The Unz Review - Mobile
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewPat Buchanan Archive
The Motives Behind the Massacre
🔊 Listen RSS
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information



=>

Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New Reply
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

“Enough is enough!” “This can’t go on!” “This has to stop!”

These were among the comments that came through the blizzard of commentary after the massacre at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Broward County. We have heard these words before.

Unfortunately, such atrocities are not going to stop. For the ingredients that produce such slaughters are present and abundant in American society.

And what can stop a man full of hate, who has ceased to care about his life and is willing to end it, from getting a weapon in a country of 300 million guns and killing as many as he can in a public place before the police arrive?

An act of “absolute pure evil,” said Gov. Rick Scott, of the atrocity that took 17 lives and left a dozen more wounded. And evil is the right word.

While this massacre may be a product of mental illness, it is surely a product of moral depravity. For this was premeditated and plotted, done in copycat style to the mass killings to which this country has become all too accustomed.

Nikolas Cruz thought this through. He knew it was Valentine’s Day. He brought his fully loaded AR-15 with extra magazines and smoke grenades to the school that had expelled him. He set off a fire alarm, knowing it would bring students rushing into crowded halls where they would be easy to kill. He then escaped by mixing in with fleeing students.

The first ingredient then was an icy indifference toward human life and a willingness to slaughter former fellow students to deliver payback for whatever it was Cruz believed had been done to him at Douglas High.

In his case, the conscience was dead, or was buried beneath hatred, rage or resentment at those succeeding where he had failed. He had been rejected, cast aside, expelled. This would be his revenge, and it would be something for Douglas High and the nation to see — and never forget.

Indeed, it seems a common denominator of the atrocities to which we have been witness in recent years is that the perpetrators are nobodies who wish to die as somebodies.

If a sense of grievance against those perceived to have injured them is the goad that drives misfits like Cruz to mass murder, the magnet that draws them to it is infamy. Infamy is their shortcut to immortality.

From the killings in Columbine to Dylann Roof’s murder of black parishioners at the Charleston Church, from the Pulse nightclub massacre in Orlando to the slaughter of first-graders in Newtown, to Las Vegas last October where Stephen Paddock, firing from an upper floor of the Mandalay Bay, shot dead 58 people and wounded hundreds at a country music festival — these atrocities enter the social and cultural history of the nation. And those who carry them out achieve a recognition few Americans ever know. Charles Whitman, shooting 47 people from that Texas tower in 1966, is the original model.

Evil has its own hierarchy of rewards. Perhaps the most famous man of the 20th century was Hitler, with Stalin and Mao among his leading rivals.

ORDER IT NOW

Some of these individuals who seek to “go out” this way take their own lives when the responders arrive, or they commit “suicide by cop” and end their lives in a shootout. Others, Cruz among them, prefer to star in court, so the world can see who they are. And the commentators and TV cameras will again give them what they crave: massive publicity.

And we can’t change this. As soon as the story broke, the cameras came running, and we watched another staging of the familiar drama — the patrol cars, cops in body armor, ambulances, students running in panic or walking in line, talking TV heads demanding to know why the cowards in Congress won’t vote to outlaw AR-15s.

Yet, among the reasons gun-owners prize the AR-15 is that, not only in movies and TV shows is it the hero’s — and the villain’s — weapon of choice, but in real life, these are the kinds of rifles carried by the America’s most-admired warriors.

They are the modern version of muskets over the fireplace.

Another factor helps to explain what happened Wednesday: We are a formerly Christian society in an advanced state of decomposition.

Nikolas Cruz was a product of broken families. He was adopted. Both adoptive parents had died. Where did he get his ideas of right and wrong, good and evil? Before the Death of God and repeal of the Ten Commandments, in those dark old days, the 1950s, atrocities common now were almost nonexistent.

One imagines Nikolas sitting alone, watching coverage of the Las Vegas shooting, and thinking, “Why not? What have I got to lose? If this life is so miserable and unlikely to get better, why not go out, spectacularly, like that? If I did, they would remember who I was and what I did for the rest of their lives.”

And, so, regrettably, we shall.

Patrick J. Buchanan is the author of a new book, “Nixon’s White House Wars: The Battles That Made and Broke a President and Divided America Forever.”

Copyright 2018 Creators.com.

 
• Category: Ideology • Tags: Gun Control, Mass Shootings 
Hide 102 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to Ignore...to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
    []
  1. Then there is this, real or fake news? I cannot say..

    https://www.henrymakow.com/2018/02/another-false-flag-shooting.html

    Is the 2nd amendment the target?

    Read More
    • Replies: @pyrrhus
    School only 40 miles from Trump resort, Deep State visited school 2 weeks earlier, students reported multiple shooters, 19 year old on psychotropic medications (like most shooters)--False Flag sounds probable....
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc.
    AgreeDisagreeLOLTroll
    These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Troll, or LOL with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used once per hour.
    Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
    More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  2. utu says:

    Banning guns would help.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Johnny Smoggins
    "Banning guns would help."

    Like the way it's completely eliminated gun violence in Mexico, Brazil and Venezuela?

    The AR-15 (the gun this guy used) is legal in Canada, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Finland and yet this sort of thing doesn't happen in those countries. Anyone who's been to Israel will tell you that guns are ubiquitous. No mass shootings either.

    There's something wrong with the culture in the U.S. (and Brazil, Mexico and Venezuela)
    , @jacques sheete

    Banning guns would help.

     

    Particularly if government agents were all unarmed, all the time.
    , @Randal
    Even if it would help, it wouldn't be worth the price imo (though that's a matter for Americans not for foreigners like us, in the case of the US). It wasn't worth the price in my country, for sure, as far as I'm concerned. Save a few lives at the cost of taking yet more responsibility away from the citizen and putting control into the hands of state thugs. Obviously those unlucky ones who do actually suffer the losses would have a different emotionally based response, but reason should over-ride sentimentality in policymaking.

    Gun deaths are a relatively small part of the death rates in civilised countries. In the US around 13k gun killings per annum in a country of 300 million people, whereas ten times that many die as a result of what the CDC classifies as accidents generally. Many of those deaths are clearly positive benefits to society (real criminals shot in the course of committing crimes), or at least of mixed effects (criminals shooting each other).

    Suicide is another issue, but not one I'd regard as ultimately over-riding my preference for keeping responsibility with people rather than the state.
    , @redmudhooch
    Yeah, look at Mexico, they banned guns and all the murders just stopped.

    Ban the FBI, CIA, Mossad, MIC, MSM, AIPAC would be a good start
    , @jpb
    Banning public schools would help! No one shoots up charter or private schools. The public school system is broken in many areas, as a result of government policy of inclusion and diversity.

    Parents in our local community have been demanding school officials stop violence and disruption of classes, which include many mentally ill students. When a student disrupts the class, the class is halted and the disrupting student is allowed to act out, while the other students are removed from the class. There are dozens of these incidents per week.

    The public school system is broken beyond repair in the USA. My family now home schools or attend charter schools. Ban public schools and the school shootings will stop.
    , @Longfisher
    There is a substantial body of evidence that an armed citizenry reduces violent crime, and none to suggest that disarming citizens reduces violent crime.
    , @redmudhooch
    Banning CIA/Mossad/MIC/FBI would help more.
    Would a gun ban have prevented 9/11?
    How many people die every day of heroin/opiates pushed by CIA/Mossad, Big Pharma.
    How many people have been murdered land and resources looted as a result of 9/11 false flag?

    You're lucky we still have our guns, its the only reason you're still able to voice your opinion here on the internet. You're welcome.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  3. “The unjust conceives wickedness in his heart, for there is no fear of God before his eyes, he is unwilling to see his sins forgiven or to hate them… He plots trouble while on his bed; he sets himself in a way that is not good; he does not reject evil.”
    Pslams 36-1-2,4

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  4. Evil has its own hierarchy of rewards. Perhaps the most famous man of the 20th century was Hitler, with Stalin and Mao among his leading rivals

    You should look to your own class of people when it comes to precedent and setting example, Pat, those ‘Ten Commandments loving Christians’ at the apex of empire who behave little differently, except on a much larger scale:

    “I would … like to single out Doug Coe, who has been such a guiding light in all of this” –George W Bush

    “Doug Coe is a unique presence in Washington: a genuinely loving spiritual mentor and guide to anyone, regardless of party or faith, who wants to deepen his or her relationship with God” –Hillary Clinton

    “You know Jesus said ‘You got to put Him before mother-father-brother sister? Hitler, Lenin, Mao, that’s what they taught the kids. Mao even had the kids killing their own mother and father. But it wasn’t murder. It was for building the new nation. The new kingdom” –Doug Coe

    The revolution was fought with, and the 2nd Amendment was written, in the era of flintlocks. Mass killings of people was not possible on the same scale, whether by the state or an individual:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2013/08/20/the-anti-federalist-urban-legend/

    ^ Time to go back to the drawing board, but who could you trust to get it right? Our constitution has become irrelevant in any case, the most often applied political lie [fake promise] in the USA today is the oath to uphold the same:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2017/12/01/the-oath-and-the-trash-bin/

    ^ The idea the oath to uphold the constitution is kept in any case is patently laughable. The idea this lie in its entirety can be corrected in today’s political circumstance is an even bigger joke -

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete

    Evil has its own hierarchy of rewards. Perhaps the most famous man of the 20th century was Hitler, with Stalin and Mao among his leading rivals.
     
    Thanks for commenting on that.

    Funny how that paragraph is sitting right next to an image of Pat's book. You'd think he'd know better than to make a doofus statement like that. Churchill, FDR, and their Wall Street buddies were all much worse than Hitler, and PB should know that.

    A die hard nationalist like Paddie ought ot have a bit of empathy if not sympathy for Hitler, I'd think.

    The German-Polish war had come out of a quarrel over a town the size of Ocean City, Md., in summer. Danzig, 95 percent German, had been severed from Germany at Versailles in violation of Woodrow Wilson’s principle of self-determination. Even British leaders thought Danzig should be returned.
    …Was Danzig worth a war? Unlike the 7 million Hong Kongese whom the British surrendered to Beijing, who didn’t want to go, the Danzigers were clamoring to return to Germany. [As were several other populations in countries surrounding Germany.]

    -Patrick J. Buchanan , Did Hitler Want War?
    http://buchanan.org/blog/did-hitler-want-war-2068

     

    , @Twodees Partain
    "The revolution was fought with, and the 2nd Amendment was written, in the era of flintlocks. "

    Yes, because flintlock muskets and rifles were state of the art military small arms in those days. The 2nd Amendment recognized the right of human beings to have the same arms as agents of their government.

    There's no need to go back to the drawing board. Someone who has been personally targeted for assassination by agents of his own government, as you have, should have a better view of the rights of people to keep and bear state of the art small arms to defend themselves against their own government

    , @Carroll Price
    Give Pat a break. He was simply taking a cheap shot at Adolph Hitler, who was an angel compared to every US president starting with Andrew Jackson, an admitted and unabashed war criminal.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  5. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    He had been rejected, cast aside, expelled. This would be his revenge, and it would be something for Douglas High and the nation to see — and never forget.

    As Hyman Roth said of Pantangeli, ‘small potatoes’.

    What Cruz did is terrible, but it tore up only a local community. He killed several people.

