Supreme Court put it in 1840, “A man in the pursuit of deer, elk, and buffaloes might carry his rifle every day for forty years, and yet it would never be said of him that he had borne arms; much less could it be said that a private citizen bears arms because he has a dirk or pistol concealed under his clothes, or a spear in a cane.”
Then the National Rifle Association.
The NRA was founded by a group of Union officers after the Civil War who, perturbed by their troops’ poor marksmanship, wanted a way to sponsor shooting training and competitions. The group testified in support of the first federal gun law in 1934, which cracked down on the machine guns beloved by Bonnie and Clyde and other bank robbers. When a lawmaker asked whether the proposal violated the Constitution, the NRA witness responded, “I have not given it any study from that point of view.” The group lobbied quietly against the most stringent regulations, but its principal focus was hunting and sportsmanship: bagging deer, not blocking laws. In the late 1950s, it opened a new headquarters to house its hundreds of employees. Metal letters on the facade spelled out its purpose: firearms safety education, marksmanship training, shooting for recreation.
But in a 1977 meeting, some activists did the "Revolt at Cincinnati". "Activists from the Second Amendment Foundation and the Citizens Committee for the Right to Keep and Bear Arms pushed their way into power."

This activist revolt was followed by tax revolts and the Sagebrush Rebellion against Interior Department land policies.
Politicians adjusted in turn. The 1972 Republican platform had supported gun control, with a focus on restricting the sale of “cheap handguns.” Just three years later in 1975, preparing to challenge Gerald R. Ford for the Republican nomination, Reagan wrote in Guns & Ammo magazine, “The Second Amendment is clear, or ought to be. It appears to leave little if any leeway for the gun control advocate.” By 1980 the GOP platform proclaimed, “We believe the right of citizens to keep and bear arms must be preserved. Accordingly, we oppose federal registration of firearms.” That year the NRA gave Reagan its first-ever presidential endorsement.

Today at the NRA’s headquarters in Fairfax, Virginia, oversized letters on the facade no longer refer to “marksmanship” and “safety.” Instead, the Second Amendment is emblazoned on a wall of the building’s lobby. Visitors might not notice that the text is incomplete. It reads:

“.. the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.”

The first half—the part about the well regulated militia—has been edited out.
Then about the individual-rights interpretation, "If one delves into the claims these scholars were making, a startling number of them crumble."

"In the end, it was neither the NRA nor the Bush administration that pressed the Supreme Court to reverse its centuries-old approach, but a small group of libertarian lawyers who believed other gun advocates were too timid."

Then some lessons that left-wing activists can learn from the NRA's triumph. Like patience and there being no substitute for political organizing. "Before social movements can win at the court they must win at the ballot box."

"But even more important is this: Activists turned their fight over gun control into a constitutional crusade." and "Deep notions of freedom and rights have retained totemic power."

So it may be hard to reassure the gun nuts that they can keep their guns if they are well-behaved.

"Liberal lawyers might once have rushed to court at the slightest provocation. Now, they are starting to realize that a long, full jurisprudential campaign is needed to achieve major goals."

That's true of political movement building in general.
 
How Often Do Police Stop Active Shooters? - The New York Times
Out of 433 US mass-shooting attacks over 2000 - 2021:
  • 249 - ended before the police arrive
    • 185 - the attacker...
      • 113 - left the scene
      • 72 - committed suicide
    • 64 - a bystander...
      • 42 - subdued the attacker
      • 22 - shot the attacker
        • 12 - ordinary person
        • 7 - security guard
        • 3 - off-duty cop
  • 184 - ended after the police arrive
    • 131 - the police...
      • 98 - shot the attacker
      • 33 - subdued the attacker
    • 53 - the attacker...
      • 38 - committed suicide
      • 15 - surrendered

2011 - 2021: 13, 21, 19, 20, 20, 20, 31, 29, 30, 40, 61

“It’s direct, indisputable, empirical evidence that this kind of common claim that ‘the only thing that stops a bad guy with the gun is a good guy with the gun’ is wrong,” said Adam Lankford, a professor at the University of Alabama, who has studied mass shootings for more than a decade. “It’s demonstrably false, because often they are stopping themselves.”

...
“The actual data show that some of these kind of heroic, Hollywood moments of armed citizens taking out active shooters are just extraordinarily rare,” Mr. Lankford said.

