Same material. Kevlar, Tridur, Acceleron. Cheap and readily available. Seriously google Unequal Technologies
another elementary school shooting
- Thread starter kurt cloverdales
- Start date
It obviously depends on the rounds and power but google unequal technologies and check out their website. I've seen it demonstrated
One alternative I thought about would be a tiered system. If you wanna semi auto the requirements are more stringent than a .22 single shot.
I was looking up the second. At the time of the Constitution, it was illegal to store a loaded firearm in Boston. Clearly, that would have been known and constitutional, yet I don't think we would think of it that way today.
In discussing public carry, I found some interesting info out in the site below. In Heller, Scalia said he was using a GA Supreme Court decision in 1846 to bolster the claim that the founders intended for public carry. Of course in doing so he ignored northern states that did NOT allow public carry unless one showed a reason. In fact in some northern states if you carried a weapon and it caused fear in someone else, you could be charged. Yet Scalia didn't seem to think that was part of originalism, and hence much of my disdain for originalism. Too many Originalists seek out only that which supports their beliefs and disregard the rest (not all).
... In other words, the act of traveling armed in a populated place was sufficient under common law to constitute the offense. Accordingly, an 1805 treatise written for justices of the peace in New Jersey made clear that peace officers could, on their own initiative, apply this restriction to a man traveling armed “though he may not have threatened any person in particular, or committed any particular act of violence.”50 Similarly, other early American versions of the Statute of Northampton omitted any mention of “terror.” North Carolina’s statute, for example, stated that “no man great nor small [shall] go nor ride armed by night nor day, in fairs, markets, nor in the presence of the King’s Justices, or other ministers, nor in no part elsewhere.”51 By its plain terms the North Carolina prohibition applied categorically, regardless of any “intent to terrorize.”
But we accepted ONLY Georgia's law, a state which allowed public carry because of the southern paranoia of servile insurrection. It seems clear that the common wisdom of the state of New Jersey at the time of the Constitution was not in agreement with what we say originalism means.
Firearm Regionalism and Public Carry: Placing Southern Antebellum Case Law in Context
IntroductionDuring recent oral arguments in Peruta v. County of SanDiego, a case being reconsidered en banc in the U.S. Court of Appeals forthe Ninth Circuit, former Solicitor General Paul Clement turned to what mayappear an unusual guide for interpreting the scope of the Second Amendment inthe...
Really you don't? Wow you are really out of touch . You think out of the whole country ony a few hundred''kids'' want to own guns? Ever heard of hunting?
They sell a ballistic vest for $399, a Lacrosse vest for $150. They may be the same thing, they can just get more for calling it ballistic. Or maybe they aren't. If they are the same, maybe we need to wonder if we need kevlar lacrosse vests (not to mention, do we need lacrosse)?
Hey, I’d take anything to do something. But again, the NRA will absolutely positively not allow what you are proposing. Thus Republican elected officials will also not allow it.
Yes the difference is typically the audience/consumer and the ballistic products will be shaped differently (molds) and a little thicker. But my broader point is that more and more sports protection material is just that strong.
Lol re Lacrosse.
And as a PSA their backpack inserts are great for kids. Sad there's such a thing. Kids today have a lot more to deal with than our generation it seems.
Before everybody comes at me, hear me out.
Apparently the police engaged the shooter outside the school but failed to take him down. Now, I'm sure he wrecked the car and fled pretty quickly, but the most recent thing I heard was they got shots off.
To your point about highly trained....would more marksmanship or combat/tactical training put the police in a better position to succeed in the engagement.
Again, the story is pretty loose right now but I do have to wonder how the police missed. How many shots did they get off?
I have zero combat experience and I believe you've noted nobody knows what they will do once bullets fly so I'm not blaming them just wondering if we're failing by not focusing at least some training for regular police on situations like this.
Doesn't this at least raise the question of, "How old should you be be for you can legally own a firearm, or at least own certain types of firearms?" Unless, an eighteen year old is in the military, why does he need to possess an assault rifle or a similar type of weapon? Signed, Just Curious.
Today anyway? I’ve held pretty much the same position on guns for years. You need to either pay attention, stop the stereotyping, or both.