    But the US has destroyed entire nations. Why? The elites(especially the Zionist-globalists) filled with power-lust, paranoia, megalomania, resentment & vengeful angst, and contempt for the hoi polloi(both in the US and abroad), spread lies through the pathological fake news media and engineered falsehoods in collusion with Deep State. Remember CIA and ‘slam dunk’ about Hussein’s WMD? The hubris, the arrogance, the sheer lack of concern for lives, and etc. The vile elites don’t care about American soldiers traumatized in wars and don’t care for the countless people who died, were maimed, or mentally destroyed in the Muslim World.

    It’s not far-fetched to say the Deep State, Media, Academia, and elite institutions are simply filled with more intelligent versions of Nick Cruz. They aren’t the types to shoot random people in a school, but they they have bigger fish in mind. To take down entire nations. Hire Neo-Nazis to bring down the regime in Ukraine. Cook up total lies to restart Cold War with Russia,pushing tensions for another great war. Taking down Gaddafi and turning Libya into a total clusterfuc*. Hillary laughs at the lynching of Gaddafi, and Obama shrugs his shoulders and says, “Oops, my bad.” Just a mistake, you see. And the US deep state gives aid to entire armies of terrorists and Jihadis to tear Syria apart. Ancient treasures are destroyed for good and 300,000 people are killed, and millions are uprooted. But the ONLY concern among American elites is, “Is it good for Israel?”

    In status-made globalist America where the elites no longer feel a national-humanist connection with the people, all that matters is a nihilist lust for power. They are like the psycho-yuppie a**holes in AMERICAN PSYCHO. Sure, they talk the talk of PC about ‘equality’ and ‘human rights’, but it’s all just a smoke screen for their power games. These elites are so eager to be insiders and members of the Club that they will say or do anything to get in and stay in. Whether it’s Samantha Powers or John Bolton or Nikki Haley or John Yoo or any other bunch of scum-suckers, they are all a bunch of status-mad sociopaths whose only compass is one where the needle points to Power.

    And for morality and spirituality in these times, worship the holy homo and you better believe Bruce Jenner is a ‘woman’. Ah, the rainbow in your eyes.
    Lies upon lies. And you Negroes, never mind that you’re totally losing out due to globalism, mass immigration, and gentrification. Just watch the bling-movie on screen and be distracted by Wakanda, sheeeeiiit. The elites will drive you out of cities but direct your gaze at bling heaven on the big screen. But then, what is the culture of blacks? Rap and ‘twerking’.

    Fish rots from the head. We know from the bogus ‘russiagate’ affair that the whole media complex and deep state are totally corrupt and will go to any length to subvert rule of law and democracy. We know from Charlottesville that the Power will trample on the most fundamental American liberties to silence dissident voices. The issue isn’t whether there were some unsavory people at the Alt Right rally at Charlottesville — there certainly were — but the fact that a completely legal assembly was shut down by the Power simply because it didn’t like the message. But the media just run the narrative pushed by the Power.

    US is now an empire of lies. Lies about wonders of homosexuality and tranny nonsense, lies about BLM, lies about Russia as new nazi nation, lies about War on Terror(because the US is actually allied with terrorists to wreck nations like Syria), lies about Iran, and etc. US has gotten so bad that even a horrible regime like the one in North Korea sometimes sounds more rational in comparison.

    We need a new nationalism, and real nationalism. The people of America and other nations need to come together and demand that the elites serve, lead, and guide the people. It must be a people nationalism. A nation exists for the leaders to lead and serve the people. But the current elites of the US gives the middle finger to middle America and say they must be replaced by endless tides of foreigners who are bribed with gibs. David Brooks, Max Boot, and Jennifer Rubin would never go on a killing spree, but if the likes of him get their way, Real America will h ave been murdered for good.

    As of now, is national renewal even possible with the kind of leaders and elites we have today whose minds and souls were molded by decades of degeneracy, decadence, and pseudo-intellectual PC garbage that reduces all of reality and morality into empty slogans about ‘diversity’ and ‘inclusion’ that can be made to mean ANYTHING? Too many Jewish elites are fueled by animus, hatred, contempt, and revenge emotions. Everything is pogroms or WWII all over again, so much so that they’re blind to the fact that they’ve become the New Power that’s acting like the Russian imperialists and German warmongers of old.

    Now, I’m not saying that if we have good elites and a culture of truth, there won’t be sickos like Nick Cruz. But in such a society, he would be the exception. But why are there so many instances of sociopaths like him acting like they above the law? Because our culture is one of nihilism from the top. Granted, fish rots from the gut as well as from the head. The most corrupting gut-rot force in America has been blacks. Naturally savage and prone to psychopath, they’ve given us a culture rooted not in the mind and heart but in the fist, genitals, and butts. The symbiotic relationship between elites minds and black butts have really degraded the culture of the world.

    Lies have always been a part of America as in any other society. But now, lies have been institutionalized as the New Truth. Americans are so poisoned by lies that they can’t even see the ugliness of homo fecal penetration. Instead, they support massive homo parades, drape churches with homo colors, support ‘gay marriage’, and believe bakers ought to be destroyed for having moral courage. This is a sick sick society. Libertarian types will say ‘homomania’ doesn’t kill people, but it murders something far more essential: Truth. Homomania murders the truth because it doesn’t just tell lies but canonizes lies as the holy truth. If the norm of a society is to murder truth in this manner, then the cancer will grow and poison all of society.

    It’s like what Merlin said:

    Read More
    • Agree: Carroll Price
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  6. At times like this, people need to focus on the fact that at last the kids don’t have to have their “freedom of religion” violated by hearing about those pesky “Christian” values and morals and/or those 10 Commandments. That’s the leftist ideology that now reins supreme.

    So yes, the kids go to school in fear, something I can’t even imagine, but at least the non-Christians won’t be made to feel “uncomfortable” hearing about Christian values and morals.

    And of course the money-driven media, who know these kids are doing this for instant fame, give them exactly what they want, and then parade other stupid liberals claiming “gun control” is going to somehow sole this problem.

    It’s time to balkanize the USA by ideologies. Conservative Christians should be able to have their own areas in the country so we can return to some level of sanity. The non-Christians can either accept this way of life or go live in their own “sections” or states.

    The liberals have used the constitution, brainwashing teachers, bullying liberal lawyers, the lying media, tax-exempt 501C marxist attack groups and the corrupt politicized judges to take over the country and destroy it. It’s time to take down this enemy cabal by any means needed. We need a new Just War Doctrine 2.0.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  7. The first ingredient then was an icy indifference toward human life and a willingness to slaughter ….

    There you have U.S. foreign policy. Murder is as American as apple pie.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  8. …an icy indifference toward human life and a willingness to slaughter former fellow students to deliver payback for whatever it was Cruz believed had been done to him at Douglas High.

    In his case, the conscience was dead, or was buried beneath hatred, rage or resentment at those succeeding where he had failed. He had been rejected, cast aside, expelled. This would be his revenge, and it would be something for Douglas High and the nation to see — and never forget.

    The guy sounds like a Bolshie thug or a Zionist goon.

    Indeed, it seems a common denominator of the atrocities to which we have been witness in recent years is that the perpetrators are nobodies who wish to die as somebodies.

    Recent? What do you mean by recent?

    “Note mandatory flagly background, pickle suit, and stupid colorful gewgaws so he looks like a goddam stamp collecton.”

    -Fred Reed •447 – Killing Feels So Good Psycopathy Legitimized Feminist Marine Gets His Kicks Killing Male Chauvinists Date

    http://www.fredoneverything.net/

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    I apologize that the link above no longer works and I could not find the quote at Reed's new site either, but I did stumble across this.

    [Robert the wannabe gang initiate] was basically a malleable nobody who would keep running with the gangs until someone put a gun in his hand and told him who to kill, or something equally stupid.

    -Fred Reed, Dumb, Young, And Ain’t Gonna Make It: The Things You Find In Malls. May 23, 2000
    https://fredoneverything.org/appalling-stupidity/

     

    Sounds a lot like a soldier.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  9. @utu
    Banning guns would help.

    “Banning guns would help.”

    Like the way it’s completely eliminated gun violence in Mexico, Brazil and Venezuela?

    The AR-15 (the gun this guy used) is legal in Canada, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Finland and yet this sort of thing doesn’t happen in those countries. Anyone who’s been to Israel will tell you that guns are ubiquitous. No mass shootings either.

    There’s something wrong with the culture in the U.S. (and Brazil, Mexico and Venezuela)

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu

    The AR-15 (the gun this guy used) is legal in Canada, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Finland and yet this sort of thing doesn’t happen in those countries.
     
    You don't have civic responsibility like in Canada, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Finland because the US of A is populated with Americans not Canadians, Swiss, Dutch of Finns. Americans can't handle guns for many reasons.
    , @Carroll Price
    What's wrong with US culture is the US government that spawned and nourishes it.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  10. Everyone I’ve ever known who was adopted was messed up. It must do some incredible psychological damage to know that even your own mother didn’t want you.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Longfisher
    "Everyone I’ve ever known who was adopted was messed up. It must do some incredible psychological damage to know that even your own mother didn’t want you."

    Perhaps. But there's also the possibility that children put up for adoption were unworthy, unloving parents who would have done the child more harm than good were they to have raised the child.

    There's also the possibility that the child was removed from the parents by CPS and their parental rights were extinguished by the court.

    We'll simply never know.
    , @Rosamond Vincy
    Some sincerely want someone to give the baby a better life than they can. I know at least one guy whose birth-mother was a teen, and he's pretty sure she didn't have many other options in those days.
    , @Anonymous
    Quite true. Some children are put up for adoption from the best of motives by mothers who are quite unable to take care of the child and quite unsuitable to the role by any reasonable standard.

    Nevertheless, the adopted child never quite overcomes the feeling that he or she was unwanted by the birth mother.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  11. @jacques sheete

    ...an icy indifference toward human life and a willingness to slaughter former fellow students to deliver payback for whatever it was Cruz believed had been done to him at Douglas High.

    In his case, the conscience was dead, or was buried beneath hatred, rage or resentment at those succeeding where he had failed. He had been rejected, cast aside, expelled. This would be his revenge, and it would be something for Douglas High and the nation to see — and never forget.
     
    The guy sounds like a Bolshie thug or a Zionist goon.

    Indeed, it seems a common denominator of the atrocities to which we have been witness in recent years is that the perpetrators are nobodies who wish to die as somebodies.
     
    Recent? What do you mean by recent?

    “Note mandatory flagly background, pickle suit, and stupid colorful gewgaws so he looks like a goddam stamp collecton.”

    -Fred Reed •447 - Killing Feels So Good Psycopathy Legitimized Feminist Marine Gets His Kicks Killing Male Chauvinists Date

    http://www.fredoneverything.net/

     

    I apologize that the link above no longer works and I could not find the quote at Reed’s new site either, but I did stumble across this.

    [Robert the wannabe gang initiate] was basically a malleable nobody who would keep running with the gangs until someone put a gun in his hand and told him who to kill, or something equally stupid.

    -Fred Reed, Dumb, Young, And Ain’t Gonna Make It: The Things You Find In Malls. May 23, 2000

    https://fredoneverything.org/appalling-stupidity/

    Sounds a lot like a soldier.