In fact, having more than one armed person at the scene who is not a member of law enforcement can create confusion and carry dire risks. An armed bystander who shot and killed an attacker in 2021 in Arvada, Colo., was himself shot and killed by the police, who mistook him for the gunman.

It was twice as common for bystanders to physically subdue the attackers, often by tackling or striking them. At Seattle Pacific University in 2014, a student security guard pepper sprayed and tackled a gunman who was reloading his weapon during an attack that killed one and injured three others. The guard took the attacker’s gun away and held the attacker until law enforcement arrived.

When a gunman entered a classroom at the University of North Carolina at Charlotte in 2019, a student tackled him. The student was shot and killed, but the police chief said the attack would have had a far worse death toll had the student not intervened.

...
Why attackers stop themselves is a hard thing to know, but Mr. Lankford, after studying shooters for years, has some guesses. One is that sometimes, shooters plan for a dramatic confrontation with the police that does not happen. Another possibility, he said, is that the reality of their actions sets in.

I like this comment from "Reader": "The good guy with a gun is a myth only seen in TV westerns." Some people seem to imagine some Hollywood-Western sort of confrontation, where the two sides face each other and get out their guns.

JS:
If you tell me that the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun (as Wayne LaPierre said after the Columbine shooting), I'll tell you you're watching too much television.

BTW, less than a year after Columbine, LaPierre went on safari in Botswana where he was unable to kill an elephant at point-blank range. He first wounded it and then fired three shots at it as it lay on the ground but still did not kill it. Read about it in the April 27, 2021 edition of the New Yorker - article by Mike Spies. The article includes a video of LaPierre's inept butchery of the elephant; it had to be finished off by the safari guide.

DeepSouthEric:
The Rambo fantasy too many people carry has to be one of history's greatest absurdities. Talk about playing too many video games...

The data shows that even trained officers, when returning fire under duress, miss their target badly 9 of 10 times. So, our trained police launch nine errant bullets for every one that hits.

Now, imagine your random citizen trying to take down a shooter in a crowd. Oy...
 
Yeah, so instead of lobbying to amend it to fit changing times they ignore it entirely in order to sell guns for-profit to consumers that are only interested in defending themselves rather than the state. If the federal government decided one day that state rights don't matter (seems like we're already there with the SCOTUS overturning state gun laws) there'd be no militia to keep them in check. Only a bunch of disorganized pussies waving guns at one other. The NRA is our savior indeed.
 
If the federal government decided one day that state rights don't matter (seems like we're already there with the SCOTUS overturning state gun laws) there'd be no militia to keep them in check. Only a bunch of disorganized pussies waving guns at one other. The NRA is our savior indeed.
well true, but the federal government hasn't given a shit about state's rights since probably... 1784 or so.

the notion that any population can rise up in armed conflict against its own government (in a geographically centralized landmass with an established civil and military infrastructure) is fucking absurd, and it always has been.

the 2nd amendment exists for the sole reason that it was a concession to slave owning states who wanted the ability to have private arsenals of weapons to keep their slave populations in check. that's it. that's why the 2nd amendment exists. any other explanation or excuse is a lie made to try to cover up for the fact that it's just there so slave owners can shoot at their property when it tries to get uppity.
 
Wow, never heard that take before. I was always under the impression it was written with the purpose of giving the states the right to defend their territory from any threat to the state (including the Federal Government if that were to happen). You've got my head popped right now.
 
Wow, never heard that take before. I was always under the impression it was written with the purpose of giving the states the right to defend their territory from any threat to the state (including the Federal Government if that were to happen). You've got my head popped right now.
this isn't solely out of my ass btw.



TLDR:
when the US was being founded, they needed each territory that would become a state to agree to unify.
the southern states were adamant that the law allow them to have private gun arsenals for the purposes of keeping down slave rebellion.
since the natural inclination of the original founding would have been to follow the model of the rest of the world at the time which was extremely limited private weapon ownership, and mass weapons only being available to governments, they were worried that a federal armed response to a slave revolt wouldn't be fast enough and the entire system would come down.

the 2nd amendment was created to appease them and is worded the way that it is to basically say that slave patrols are fine to keep their own arsenals.
 
Last edited:
Bruh. That's wild. I'm not surprised given America's history but that's some wild shit.

Edit: I'll be looking into this but as of this moment my view of the second amendment has changed.
 