Absolutely. But again, that will be fought tooth and nail.
Hell, shouldn’t we ask why a civilian should be able to buy a firearm that out guns law enforcement? These weapons allow untrained users to commit quick and decisive mass murders. The number and magnitude of which that only happen in the US.
I think the language of it could be tweaked to recognize that the militia and the right to bear arms should be well regulated; however, all they had in 1789 were flintlocks, which were single shot arms nothing to really worry could result in mass murder.
How were the founding fathers supposed to realize that we would have our present type of guns?
I have not been around here long enough to know that, so I apologize.
We will see tough talk today from people like the Republican governor of Texas. Then after a few stern conversations with NRA representatives, his talk will change, next week. That's despicable. I am glad that you are not in that camp, and (once again) I apologize.
How do we make your suggestions as palatable to GOP politicians as they are, inherently, to the American public at large?
I also don't think they realized we would so readily use our guns on each other.
You consistently denigrate and disparage anything that isn't on your list. It's not surprising people are surprised that you support any measures at all.
Absolutely agree. Women are often killed by their husbands or partners with guns after multiple domestic violence incidents.
Or that millions of guns would be bought because we fear our fellow citizens.
Do we need to rethink completely what we consider an adult? I think there are some pretty compelling arguments that we treat 18 year olds as an adult in almost every other instance of the law except for drinking. This would be adding another exception. To me, they are adults or they are not.
I wasn't much of a hunter but really wanted guns as a kid. I just liked to shoot guns. Every weekend when I'm out in the country I hear people blazing away target practicing. I'm to cheap to want to pay for the shells or I probably would too.
That is truly insane and terribly sad. There is no reason weapons like that should be available to the general public. None.
What are the right’s solutions to curb mental illness? I was thinking about this last night. It’s been decades since many of the facilities have been closed . I agree it’s a huge issue but can’t even fathom where to begin
A
anon_mlxxvlbug9dpa
Guest
The NRA is a dying ferret. It’s the elected officials that are terrified of losing votes that matters. And that’s on the left too.
Indiana is getting ahead of that. My brother in law just finished a brand new state of the art state funded mental health hospital. This red state is acknowledging the problem. This isn’t as cut and dried right vs left argument. This government has been treating symptoms not the problem. The guns are a problem but they are just a symptom. Let’s just stop with all the finger pointing. It’s an old ass argument. As soon as I hear those damn libs or this crazy righties…I zone out.
Not to go off on a tangent, but it’s one of the reasons teachers absolutely must teach some values, SEL, etc. Those that are not getting it at home , must get it at school or they won’t have it anywhere.
Are we back to this again? He may have been wrong, but deinstitutionalization began under LBJ
They just broke ground on another.
As new psychiatric hospital opens on east side, Indiana refocuses efforts on mental health needs
INDIANAPOLIS, Ind. — A state-of-the-art psychiatric hospital will soon begin treating patients on the east side of Indianapolis, in an effort to increase access to mental health services. Sta…
cbs4indy.com
On a board where people argue about whether the sky is blue or whose fault it is that it's blue or whatever, I think things like this and some other suggestions would be overwhelmingly accepted.
I think the same would be true for the general public.
So why aren't things like this happening????
Partially true, but these issues are not isolated to the US. Unfortunately, f’d up gun culture is isolated to the US for the most part.
What a mess. These threads and this entire discussion have become futile. It’s the same people on both sides saying the same things.
This hits home. My grandfather was a brilliant man that suffered from terrible mental illness. Lithium was a godsend to him. It’s unreal the lack of mental health institutions in this country.Are we back to this again? He may have been wrong, but deinstitutionalization began under LBJ
A
anon_mya1phvcpf5x4
Guest
I haven't read much of the details but if there were bystanders in the area outside the school, then they may have been trying to be extra careful where they shot so as to make sure the only possible person to get hit would be the target.
To be clear, this topic is wildly complex. My sense is that patients still have choice now, whereas they didn't back in the first half of the 20th Century. There are pros and cons for both. Just as there is between the massive shift away from inpatient towards outpatient or in-home services.
Similar threads