    Read More
    • Replies: @jacques sheete
    If anyone cares, here's the article and a link.

    https://fredoneverything.org/marine-general-feminist/

    Note that he spelled "psychopathy" correctly in the later version.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  12. @utu
    Banning guns would help.

    Banning guns would help.

    Particularly if government agents were all unarmed, all the time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    AGREED!
    , @utu
    Then the gov agents won't have to be armed all the time.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  13. This kid like many of the other mass murderers is probably drugged to the eyeballs with anti depressants.

    What the drugs do is deaden you conscience, and make you indifferent to life, you own and others. I think they probably free people from feeling pain from the social judgement’s of others and their own self critical conscience.

    Heroin and all the major drugs do the same, and is probably why they are widely loved by criminals and prostitutes, etc. Nothing like a drug to stop that moral self critical conscience keeping you awake at night.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    http://www.cchrflorida.org/antidepressants-are-a-prescription-for-mass-shootings/

    The video in the above link, while a little on the emotive side, is worth a watch. I have never been on anti-depressants but drugs certainly do alter mood. Maybe there is something to this. Often people who are depressed are unable to get out of bed. It seems like it would take quite a bit of motivation to plan and carry out a school shooting, for example. It seems likely that these SSRI drugs are worth investigating as a part of this mass shooting phenomenon.

    The other undeniable link in the feedback loop between one mass shooting and the next is the media promotion of these people as infamous. Take that out, and all you'd be is an entry in wikipedia. To those in the media, the media hoopla and feedback loop to create more and more effective mass shooters is more a feature than a bug. It is bad enough that the goyim have pitch forks, they should not be allowed to have AR-15s or AK-47s. Without public push to abolish the 2A, it will not happen. The school shooting is the problem in the problem-reaction-solution. Unfortunately for the (((media))), the reaction is fairly muted, thus far preventing a solution (lol).

    The counter-intuitive solution to school shootings will be driven from the bottom up. Gun free school zones, in fact, gun free zones such as cinemas are a guarantee of a soft target. Much like the success of CCW across the nation, armed teachers or guards would both deter and minimize the extent of school shootings. The last thing a Nikolas Cruz wants is to be a footnote in a pro-2A propaganda piece (Armed teacher puts down prospective school shooter!) that only random autists know about.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  14. @jacques sheete

    Banning guns would help.

     

    Particularly if government agents were all unarmed, all the time.

    AGREED!

    Read More
    • Agree: Rurik
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  15. Randal says:
    @utu
    Banning guns would help.

    Even if it would help, it wouldn’t be worth the price imo (though that’s a matter for Americans not for foreigners like us, in the case of the US). It wasn’t worth the price in my country, for sure, as far as I’m concerned. Save a few lives at the cost of taking yet more responsibility away from the citizen and putting control into the hands of state thugs. Obviously those unlucky ones who do actually suffer the losses would have a different emotionally based response, but reason should over-ride sentimentality in policymaking.

    Gun deaths are a relatively small part of the death rates in civilised countries. In the US around 13k gun killings per annum in a country of 300 million people, whereas ten times that many die as a result of what the CDC classifies as accidents generally. Many of those deaths are clearly positive benefits to society (real criminals shot in the course of committing crimes), or at least of mixed effects (criminals shooting each other).

    Suicide is another issue, but not one I’d regard as ultimately over-riding my preference for keeping responsibility with people rather than the state.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Achmed E. Newman
    Also, Randal, a big majority of the "gun deaths" that are not suicides are inner city gang shootings or just disputes over the dissing of one's "brothers". It's black ghetto deaths, in other words. In a decent, white area of either your county, or the country, deaths from shooting are a miniscule portion of total non-natural deaths.

    BTW, the last gun death that happened in my immediate or even extended family was when I let a single-shot .22 stay in the bathroom too long. It was there for squirrel reasons, but it rusted badly, and I consider that gun death my fault. It wasn't just another statistic - this time it was PERSONAL.
    , @utu

    In the US around 13k gun killings per annum in a country of 300 million people, whereas ten times that many die as a result of what the CDC classifies as accidents generally. Many of those deaths are clearly positive benefits to society (real criminals shot in the course of committing crimes), or at least of mixed effects (criminals shooting each other).
     
    I had you for a very sensible and thoughtful commenter. Is it really you?

    clearly positive benefits to society - There are about 1000 killings by police per year which it is about 50 times higher rate then Europe. Have you noticed Darwinist improvement in America?

    times that many die as [...] as accidents generally - we can work on reducing the number of accidents rate. 2.5 million people die of natural causes in America. Should I argue that then accidents not mentioning murders should be totally ignored? I am sure 99% of those 2.5 million could have been kept alive at least 1 min longer instead of wasting resources on chasing murders or preventing accidents.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  16. @Ronald Thomas West

    Evil has its own hierarchy of rewards. Perhaps the most famous man of the 20th century was Hitler, with Stalin and Mao among his leading rivals
     
    You should look to your own class of people when it comes to precedent and setting example, Pat, those 'Ten Commandments loving Christians' at the apex of empire who behave little differently, except on a much larger scale:

    “I would … like to single out Doug Coe, who has been such a guiding light in all of this” –George W Bush

    “Doug Coe is a unique presence in Washington: a genuinely loving spiritual mentor and guide to anyone, regardless of party or faith, who wants to deepen his or her relationship with God” –Hillary Clinton

    “You know Jesus said ‘You got to put Him before mother-father-brother sister? Hitler, Lenin, Mao, that’s what they taught the kids. Mao even had the kids killing their own mother and father. But it wasn’t murder. It was for building the new nation. The new kingdom” –Doug Coe

    The revolution was fought with, and the 2nd Amendment was written, in the era of flintlocks. Mass killings of people was not possible on the same scale, whether by the state or an individual:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2013/08/20/the-anti-federalist-urban-legend/

    ^ Time to go back to the drawing board, but who could you trust to get it right? Our constitution has become irrelevant in any case, the most often applied political lie [fake promise] in the USA today is the oath to uphold the same:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2017/12/01/the-oath-and-the-trash-bin/

    ^ The idea the oath to uphold the constitution is kept in any case is patently laughable. The idea this lie in its entirety can be corrected in today's political circumstance is an even bigger joke -

    Evil has its own hierarchy of rewards. Perhaps the most famous man of the 20th century was Hitler, with Stalin and Mao among his leading rivals.

    Thanks for commenting on that.

    Funny how that paragraph is sitting right next to an image of Pat’s book. You’d think he’d know better than to make a doofus statement like that. Churchill, FDR, and their Wall Street buddies were all much worse than Hitler, and PB should know that.

    A die hard nationalist like Paddie ought ot have a bit of empathy if not sympathy for Hitler, I’d think.

    The German-Polish war had come out of a quarrel over a town the size of Ocean City, Md., in summer. Danzig, 95 percent German, had been severed from Germany at Versailles in violation of Woodrow Wilson’s principle of self-determination. Even British leaders thought Danzig should be returned.
    …Was Danzig worth a war? Unlike the 7 million Hong Kongese whom the British surrendered to Beijing, who didn’t want to go, the Danzigers were clamoring to return to Germany. [As were several other populations in countries surrounding Germany.]

    -Patrick J. Buchanan , Did Hitler Want War?

    http://buchanan.org/blog/did-hitler-want-war-2068

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  17. @jacques sheete
    I apologize that the link above no longer works and I could not find the quote at Reed's new site either, but I did stumble across this.

    [Robert the wannabe gang initiate] was basically a malleable nobody who would keep running with the gangs until someone put a gun in his hand and told him who to kill, or something equally stupid.

    -Fred Reed, Dumb, Young, And Ain’t Gonna Make It: The Things You Find In Malls. May 23, 2000
    https://fredoneverything.org/appalling-stupidity/

     

    Sounds a lot like a soldier.

    If anyone cares, here’s the article and a link.

    https://fredoneverything.org/marine-general-feminist/

    Note that he spelled “psychopathy” correctly in the later version.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  18. Another factor helps to explain what happened Wednesday: We are a formerly Christian society in an advanced state of decomposition.

    Another factor is the fact that ours never was a “Christian” society and one would think an historian like PB would know that.

    I’ll grant that there’s always been a lot of lip service about “Christian” ideals, but for the most part Christ’s ears must be burning when he hears such rubbish.

    Psst, hey, Pat; tell us about the “Christian” Puritans and their persecution of other Christian sects. You can also inform us of the Christian generosity so often shown to the Indians and slaves as well as the prols and peasants who fought the Rev War, then got promptly tossed under the bus, and that’s just for starters.

    Christian?

    Gimmee a break.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Pat the Rat
    We are Christian societies, even now.

    But the wheat has always been mixed in with the tares. And the tares grow and try to shade out the wheat and cannot be uprooted without destroying the wheat also.

    That is a christian society jacques, wheat and tares.

    The wheat fought Slavery, the tares profited from it. The wheat fights against the killing of innocent babies before birth, the tares support the murder of them for convenience. They are two obvious moral issues, many others are far less clear.

    Jesus said at the harvest of the wheat, then the tares can be separated and burnt. Food for thought jacques.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  19. dearieme says:

    “suicide by cop” That’s pretty much what Jesus did, wasn’t it? But with a mini-riot in the temple rather than a slaughter of teenagers.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  20. @utu
    Banning guns would help.

    Yeah, look at Mexico, they banned guns and all the murders just stopped.

    Ban the FBI, CIA, Mossad, MIC, MSM, AIPAC would be a good start

    Read More
    • Replies: @utu
    You having gun has no impact on FBI, CIA, Mossad, MIC, MSM, AIPAC . You and your gun can do nothing to them. But your gun may end up killing kids in schools which btw does not happen as often in Mexico.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  21. pyrrhus says:
    @NoseytheDuke
    Then there is this, real or fake news? I cannot say..

    https://www.henrymakow.com/2018/02/another-false-flag-shooting.html

    Is the 2nd amendment the target?

    School only 40 miles from Trump resort, Deep State visited school 2 weeks earlier, students reported multiple shooters, 19 year old on psychotropic medications (like most shooters)–False Flag sounds probable….

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    I have read several reports online that a drill was being conducted nearby at the same time. If this is true then only a very dedicated coincidence-theorist could not find that suspicious.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  22. pyrrhus says:

    Abe Lincoln caused at least a couple of million American deaths, including those who starved to death…I haven’t noticed you condemning “Honest Abe” lately, Buchanan….

    Read More
    • Replies: @MEexpert
    "Civil wars" are only bad in the Middle East. That is why we have to intervene. In the US, we call them war between states. Sounds very civil. Doesn't it?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  23. Rurik says:

    The Motives Behind the Massacre

    as if we all didn’t know

    the motive was obviously white supremacy

    https://www.bing.com/search?q=%20cruz%20white%20supremacist&qs=n&form=QBRE&sp=-1&pq=cruz%20white%20supremacist&sc=1-22&sk=&cvid=34C92EEF8EF84F85A3914D5EEADA8398&ajf=60

    if the ADL says it, then it can always be reported as the verified truth

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  24. jim jones says:

    Those pesky Muslims have been pretty quiet lately, maybe the Yanks are taking their place

    Read More
    • Replies: @MEexpert
    You were hoping you could blame those pesky Muslims for this slaughter but you have no one to blame but yourself for it. When a child grows up with violent cartoons, TV shows, and movies, where indifferent shooting is a common occurrence, result will be incidents like this. Gun control is not the answer. These liberal Hollywood types produce these shows and when some thing like this happens they blame the guns.
    , @anon
    Those pesky Muslims have been pretty quiet lately, maybe the Yanks are taking their place (Places like Kabul Aleppo Somalia Kenya Mali - you name it
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  25. Remember Elliott Rodger?