Wow, never heard that take before. I was always under the impression it was written with the purpose of giving the states the right to defend their territory from any threat to the state (including the Federal Government if that were to happen). You've got my head popped right now.
It's true. Originally the 2nd was "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free Nation, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." Southern slave holding states objected. Their militias were the slave patrols. They didn't want the federal government to be able to call their slave patrols into action in other states leaving them defenseless against slave revolts.

So it was agreed to change the 2nd to "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" which was then ratified.

Heh, ninja'd by P&F.
 
I can't believe I missed this detail in all my years as an all-things written by white people on history hater. That would be my character on Dave Chapelles Blackzilla & Playa Haters' Ball.
 
I think different segments of the colonial public wanted their private arsenals for various reasons. There was also considerable tension in the North, the western Applachians, and the Ohio River valley, between the invading settler population and the lawful inhabitants of the land. Continued violence in the supposed wake of the "French and Indian War", even as special taxes were being demanded to recuperate the Crown for its supposed defense of those territories, was one of the motivating sticking points against King George for many inhabitants of the northern colonies, hence some of the bigoted language in the Declaration and the attitude of the Constitution regarding the Indian nations. I have a copy of a letter from one of my pioneer ancestors not long after the war, lamenting the need to arm her sons when they went on errands for fear of Indian attacks, a proviso which she clearly saw as necessary but not very pious when the errand was church.

This is not to say that the slave patrols weren't a part of this. The politics of the early Republic were not monolithic by any means.

Bottom line, the new government saw it as in its interest to have a heavily armed population, without whose contributions it might have fallen to a federal military or foreign mercenaries to keep the peace, a task that would have been both impossible to accomplish and extremely unpopular with the citizens. Forced disarmaments of Tory families were also a major source of criticism of the Revolutionary government during the war; this amendment could be seen as kind of a peace token in that regard.
 
Company towns were also controlled by armed thugs, north and south. Can’t be making those illegal!
 
How Often Do Police Stop Active Shooters? - The New York Times
Out of 433 US mass-shooting attacks over 2000 - 2021:
  • 249 - ended before the police arrive
    • 185 - the attacker...
      • 113 - left the scene
      • 72 - committed suicide
    • 64 - a bystander...
      • 42 - subdued the attacker
      • 22 - shot the attacker
        • 12 - ordinary person
        • 7 - security guard
        • 3 - off-duty cop
  • 184 - ended after the police arrive
    • 131 - the police...
      • 98 - shot the attacker
      • 33 - subdued the attacker
    • 53 - the attacker...
      • 38 - committed suicide
      • 15 - surrendered

2011 - 2021: 13, 21, 19, 20, 20, 20, 31, 29, 30, 40, 61

“The actual data show that some of these kind of heroic, Hollywood moments of armed citizens taking out active shooters are just extraordinarily rare,” Mr. Lankford said.

In fact, having more than one armed person at the scene who is not a member of law enforcement can create confusion and carry dire risks. An armed bystander who shot and killed an attacker in 2021 in Arvada, Colo., was himself shot and killed by the police, who mistook him for the gunman.

It was twice as common for bystanders to physically subdue the attackers, often by tackling or striking them. At Seattle Pacific University in 2014, a student security guard pepper sprayed and tackled a gunman who was reloading his weapon during an attack that killed one and injured three others. The guard took the attacker’s gun away and held the attacker until law enforcement arrived.

Just because they were twice as likely to be jumped as shot doesn't make shooting the attacker extraordinarily rare. Most mass shootings occur in areas where people aren't allowed to be armed in the first place. In my book, 10% is not "extraordinarily rare".
 

Journalists in Uvalde are stonewalled, hassled, threatened with arrest​

A month after 19 children and two educators were killed at Robb Elementary School, a picture is emerging of a disastrous police response, in which officers from several law enforcement agencies waited for an hour outside an unlocked classroom where children were trapped with the attacker. But journalists who have flocked to Uvalde, Tex., from across the country to tell that story have faced near-constant interference, intimidation and stonewalling from some of the same authorities — and not only bikers claiming to have police sanction.

Journalists have been threatened with arrest for “trespassing” outside public buildings. They have been barred from public meetings and refused basic information about what police did during the May 24 attack. After several early, error-filled news conferences, officials have routinely turned down interview requests and refused to hold news briefings. The situation has been made even more fraught by the spider’s web of local and state agencies involved in responding to and investigating the shooting, some of which now blame each other for the chaos.

Gifted link -> https://wapo.st/3HZaPx0
 
Back
Top Bottom