    No points if you have to look it up.

    Extra points if you tried to read his “Manifesto.”

    That’s how long this sort of fame REALLY lasts.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  26. @pyrrhus
    School only 40 miles from Trump resort, Deep State visited school 2 weeks earlier, students reported multiple shooters, 19 year old on psychotropic medications (like most shooters)--False Flag sounds probable....

    I have read several reports online that a drill was being conducted nearby at the same time. If this is true then only a very dedicated coincidence-theorist could not find that suspicious.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  27. @Ronald Thomas West

    Evil has its own hierarchy of rewards. Perhaps the most famous man of the 20th century was Hitler, with Stalin and Mao among his leading rivals
     
    You should look to your own class of people when it comes to precedent and setting example, Pat, those 'Ten Commandments loving Christians' at the apex of empire who behave little differently, except on a much larger scale:

    “I would … like to single out Doug Coe, who has been such a guiding light in all of this” –George W Bush

    “Doug Coe is a unique presence in Washington: a genuinely loving spiritual mentor and guide to anyone, regardless of party or faith, who wants to deepen his or her relationship with God” –Hillary Clinton

    “You know Jesus said ‘You got to put Him before mother-father-brother sister? Hitler, Lenin, Mao, that’s what they taught the kids. Mao even had the kids killing their own mother and father. But it wasn’t murder. It was for building the new nation. The new kingdom” –Doug Coe

    The revolution was fought with, and the 2nd Amendment was written, in the era of flintlocks. Mass killings of people was not possible on the same scale, whether by the state or an individual:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2013/08/20/the-anti-federalist-urban-legend/

    ^ Time to go back to the drawing board, but who could you trust to get it right? Our constitution has become irrelevant in any case, the most often applied political lie [fake promise] in the USA today is the oath to uphold the same:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2017/12/01/the-oath-and-the-trash-bin/

    ^ The idea the oath to uphold the constitution is kept in any case is patently laughable. The idea this lie in its entirety can be corrected in today's political circumstance is an even bigger joke -

    “The revolution was fought with, and the 2nd Amendment was written, in the era of flintlocks. ”

    Yes, because flintlock muskets and rifles were state of the art military small arms in those days. The 2nd Amendment recognized the right of human beings to have the same arms as agents of their government.

    There’s no need to go back to the drawing board. Someone who has been personally targeted for assassination by agents of his own government, as you have, should have a better view of the rights of people to keep and bear state of the art small arms to defend themselves against their own government

    Read More
    • Replies: @Ronald Thomas West
    "There’s no need to go back to the drawing board. Someone who has been personally targeted for assassination by agents of his own government, as you have, should have a better view of the rights of people to keep and bear state of the art small arms to defend themselves against their own government"

    Actually, my experience has (as some might imagine) caused a deep reflection. I don't question the premise of the 2nd Amendment, it is what it is. What I question is, the de facto ability, whether a state or individual, to take upon themselves 1) the right to kill, and 2) easily possess the means to go about it.

    As you might note, in my prior comment I express a high degree of doubt there is an easy answer, if there is an answer at all.

    What to watch for: enough mass killings generating pressure to employ the simplest legal means to outlaw the possession of weapons by the populace without curtailing the power of the state to employ extra-judicial murders. How this could initially come about would be the 'supremacy clause' of the constitution applied to entering a multilateral treaty banning sales of weapons and ammunition to private parties, for instance a small arms control treaty aimed at reducing numbers of AK 47, AR 15 and other high volume fire models, interpreted in such way as Ruger, Colt, et cetera can only wholesale to federal military, example given. All it would require is the Executive to sign and the Senate to ratify, said treaty and it becomes "the supreme law of the land", the 2nd Amendment lawfully canceled out. Then you will finally have a science-fiction medieval authority with 21st Century killing technology. We're not there yet, but we may not be far away either.

    Meanwhile look for the FBI and other agencies to continue to stand back and 'fail' to stop massacres like this most recent. It's a matter of septic flotsam rising to leadership at the top:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2018/02/07/bob-manson-charlie-mueller/

    ^ There is nothing these people would not stoop to, to consolidate power, if for no reason other than saving their own asses as a criminal actors and political class; inclusive of state initiated mass murders on a vast scale, were the 2nd Amendment to 'come into force' so to speak, pitting the people in open warfare with the central government.

    It seems there should be a better way out of the dilemma of the USA having morphed into a criminal state apparatus. Meanwhile, I hate to say 'democracy' is a failed experiment but the prognosis is not good.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  28. Pat swallows all the bullshit he can hold from the TV news, then writes another of his articles repeating every false meme that is currently on TV news.

    Yeah, Pat. Whatever you say.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  29. @Randal
    Even if it would help, it wouldn't be worth the price imo (though that's a matter for Americans not for foreigners like us, in the case of the US). It wasn't worth the price in my country, for sure, as far as I'm concerned. Save a few lives at the cost of taking yet more responsibility away from the citizen and putting control into the hands of state thugs. Obviously those unlucky ones who do actually suffer the losses would have a different emotionally based response, but reason should over-ride sentimentality in policymaking.

    Gun deaths are a relatively small part of the death rates in civilised countries. In the US around 13k gun killings per annum in a country of 300 million people, whereas ten times that many die as a result of what the CDC classifies as accidents generally. Many of those deaths are clearly positive benefits to society (real criminals shot in the course of committing crimes), or at least of mixed effects (criminals shooting each other).

    Suicide is another issue, but not one I'd regard as ultimately over-riding my preference for keeping responsibility with people rather than the state.

    Also, Randal, a big majority of the “gun deaths” that are not suicides are inner city gang shootings or just disputes over the dissing of one’s “brothers”. It’s black ghetto deaths, in other words. In a decent, white area of either your county, or the country, deaths from shooting are a miniscule portion of total non-natural deaths.

    BTW, the last gun death that happened in my immediate or even extended family was when I let a single-shot .22 stay in the bathroom too long. It was there for squirrel reasons, but it rusted badly, and I consider that gun death my fault. It wasn’t just another statistic – this time it was PERSONAL.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    Also, Randal, a big majority of the “gun deaths” that are not suicides are inner city gang shootings or just disputes over the dissing of one’s “brothers”. It’s black ghetto deaths, in other words. In a decent, white area of either your county, or the country, deaths from shooting are a miniscule portion of total non-natural deaths.
     
    Absolutely. Not a huge problem for civilised people most of the time, and something that is entirely the result of the communities in question failing to sort out their own cultural issues.

    Personally, I think I had that mostly covered with:


    Many of those deaths are clearly positive benefits to society (real criminals shot in the course of committing crimes), or at least of mixed effects (criminals shooting each other).
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  30. Randal says:
    @Achmed E. Newman
    Also, Randal, a big majority of the "gun deaths" that are not suicides are inner city gang shootings or just disputes over the dissing of one's "brothers". It's black ghetto deaths, in other words. In a decent, white area of either your county, or the country, deaths from shooting are a miniscule portion of total non-natural deaths.

    BTW, the last gun death that happened in my immediate or even extended family was when I let a single-shot .22 stay in the bathroom too long. It was there for squirrel reasons, but it rusted badly, and I consider that gun death my fault. It wasn't just another statistic - this time it was PERSONAL.

    Also, Randal, a big majority of the “gun deaths” that are not suicides are inner city gang shootings or just disputes over the dissing of one’s “brothers”. It’s black ghetto deaths, in other words. In a decent, white area of either your county, or the country, deaths from shooting are a miniscule portion of total non-natural deaths.

    Absolutely. Not a huge problem for civilised people most of the time, and something that is entirely the result of the communities in question failing to sort out their own cultural issues.

    Personally, I think I had that mostly covered with:

    Many of those deaths are clearly positive benefits to society (real criminals shot in the course of committing crimes), or at least of mixed effects (criminals shooting each other).

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  31. This kid like many of the other mass murderers is probably drugged to the eyeballs with anti depressants.

    Bingo! We have a winner. Majority of these killers have been doped up by our caring authorities. Boys can’t be boys anymore. Maybe if we forced him to take ‘transition’ drugs……

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  32. MEexpert says:
    @jim jones
    Those pesky Muslims have been pretty quiet lately, maybe the Yanks are taking their place

    You were hoping you could blame those pesky Muslims for this slaughter but you have no one to blame but yourself for it. When a child grows up with violent cartoons, TV shows, and movies, where indifferent shooting is a common occurrence, result will be incidents like this. Gun control is not the answer. These liberal Hollywood types produce these shows and when some thing like this happens they blame the guns.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  33. MEexpert says:
    @pyrrhus
    Abe Lincoln caused at least a couple of million American deaths, including those who starved to death...I haven't noticed you condemning "Honest Abe" lately, Buchanan....

    “Civil wars” are only bad in the Middle East. That is why we have to intervene. In the US, we call them war between states. Sounds very civil. Doesn’t it?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  34. Beene says:

    BTW, Pat Buchanan is, of course, a Trump voter. The irony of a Trump supporter writing about the moral degradation of the United States doesn’t seem to materialize in poor old Pat.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rurik

    The irony of a Trump supporter writing about the moral degradation of the United States
     
    perhaps because he considers the fact that some starlets want to rub their private parts on a billionaire- as negligible when you consider the moral degradation of Eternal Wars based on lies, that murder and maim and displace millions, destroying nation after nation.

    If you ask me, that is far more morally reprehensible than a celebrity accommodating some Hollywood gold digger by touching her bits.

    Trump has ended the edict that men have a right to follow your 12 year old daughter into the girls locker room or bathroom, because they 'identify' as female.

    Trump has appointed a sane justice to the Supreme Court.

    Trump is appointing judges recommended by the Federalist Society to the Federal bench, rather than the tyrannical, moral abominations that we've been getting for years now.

    Trump is far, far from a moral paragon, but compared to what we've had, (or almost had!), he's not doing all that bad, at least aside from the Eternal Wars he seems loath to end.
    , @Pat the Rat
    Trump has shown quite a bit of ambivalence, even opposition to abortion.

    The widespread state supported murder of unborn children is of course the greatest moral evil in existence today.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  35. Rurik says:
    @Beene
    BTW, Pat Buchanan is, of course, a Trump voter. The irony of a Trump supporter writing about the moral degradation of the United States doesn't seem to materialize in poor old Pat.

    The irony of a Trump supporter writing about the moral degradation of the United States

    perhaps because he considers the fact that some starlets want to rub their private parts on a billionaire- as negligible when you consider the moral degradation of Eternal Wars based on lies, that murder and maim and displace millions, destroying nation after nation.

    If you ask me, that is far more morally reprehensible than a celebrity accommodating some Hollywood gold digger by touching her bits.

    Trump has ended the edict that men have a right to follow your 12 year old daughter into the girls locker room or bathroom, because they ‘identify’ as female.

    Trump has appointed a sane justice to the Supreme Court.

    Trump is appointing judges recommended by the Federalist Society to the Federal bench, rather than the tyrannical, moral abominations that we’ve been getting for years now.

    Trump is far, far from a moral paragon, but compared to what we’ve had, (or almost had!), he’s not doing all that bad, at least aside from the Eternal Wars he seems loath to end.

    Read More
    • Agree: Randal
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  36. anon • Disclaimer says:

    Hey Pat
    This is called chicken coming home to roost

    How does it find its way back is pretty convoluted , multiple myriad crosscrissing, may be even a quantum leap – but the genie is not much different from the soul of those who sends drones from Rocky mountain to Kabul or Yemen to kill innocent children and family .

    Its not the deceased ( they are gone and have escaped the brutal moral, economic,intellectual failures that would have been awaiting them – they all have lasting peace . Its those who are left behind- the parents,brothers,sisters,a sweetheart friend ) its us who have failed them . We have blood on hand . We are the passive dewey eyed hand wringer , we the stupidest , we the backbone less – will god forgive us?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  37. anon • Disclaimer says:
    @jim jones
    Those pesky Muslims have been pretty quiet lately, maybe the Yanks are taking their place

    Those pesky Muslims have been pretty quiet lately, maybe the Yanks are taking their place (Places like Kabul Aleppo Somalia Kenya Mali – you name it

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  38. @Beene
    BTW, Pat Buchanan is, of course, a Trump voter. The irony of a Trump supporter writing about the moral degradation of the United States doesn't seem to materialize in poor old Pat.

    Trump has shown quite a bit of ambivalence, even opposition to abortion.

    The widespread state supported murder of unborn children is of course the greatest moral evil in existence today.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  39. @jacques sheete

    Another factor helps to explain what happened Wednesday: We are a formerly Christian society in an advanced state of decomposition.
     
    Another factor is the fact that ours never was a "Christian" society and one would think an historian like PB would know that.

    I'll grant that there's always been a lot of lip service about "Christian" ideals, but for the most part Christ's ears must be burning when he hears such rubbish.

    Psst, hey, Pat; tell us about the "Christian" Puritans and their persecution of other Christian sects. You can also inform us of the Christian generosity so often shown to the Indians and slaves as well as the prols and peasants who fought the Rev War, then got promptly tossed under the bus, and that's just for starters.

    Christian?

    Gimmee a break.

    We are Christian societies, even now.

    But the wheat has always been mixed in with the tares. And the tares grow and try to shade out the wheat and cannot be uprooted without destroying the wheat also.

    That is a christian society jacques, wheat and tares.

    The wheat fought Slavery, the tares profited from it. The wheat fights against the killing of innocent babies before birth, the tares support the murder of them for convenience. They are two obvious moral issues, many others are far less clear.

    Jesus said at the harvest of the wheat, then the tares can be separated and burnt. Food for thought jacques.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  40. utu says:
    @Johnny Smoggins
    "Banning guns would help."

    Like the way it's completely eliminated gun violence in Mexico, Brazil and Venezuela?

    The AR-15 (the gun this guy used) is legal in Canada, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Finland and yet this sort of thing doesn't happen in those countries. Anyone who's been to Israel will tell you that guns are ubiquitous. No mass shootings either.

    There's something wrong with the culture in the U.S. (and Brazil, Mexico and Venezuela)

    The AR-15 (the gun this guy used) is legal in Canada, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Finland and yet this sort of thing doesn’t happen in those countries.

    You don’t have civic responsibility like in Canada, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Finland because the US of A is populated with Americans not Canadians, Swiss, Dutch of Finns. Americans can’t handle guns for many reasons.

    Read More
    • Replies: @dearieme
    That seems to be the point. Would you like to try to identify some of those many reasons?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  41. utu says:
    @jacques sheete

    Banning guns would help.

     

    Particularly if government agents were all unarmed, all the time.

    Then the gov agents won’t have to be armed all the time.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
    Government employees carrying arms is a privilege. The citizens can remove that privilege from them. Citizens should be armed, not government employees.


    But if you really want to ban guns, how many people are you prepared to kill to take them? How many men are you prepared to lose trying to take them?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  42. utu says:
    @redmudhooch
    Yeah, look at Mexico, they banned guns and all the murders just stopped.

    Ban the FBI, CIA, Mossad, MIC, MSM, AIPAC would be a good start

    You having gun has no impact on FBI, CIA, Mossad, MIC, MSM, AIPAC . You and your gun can do nothing to them. But your gun may end up killing kids in schools which btw does not happen as often in Mexico.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Chris Mallory
    Only because armed citizens have held their peace. But it was made known back in 1993 that there would be no more "free Wacos". Notice that the Bundy Ranch was not raided and burned to the ground.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  43. utu says:
    @Randal
    Even if it would help, it wouldn't be worth the price imo (though that's a matter for Americans not for foreigners like us, in the case of the US). It wasn't worth the price in my country, for sure, as far as I'm concerned. Save a few lives at the cost of taking yet more responsibility away from the citizen and putting control into the hands of state thugs. Obviously those unlucky ones who do actually suffer the losses would have a different emotionally based response, but reason should over-ride sentimentality in policymaking.

    Gun deaths are a relatively small part of the death rates in civilised countries. In the US around 13k gun killings per annum in a country of 300 million people, whereas ten times that many die as a result of what the CDC classifies as accidents generally. Many of those deaths are clearly positive benefits to society (real criminals shot in the course of committing crimes), or at least of mixed effects (criminals shooting each other).

    Suicide is another issue, but not one I'd regard as ultimately over-riding my preference for keeping responsibility with people rather than the state.

    In the US around 13k gun killings per annum in a country of 300 million people, whereas ten times that many die as a result of what the CDC classifies as accidents generally. Many of those deaths are clearly positive benefits to society (real criminals shot in the course of committing crimes), or at least of mixed effects (criminals shooting each other).

    I had you for a very sensible and thoughtful commenter. Is it really you?

    clearly positive benefits to society – There are about 1000 killings by police per year which it is about 50 times higher rate then Europe. Have you noticed Darwinist improvement in America?

    times that many die as [...] as accidents generally – we can work on reducing the number of accidents rate. 2.5 million people die of natural causes in America. Should I argue that then accidents not mentioning murders should be totally ignored? I am sure 99% of those 2.5 million could have been kept alive at least 1 min longer instead of wasting resources on chasing murders or preventing accidents.

    Read More
    • Replies: @koob

    There are about 1000 killings by police per year which it is about 50 times higher rate then Europe. Have you noticed Darwinist improvement in America?
     
    Bad logic, since we can determine the statistical chances of all those criminals who were killed or seriously maimed by police committing further serious crimes, impregnating women that had no intention of marrying or supporting, etc. to carry on their thug lowlife culture.

    Think of it this way. What if those deadheads had gotten away, or did 6 years in prison, then put back out on the streets? Would the neighborhoods they operated in be better for it, or worse?

    The dramatic crime reduction in Compton is partly because the perps either killed each other, killed by police, or given a "gentleman's post-natal abortion" (life in prison). What is prison besides a gentle sucking of a criminal's life forces via time?

    Every measure mentioned, including being shot in the face by the police, makes for a better life for you and me. Because if the hardened criminals don't exist, they can't rob or kill you.

    Hope this helps.
    , @Randal

    I had you for a very sensible and thoughtful commenter. Is it really you?
     
    I didn't have you down for the sentimental, emotionally incontinent "think of the children" type either, so I suppose it just reinforces the unreliability of such online impressions.

    The point is that increasing state control of gun ownership is not a simple cost-free benefit as its advocates usually portray it, and the actual costs of the present US situation are both debatable and clearly much less than gun ban advocates invariably pretend when they are trying to exploit an event such as this latest school shooting. As I noted, relatively few people are killed using guns in the US and a large number of those people are self-evidently either criminals or general thugs whose deaths are a net benefit to society.

    As for the US's problem with militarised policing, that's a function of elements probably inherent to US culture that will not go away with the imposition of state gun control. In my own country we have had more or less total prohibition of private handgun ownership for some years now, but the trend is strongly towards ever more routine arming of the police, despite the long cultural tradition to the contrary that is barely managing to hold any kind of line in the face of creeping "anti-terrorism" militarising and widespread issuing of tasers and other weaponry.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  44. jpb says:
    @utu
    Banning guns would help.

    Banning public schools would help! No one shoots up charter or private schools. The public school system is broken in many areas, as a result of government policy of inclusion and diversity.

    Parents in our local community have been demanding school officials stop violence and disruption of classes, which include many mentally ill students. When a student disrupts the class, the class is halted and the disrupting student is allowed to act out, while the other students are removed from the class. There are dozens of these incidents per week.

    The public school system is broken beyond repair in the USA. My family now home schools or attend charter schools. Ban public schools and the school shootings will stop.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
    The way public school teachers are trained is much of the problem. Education Majors learn methods of presenting material, but not the material itself. They try to make class "fun," but they don't know how to make information comprehensible. As for discipline, Lewis' "Experiment House" pretty much describes it:

    All sorts of things, horrid things, went on which at an ordinary school would have been found out and stopped in half a term; but at this school they weren't. Or even if they were, the people who did them were not expelled or punished. The Head said they were interesting psychological cases and sent for them and talked to them for hours. And if you knew the right sort of things to say to the Head, the main result was that you became rather a favourite than otherwise.
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  45. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    Yes, a crumbling society is not civilized, so gun control should at least be considered a policy option on the table.

    The other obvious policy option (for school shootings) is strengthening that institution called the family through all channels available to the State: storytelling (education), benefits programs, jobs programs (for stably married breadwinners only), fiscal incentives. Adequate socialization starts at home.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  46. @jpb
    Banning public schools would help! No one shoots up charter or private schools. The public school system is broken in many areas, as a result of government policy of inclusion and diversity.

    Parents in our local community have been demanding school officials stop violence and disruption of classes, which include many mentally ill students. When a student disrupts the class, the class is halted and the disrupting student is allowed to act out, while the other students are removed from the class. There are dozens of these incidents per week.

    The public school system is broken beyond repair in the USA. My family now home schools or attend charter schools. Ban public schools and the school shootings will stop.

    The way public school teachers are trained is much of the problem. Education Majors learn methods of presenting material, but not the material itself. They try to make class “fun,” but they don’t know how to make information comprehensible. As for discipline, Lewis’ “Experiment House” pretty much describes it:

    All sorts of things, horrid things, went on which at an ordinary school would have been found out and stopped in half a term; but at this school they weren’t. Or even if they were, the people who did them were not expelled or punished. The Head said they were interesting psychological cases and sent for them and talked to them for hours. And if you knew the right sort of things to say to the Head, the main result was that you became rather a favourite than otherwise.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  47. peterAUS says:

    A pattern:
    An incident of this type happens->a lot of TALK and EMOTION lasting for a week, two tops->nothing of any relevance to the real life happens->rinse and repeat.

    An interesting social and psychological exercise; people watching in fact.

    Peculiar.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  48. It is individualism versus collectivism. Each side has certain advantages and disadvantages.
    The properties are not transferable.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  49. Bill Jones says: • Website

    Has any of these happened outside a “gun–free zone”?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  50. R. I. says:

    He was adopted. Both adoptive parents had died. Where did he get his ideas of right and wrong, good and evil? Before the Death of God and repeal of the Ten Commandments, in those dark old days, the 1950s, atrocities common now were almost nonexistent.

    To implement the New World Order, i.e., one currency and one government, the bankers need cheap labor that’s easily interchangeable everywhere on Earth. They therefore need to ”illuminate” the differences between people. Thus, they need homogeneous people who have lost their cultures values, language, ethnicity and religious system. They need to brainwash people into being servile and obedient like robots to obtain easily interchangeable cheap labor from any country anywhere in the world.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  51. @Twodees Partain
    "The revolution was fought with, and the 2nd Amendment was written, in the era of flintlocks. "

    Yes, because flintlock muskets and rifles were state of the art military small arms in those days. The 2nd Amendment recognized the right of human beings to have the same arms as agents of their government.

    There's no need to go back to the drawing board. Someone who has been personally targeted for assassination by agents of his own government, as you have, should have a better view of the rights of people to keep and bear state of the art small arms to defend themselves against their own government

    “There’s no need to go back to the drawing board. Someone who has been personally targeted for assassination by agents of his own government, as you have, should have a better view of the rights of people to keep and bear state of the art small arms to defend themselves against their own government”

    Actually, my experience has (as some might imagine) caused a deep reflection. I don’t question the premise of the 2nd Amendment, it is what it is. What I question is, the de facto ability, whether a state or individual, to take upon themselves 1) the right to kill, and 2) easily possess the means to go about it.

    As you might note, in my prior comment I express a high degree of doubt there is an easy answer, if there is an answer at all.

    What to watch for: enough mass killings generating pressure to employ the simplest legal means to outlaw the possession of weapons by the populace without curtailing the power of the state to employ extra-judicial murders. How this could initially come about would be the ‘supremacy clause’ of the constitution applied to entering a multilateral treaty banning sales of weapons and ammunition to private parties, for instance a small arms control treaty aimed at reducing numbers of AK 47, AR 15 and other high volume fire models, interpreted in such way as Ruger, Colt, et cetera can only wholesale to federal military, example given. All it would require is the Executive to sign and the Senate to ratify, said treaty and it becomes “the supreme law of the land”, the 2nd Amendment lawfully canceled out. Then you will finally have a science-fiction medieval authority with 21st Century killing technology. We’re not there yet, but we may not be far away either.

    Meanwhile look for the FBI and other agencies to continue to stand back and ‘fail’ to stop massacres like this most recent. It’s a matter of septic flotsam rising to leadership at the top:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2018/02/07/bob-manson-charlie-mueller/

    ^ There is nothing these people would not stoop to, to consolidate power, if for no reason other than saving their own asses as a criminal actors and political class; inclusive of state initiated mass murders on a vast scale, were the 2nd Amendment to ‘come into force’ so to speak, pitting the people in open warfare with the central government.

    It seems there should be a better way out of the dilemma of the USA having morphed into a criminal state apparatus. Meanwhile, I hate to say ‘democracy’ is a failed experiment but the prognosis is not good.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Twodees Partain
    It appears to have already advance3d to the point where the FBI and/or other agencies are conducting phony mass shootings in order to advance the disarmament agenda. Sandy Hook is one example, or as I refer to it: Sandy Hoax.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  52. n230099 says:

    “…talking TV heads demanding to know why the cowards in Congress won’t vote to outlaw AR-15s.”

    Never forget the old radical adage:

    It’s harder to impose the laws you really want if the laws you have, appear to be working”.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  53. Anonym says:

    From the killings in Columbine to Dylann Roof’s murder of black parishioners at the Charleston Church, from the Pulse nightclub massacre in Orlando to the slaughter of first-graders in Newtown, to Las Vegas last October where Stephen Paddock, firing from an upper floor of the Mandalay Bay, shot dead 58 people and wounded hundreds at a country music festival — these atrocities enter the social and cultural history of the nation. And those who carry them out achieve a recognition few Americans ever know. Charles Whitman, shooting 47 people from that Texas tower in 1966, is the original model.

    Although it doesn’t impact your thesis, including Omar Mateen is not warranted. It seems most likely to me that he was simply doing what was required of him by Islam.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonymous

    It seems most likely to me that he was simply doing what was required of him by Islam.
     
    You probably mean an eye for an eye? Sure.

    Only in our case we have no real capability to follow it to the letter, and need to settle for a measly few eyes for a million eyes.

    To be clear, if those measly few eyes are those of real enemies of Islam, such as your army and Charlie Hebdo scum, etc., sealing the fiery fate of evildoers is something to be rejoiced... and we do.
    Others... not at all. Perhaps they will be Judged more leniently.

    Anyway, no issues, as for the likes of you, your godless polytheist Islamophobic hides await something unimaginably more hideous than what we true monotheists can mete out.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  54. There’s likely another element to this tragedy that few have noticed.

    The shooter appears to have a very high percentage of the appearance features of and the behavioral characteristics of a young adult who began life as a child already impaired…by Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS).

    It would be useful to know more about the birth mother and why Mr. Cruz as a child was given up for adoption in the first place. My bet is that his birth mother and perhaps birth father too were substance abusers of the first degree.

    I mention this not to excuse his behavior, but rather, to suggest a cause for his behavior that few have suggested.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    FAS can create other terrible outcomes.

    https://images.dailykos.com/images/208576/story_image/scarborough_%282%29.png

    https://www.thefamouspeople.com/profiles/images/stephen-king-4.jpg
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  55. @utu
    Banning guns would help.

    There is a substantial body of evidence that an armed citizenry reduces violent crime, and none to suggest that disarming citizens reduces violent crime.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  56. @Johnny Smoggins
    Everyone I've ever known who was adopted was messed up. It must do some incredible psychological damage to know that even your own mother didn't want you.

    “Everyone I’ve ever known who was adopted was messed up. It must do some incredible psychological damage to know that even your own mother didn’t want you.”

    Perhaps. But there’s also the possibility that children put up for adoption were unworthy, unloving parents who would have done the child more harm than good were they to have raised the child.

    There’s also the possibility that the child was removed from the parents by CPS and their parental rights were extinguished by the court.

    We’ll simply never know.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  57. Anonym says:
    @Pat the Rat
    This kid like many of the other mass murderers is probably drugged to the eyeballs with anti depressants.

    What the drugs do is deaden you conscience, and make you indifferent to life, you own and others. I think they probably free people from feeling pain from the social judgement's of others and their own self critical conscience.

    Heroin and all the major drugs do the same, and is probably why they are widely loved by criminals and prostitutes, etc. Nothing like a drug to stop that moral self critical conscience keeping you awake at night.

    http://www.cchrflorida.org/antidepressants-are-a-prescription-for-mass-shootings/

    The video in the above link, while a little on the emotive side, is worth a watch. I have never been on anti-depressants but drugs certainly do alter mood. Maybe there is something to this. Often people who are depressed are unable to get out of bed. It seems like it would take quite a bit of motivation to plan and carry out a school shooting, for example. It seems likely that these SSRI drugs are worth investigating as a part of this mass shooting phenomenon.

    The other undeniable link in the feedback loop between one mass shooting and the next is the media promotion of these people as infamous. Take that out, and all you’d be is an entry in wikipedia. To those in the media, the media hoopla and feedback loop to create more and more effective mass shooters is more a feature than a bug. It is bad enough that the goyim have pitch forks, they should not be allowed to have AR-15s or AK-47s. Without public push to abolish the 2A, it will not happen. The school shooting is the problem in the problem-reaction-solution. Unfortunately for the (((media))), the reaction is fairly muted, thus far preventing a solution (lol).

    The counter-intuitive solution to school shootings will be driven from the bottom up. Gun free school zones, in fact, gun free zones such as cinemas are a guarantee of a soft target. Much like the success of CCW across the nation, armed teachers or guards would both deter and minimize the extent of school shootings. The last thing a Nikolas Cruz wants is to be a footnote in a pro-2A propaganda piece (Armed teacher puts down prospective school shooter!) that only random autists know about.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  58. Apparently, Cruz hated ‘jews, immigrants, gays and ‘ni***rs.’

    The lefties have cause to thank God–if they believe in Him:

    http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5402709/Nikolas-Cruz-threatened-kill-people-private-chat.html

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  59. @Johnny Smoggins
    Everyone I've ever known who was adopted was messed up. It must do some incredible psychological damage to know that even your own mother didn't want you.

    Some sincerely want someone to give the baby a better life than they can. I know at least one guy whose birth-mother was a teen, and he’s pretty sure she didn’t have many other options in those days.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  60. anon • Disclaimer says:

    Don’t keep on separating too long . The more you do the more you see that the differences between the what and tares are no more relevant than the differences between Bush ( who stands for Amerucan generic presidency and foreign policies) and Cruz or Whitman . Marten and Cruz or Bush can actually be connected easily on their presumed or alleged humiliation . Bush felt his father’s honor was not respected by Saddam – he survived his presidency, put doormat with his picture on and he tried to kill him . Cruz and Marten were expelled by an organization or assembly which found them unfit to be a member.

    You see ,honor is a big word- nobody respected America under Obama – among certain type of foreigner killers known as interventionists . They are good Christians . The good Christians ask the poor to join militaries so that Christian nation can secure peace and prosperity at home . Without military’s help they would be selling drugs or prostituing to pay for colleges . Military’s help leave them anyway addicted or damaged or violent .

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  61. dearieme says:
    @utu

    The AR-15 (the gun this guy used) is legal in Canada, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Finland and yet this sort of thing doesn’t happen in those countries.
     
    You don't have civic responsibility like in Canada, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Finland because the US of A is populated with Americans not Canadians, Swiss, Dutch of Finns. Americans can't handle guns for many reasons.

    That seems to be the point. Would you like to try to identify some of those many reasons?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  62. Telenon says:

    On Youtube: Charlottesville Car Attack: Ten Curious Facts by: SonofNewo.

    One curious thing is that there was a black Chevy SUV parked on the street right behind the position where the “car attack” occurred. It appears to be a US government vehicle with license plate beginning with “US”, maybe. Has darkened windows.

    It is one of only three vehicles parked on the street in place at the time, including a maroon van which had partially blocked the one-way street for over five minutes, and a Toyota truck.

    SonofNewo alleges that the FBI secreted away a video they took from a business on this street that would reveal real-time events.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  63. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Anonym
    From the killings in Columbine to Dylann Roof’s murder of black parishioners at the Charleston Church, from the Pulse nightclub massacre in Orlando to the slaughter of first-graders in Newtown, to Las Vegas last October where Stephen Paddock, firing from an upper floor of the Mandalay Bay, shot dead 58 people and wounded hundreds at a country music festival — these atrocities enter the social and cultural history of the nation. And those who carry them out achieve a recognition few Americans ever know. Charles Whitman, shooting 47 people from that Texas tower in 1966, is the original model.

    Although it doesn't impact your thesis, including Omar Mateen is not warranted. It seems most likely to me that he was simply doing what was required of him by Islam.

    It seems most likely to me that he was simply doing what was required of him by Islam.

    You probably mean an eye for an eye? Sure.

    Only in our case we have no real capability to follow it to the letter, and need to settle for a measly few eyes for a million eyes.

    To be clear, if those measly few eyes are those of real enemies of Islam, such as your army and Charlie Hebdo scum, etc., sealing the fiery fate of evildoers is something to be rejoiced… and we do.
    Others… not at all. Perhaps they will be Judged more leniently.

    Anyway, no issues, as for the likes of you, your godless polytheist Islamophobic hides await something unimaginably more hideous than what we true monotheists can mete out.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Anonym
    To be clear, if those measly few eyes are those of real enemies of Islam, such as your army and Charlie Hebdo scum, etc., sealing the fiery fate of evildoers is something to be rejoiced… and we do.
    Others… not at all. Perhaps they will be Judged more leniently.


    An eye for an eye is not necessary for Muslim scum to murder. The history of the Muslim incursions into Europe are evidence of that, and the current hejira is only the modern iteration. The instructions are clear and many.

    https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/violence.aspx

    I was content to leave your kind in MENA, backward, impotent and left alone. However, your words are beginning to persuade me that a nuclear crusade would be a better approach.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  64. toppler says:

    Yes, Mexico only has a small war’s worth of gun death every single year from gang activity, primarily conducted by teenage to young adult males. In a gun controlled society, I believe.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  65. Anonym says:
    @Anonymous

    It seems most likely to me that he was simply doing what was required of him by Islam.
     
    You probably mean an eye for an eye? Sure.

    Only in our case we have no real capability to follow it to the letter, and need to settle for a measly few eyes for a million eyes.

    To be clear, if those measly few eyes are those of real enemies of Islam, such as your army and Charlie Hebdo scum, etc., sealing the fiery fate of evildoers is something to be rejoiced... and we do.
    Others... not at all. Perhaps they will be Judged more leniently.

    Anyway, no issues, as for the likes of you, your godless polytheist Islamophobic hides await something unimaginably more hideous than what we true monotheists can mete out.

    To be clear, if those measly few eyes are those of real enemies of Islam, such as your army and Charlie Hebdo scum, etc., sealing the fiery fate of evildoers is something to be rejoiced… and we do.
    Others… not at all. Perhaps they will be Judged more leniently.

    An eye for an eye is not necessary for Muslim scum to murder. The history of the Muslim incursions into Europe are evidence of that, and the current hejira is only the modern iteration. The instructions are clear and many.

    https://www.thereligionofpeace.com/pages/quran/violence.aspx

    I was content to leave your kind in MENA, backward, impotent and left alone. However, your words are beginning to persuade me that a nuclear crusade would be a better approach.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  66. Anonym says:
    @Longfisher
    There's likely another element to this tragedy that few have noticed.

    The shooter appears to have a very high percentage of the appearance features of and the behavioral characteristics of a young adult who began life as a child already impaired...by Fetal Alcohol Syndrome (FAS).

    It would be useful to know more about the birth mother and why Mr. Cruz as a child was given up for adoption in the first place. My bet is that his birth mother and perhaps birth father too were substance abusers of the first degree.

    I mention this not to excuse his behavior, but rather, to suggest a cause for his behavior that few have suggested.

    FAS can create other terrible outcomes.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  67. @Ronald Thomas West
    "There’s no need to go back to the drawing board. Someone who has been personally targeted for assassination by agents of his own government, as you have, should have a better view of the rights of people to keep and bear state of the art small arms to defend themselves against their own government"

    Actually, my experience has (as some might imagine) caused a deep reflection. I don't question the premise of the 2nd Amendment, it is what it is. What I question is, the de facto ability, whether a state or individual, to take upon themselves 1) the right to kill, and 2) easily possess the means to go about it.

    As you might note, in my prior comment I express a high degree of doubt there is an easy answer, if there is an answer at all.

    What to watch for: enough mass killings generating pressure to employ the simplest legal means to outlaw the possession of weapons by the populace without curtailing the power of the state to employ extra-judicial murders. How this could initially come about would be the 'supremacy clause' of the constitution applied to entering a multilateral treaty banning sales of weapons and ammunition to private parties, for instance a small arms control treaty aimed at reducing numbers of AK 47, AR 15 and other high volume fire models, interpreted in such way as Ruger, Colt, et cetera can only wholesale to federal military, example given. All it would require is the Executive to sign and the Senate to ratify, said treaty and it becomes "the supreme law of the land", the 2nd Amendment lawfully canceled out. Then you will finally have a science-fiction medieval authority with 21st Century killing technology. We're not there yet, but we may not be far away either.

    Meanwhile look for the FBI and other agencies to continue to stand back and 'fail' to stop massacres like this most recent. It's a matter of septic flotsam rising to leadership at the top:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2018/02/07/bob-manson-charlie-mueller/

    ^ There is nothing these people would not stoop to, to consolidate power, if for no reason other than saving their own asses as a criminal actors and political class; inclusive of state initiated mass murders on a vast scale, were the 2nd Amendment to 'come into force' so to speak, pitting the people in open warfare with the central government.

    It seems there should be a better way out of the dilemma of the USA having morphed into a criminal state apparatus. Meanwhile, I hate to say 'democracy' is a failed experiment but the prognosis is not good.

    It appears to have already advance3d to the point where the FBI and/or other agencies are conducting phony mass shootings in order to advance the disarmament agenda. Sandy Hook is one example, or as I refer to it: Sandy Hoax.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  68. @utu
    Then the gov agents won't have to be armed all the time.

    Government employees carrying arms is a privilege. The citizens can remove that privilege from them. Citizens should be armed, not government employees.

    But if you really want to ban guns, how many people are you prepared to kill to take them? How many men are you prepared to lose trying to take them?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  69. @utu
    You having gun has no impact on FBI, CIA, Mossad, MIC, MSM, AIPAC . You and your gun can do nothing to them. But your gun may end up killing kids in schools which btw does not happen as often in Mexico.

    Only because armed citizens have held their peace. But it was made known back in 1993 that there would be no more “free Wacos”. Notice that the Bundy Ranch was not raided and burned to the ground.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  70. An interesting comment left on this youtube video:

    Pi C
    9 months ago
    “US govt sent an agent to sit in the local Korean radio stations to prevent incoming calls from desperate store owners asking to borrow more bullets for their guns. Korean store owners were running out of bullets as they were shooting into air to scare away defenders. No doubt they had less than just a few dozen bullets on hand, or just what were already in the gun. And local gun stores were ordered to shut down quickly as riot started.

    “As the riot went on, some Korean store owners started calling into the local Korean language radio stations asking for anyone to lend them more bullets. I can still recall a middle aged man desperately asking to borrow .38 caliber bullets (sam pal googyung, in Korean). It happened more than a few times during the first 1 or 2 days of the riot. I believe on the 2nd or 3rd day of the riot, the US govt sent someone to SIT inside the radio station studio (yes next to the radio host) to make sure no call asking for bullets would be allowed onto the airwave. As people continued to call in asking for more bullets, the radio host repeated “Sorry I cannot forward your request asking to borrow bullets or we will be shutdown by US govt”.

    So the US government sent a representative to intentionally disable a legally constituted militia, engaged in lawful activity, that they knew would result in victory by criminals. And the gun controllers bleat “Trust Us!” 24/7.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  71. @Ronald Thomas West

    Evil has its own hierarchy of rewards. Perhaps the most famous man of the 20th century was Hitler, with Stalin and Mao among his leading rivals
     
    You should look to your own class of people when it comes to precedent and setting example, Pat, those 'Ten Commandments loving Christians' at the apex of empire who behave little differently, except on a much larger scale:

    “I would … like to single out Doug Coe, who has been such a guiding light in all of this” –George W Bush

    “Doug Coe is a unique presence in Washington: a genuinely loving spiritual mentor and guide to anyone, regardless of party or faith, who wants to deepen his or her relationship with God” –Hillary Clinton

    “You know Jesus said ‘You got to put Him before mother-father-brother sister? Hitler, Lenin, Mao, that’s what they taught the kids. Mao even had the kids killing their own mother and father. But it wasn’t murder. It was for building the new nation. The new kingdom” –Doug Coe

    The revolution was fought with, and the 2nd Amendment was written, in the era of flintlocks. Mass killings of people was not possible on the same scale, whether by the state or an individual:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2013/08/20/the-anti-federalist-urban-legend/

    ^ Time to go back to the drawing board, but who could you trust to get it right? Our constitution has become irrelevant in any case, the most often applied political lie [fake promise] in the USA today is the oath to uphold the same:

    https://ronaldthomaswest.com/2017/12/01/the-oath-and-the-trash-bin/

    ^ The idea the oath to uphold the constitution is kept in any case is patently laughable. The idea this lie in its entirety can be corrected in today's political circumstance is an even bigger joke -

    Give Pat a break. He was simply taking a cheap shot at Adolph Hitler, who was an angel compared to every US president starting with Andrew Jackson, an admitted and unabashed war criminal.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  72. @Johnny Smoggins
    "Banning guns would help."

    Like the way it's completely eliminated gun violence in Mexico, Brazil and Venezuela?

    The AR-15 (the gun this guy used) is legal in Canada, Switzerland, the Netherlands and Finland and yet this sort of thing doesn't happen in those countries. Anyone who's been to Israel will tell you that guns are ubiquitous. No mass shootings either.

    There's something wrong with the culture in the U.S. (and Brazil, Mexico and Venezuela)

    What’s wrong with US culture is the US government that spawned and nourishes it.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  73. Well, excuse me, but I can’t help wondering what the 76 people roasted alive by the Feds at Waco would have to say about this rather minor demonstration of senseless violence. And while on the subject, it’s enough to make you wonder if Waco was where indiscriminate shooting into crowds of innocents gained its popularity.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy

    Just the place for a Snark!" the Bellman cried,
    As he landed his crew with care;
    Supporting each man on the top of the tide
    By a finger entwined in his hair.

    "Just the place for a Snark! I have said it twice:
    That alone should encourage the crew.
    Just the place for a Snark! I have said it thrice:
    What I tell you three times is true."
     
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  74. Second Amendment is really a red herring as no one has any plans to disarm militias. In any case, at the time of the Second Amendment slaves and women had no right to weapons, and the real need for civilian “militias” was to put down slave rebellions at a time when there was no police force.

    The real issue is keeping weapons of mass murder out of the hands of mentally unbalanced nutters under the age of 25, not stopping people from hunting rabbits or target shooting. The best way to preserve the 2nd amendment is to agree to reasonable weapons reform. After all, civilians are not allowed Second Amendment hand grenades or nuclear weapons, cruise missiles, or tactical bombers, because everything is relative to what is necessary and reasonable.

    Read More
    • Troll: Twodees Partain
    • Replies: @Randal

    Second Amendment is really a red herring as no one has any plans to disarm militias
     
    Except it's not a red herring, is it, because US courts don't interpret the 2nd Amendment the way you would evidently like to see it interpreted, but rather use it in practice to protect the rights of Americans to have reasonably free access to weapons for the protection of their persons, families and property in the face of attempts by the federal government to disarm them.

    The best way to preserve the 2nd amendment is to agree to reasonable weapons reform. After all, civilians are not allowed Second Amendment hand grenades or nuclear weapons, cruise missiles, or tactical bombers, because everything is relative to what is necessary and reasonable.
     
    That would be reasonable, if one were dealing with honest and reasonable people on the other side. But in relation to gun control one is not dealing with reasonable and honest people who could be trusted to stick to a deal and not try to use it as the basis for the next creeping encroachment of their personal drives on other folk's rights, one is dealing with hoplophobes who seek to prevent other people have weapons because they are personally too afraid of them to own them or to deal with the idea that others might own them, and power motivated government bureaucrats and lobbies that seek a disarmed populace that will be ever more dependent upon state protection and vulnerable to state coercion.

    Give them an inch and they will take a mile never applies more perfectly than when it is used to describe gun grabbers and speech controllers.

    The best way to preserve the 2nd amendment is to agree to reasonable weapons reform.
     
    Actually one of the best ways to preserve gun ownership liberty is to stick to hard reason in the face of the endless attempts to exploit tragedies.
    , @Joe Stalin
    I'm afraid you are just plain wrong; hand grenades are considered Class 3 destructive devices and can be owned by paying a $200 tax to the US Treasury. Cruise missiles are totally legal as well as tactical bombers. Many private organizations and individuals own bombers. You will however have to pay $200 tax on each bomb. Cruise missiles are so legal that a person has set out to build a low-cost DIY unit. ( http://www.interestingprojects.com/cruisemissile/ )

    Women had no right to weapons? So women are not "people" as mentioned in the Second Amendment?

    "no one has any plans to disarm militias"

    I suggest you google for "ADL" and "militia" before advancing such assertions.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  75. koob says:
    @utu

    In the US around 13k gun killings per annum in a country of 300 million people, whereas ten times that many die as a result of what the CDC classifies as accidents generally. Many of those deaths are clearly positive benefits to society (real criminals shot in the course of committing crimes), or at least of mixed effects (criminals shooting each other).
     
    I had you for a very sensible and thoughtful commenter. Is it really you?

    clearly positive benefits to society - There are about 1000 killings by police per year which it is about 50 times higher rate then Europe. Have you noticed Darwinist improvement in America?

    times that many die as [...] as accidents generally - we can work on reducing the number of accidents rate. 2.5 million people die of natural causes in America. Should I argue that then accidents not mentioning murders should be totally ignored? I am sure 99% of those 2.5 million could have been kept alive at least 1 min longer instead of wasting resources on chasing murders or preventing accidents.

    There are about 1000 killings by police per year which it is about 50 times higher rate then Europe. Have you noticed Darwinist improvement in America?

    Bad logic, since we can determine the statistical chances of all those criminals who were killed or seriously maimed by police committing further serious crimes, impregnating women that had no intention of marrying or supporting, etc. to carry on their thug lowlife culture.

    Think of it this way. What if those deadheads had gotten away, or did 6 years in prison, then put back out on the streets? Would the neighborhoods they operated in be better for it, or worse?

    The dramatic crime reduction in Compton is partly because the perps either killed each other, killed by police, or given a “gentleman’s post-natal abortion” (life in prison). What is prison besides a gentle sucking of a criminal’s life forces via time?

    Every measure mentioned, including being shot in the face by the police, makes for a better life for you and me. Because if the hardened criminals don’t exist, they can’t rob or kill you.

    Hope this helps.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  76. Randal says:
    @utu

    In the US around 13k gun killings per annum in a country of 300 million people, whereas ten times that many die as a result of what the CDC classifies as accidents generally. Many of those deaths are clearly positive benefits to society (real criminals shot in the course of committing crimes), or at least of mixed effects (criminals shooting each other).
     
    I had you for a very sensible and thoughtful commenter. Is it really you?

    clearly positive benefits to society - There are about 1000 killings by police per year which it is about 50 times higher rate then Europe. Have you noticed Darwinist improvement in America?

    times that many die as [...] as accidents generally - we can work on reducing the number of accidents rate. 2.5 million people die of natural causes in America. Should I argue that then accidents not mentioning murders should be totally ignored? I am sure 99% of those 2.5 million could have been kept alive at least 1 min longer instead of wasting resources on chasing murders or preventing accidents.

    I had you for a very sensible and thoughtful commenter. Is it really you?

    I didn’t have you down for the sentimental, emotionally incontinent “think of the children” type either, so I suppose it just reinforces the unreliability of such online impressions.

    The point is that increasing state control of gun ownership is not a simple cost-free benefit as its advocates usually portray it, and the actual costs of the present US situation are both debatable and clearly much less than gun ban advocates invariably pretend when they are trying to exploit an event such as this latest school shooting. As I noted, relatively few people are killed using guns in the US and a large number of those people are self-evidently either criminals or general thugs whose deaths are a net benefit to society.

    As for the US’s problem with militarised policing, that’s a function of elements probably inherent to US culture that will not go away with the imposition of state gun control. In my own country we have had more or less total prohibition of private handgun ownership for some years now, but the trend is strongly towards ever more routine arming of the police, despite the long cultural tradition to the contrary that is barely managing to hold any kind of line in the face of creeping “anti-terrorism” militarising and widespread issuing of tasers and other weaponry.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  77. Randal says:
    @Jonathan Mason
    Second Amendment is really a red herring as no one has any plans to disarm militias. In any case, at the time of the Second Amendment slaves and women had no right to weapons, and the real need for civilian "militias" was to put down slave rebellions at a time when there was no police force.

    The real issue is keeping weapons of mass murder out of the hands of mentally unbalanced nutters under the age of 25, not stopping people from hunting rabbits or target shooting. The best way to preserve the 2nd amendment is to agree to reasonable weapons reform. After all, civilians are not allowed Second Amendment hand grenades or nuclear weapons, cruise missiles, or tactical bombers, because everything is relative to what is necessary and reasonable.

    Second Amendment is really a red herring as no one has any plans to disarm militias

    Except it’s not a red herring, is it, because US courts don’t interpret the 2nd Amendment the way you would evidently like to see it interpreted, but rather use it in practice to protect the rights of Americans to have reasonably free access to weapons for the protection of their persons, families and property in the face of attempts by the federal government to disarm them.

    The best way to preserve the 2nd amendment is to agree to reasonable weapons reform. After all, civilians are not allowed Second Amendment hand grenades or nuclear weapons, cruise missiles, or tactical bombers, because everything is relative to what is necessary and reasonable.

    That would be reasonable, if one were dealing with honest and reasonable people on the other side. But in relation to gun control one is not dealing with reasonable and honest people who could be trusted to stick to a deal and not try to use it as the basis for the next creeping encroachment of their personal drives on other folk’s rights, one is dealing with hoplophobes who seek to prevent other people have weapons because they are personally too afraid of them to own them or to deal with the idea that others might own them, and power motivated government bureaucrats and lobbies that seek a disarmed populace that will be ever more dependent upon state protection and vulnerable to state coercion.

    Give them an inch and they will take a mile never applies more perfectly than when it is used to describe gun grabbers and speech controllers.

    The best way to preserve the 2nd amendment is to agree to reasonable weapons reform.

    Actually one of the best ways to preserve gun ownership liberty is to stick to hard reason in the face of the endless attempts to exploit tragedies.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    ...power motivated government bureaucrats and lobbies that seek a disarmed populace that will be ever more dependent upon state protection and vulnerable to state coercion.
     
    But when has having an armed population every stopped government forces from arresting people, serving warrants, putting liens on their property, etc.? Is there any "no go" are in the US where law enforcement fears to go? Do Native Americans have the right to uses weapons to defend their territories against incursions from Wašíču, or whatever they call us among themselves?

    The Waco disaster is just about the only the example that anyone can think of where citizens used weapons to defy the government, and it ended horribly. Of course I agree that the Bureau of ATF and FBI made a complete cock's ass of the whole operation, and that they could easily have arrested Koresh on federal property by just waiting until he made his weekly mail pickup at the local post office and tapped him on the shoulder.

    One likes to think these government agencies might have learned something from the experience, but when you think about it, it seems like the fact that they had guns made them excessively gung-ho and determined to get some shots off, when this was not needed. Had they been disarmed, then the Branch Davidians would probably never have fired the shot that was heard around the world.

    , @peterAUS
    You posted very good comments here.

    Maybe I could add something:
    The 2nd was introduced (proper expression I hope) to prevent STATE abuse against a citizen.
    It wasn't about self-defence, hunting or sports. A lot of people miss that for some reason (mostly dishonest).

    Now, while is true that in era of flintlock the parity was close, now it's obvious extremely large.
    BUT, still, having current weaponry at their disposal (semiautomatic rifles with proper ammo and scopes) it makes US citizens much more efficient against STATE abuse.

    While is true that in direct clash against a state (modern military) US militias have no chance it would require a too hard approach by the state. In essence, a full fledged conventional warfare on own soil.
    On top of it, the current weaponry in citizens' hands can be used to acquire proper weaponry easier than without having them. That's for direct confrontation.

    And...on top of that, the current weaponry allow for making life of potential rulers a hell. Wouldn't be possible to live, let alone enjoy life as they do now with pissed of armed citizens in their mist. It takes just one good semiautomatic rifle with a scope and on biped to make all the upper class hide in their compounds. This is simplification, of course. Besides, there is a limit of "practical talk" on the public Internet.

    Actually, on the related article here it's written that events as this are willing price for an average American to have the 2nd. Makes sense.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  78. Skipper says:

    Thorough background checks for mental/criminal history. If mental provide good mental health options. Further if mentally unfit for a weapon they are likely unfit to be a parent. As such they should be sterilzed.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  79. @Jonathan Mason
    Second Amendment is really a red herring as no one has any plans to disarm militias. In any case, at the time of the Second Amendment slaves and women had no right to weapons, and the real need for civilian "militias" was to put down slave rebellions at a time when there was no police force.

    The real issue is keeping weapons of mass murder out of the hands of mentally unbalanced nutters under the age of 25, not stopping people from hunting rabbits or target shooting. The best way to preserve the 2nd amendment is to agree to reasonable weapons reform. After all, civilians are not allowed Second Amendment hand grenades or nuclear weapons, cruise missiles, or tactical bombers, because everything is relative to what is necessary and reasonable.

    I’m afraid you are just plain wrong; hand grenades are considered Class 3 destructive devices and can be owned by paying a $200 tax to the US Treasury. Cruise missiles are totally legal as well as tactical bombers. Many private organizations and individuals own bombers. You will however have to pay $200 tax on each bomb. Cruise missiles are so legal that a person has set out to build a low-cost DIY unit. ( http://www.interestingprojects.com/cruisemissile/ )

    Women had no right to weapons? So women are not “people” as mentioned in the Second Amendment?

    “no one has any plans to disarm militias”

    I suggest you google for “ADL” and “militia” before advancing such assertions.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  80. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:

    My suspicion is that the reason so many Americans are reluctant to abandon their weapons is that they don’t want to share the vulnerability of Boer farmrers

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    EGGS-ACT-LY!

    The militias were originally needed to suppress slave rebellions, and all this Second Amendment guff is about whites wanting guns to defend themselves against black criminals-and to be fair, I think there is SOME justification for this.

    I don't have a gun, but if I lived in a rural location, I would probably want a firearm somewhere around the place to defend against home invasions--though the problem is that when you have children you need to keep a weapon and ammunition incredibly securely locked up, so it might not be so easy to pop off a shot at the Amazon delivery guy every time you get a knock at the door and see someone running away.

    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  81. @Randal

    Second Amendment is really a red herring as no one has any plans to disarm militias
     
    Except it's not a red herring, is it, because US courts don't interpret the 2nd Amendment the way you would evidently like to see it interpreted, but rather use it in practice to protect the rights of Americans to have reasonably free access to weapons for the protection of their persons, families and property in the face of attempts by the federal government to disarm them.

    The best way to preserve the 2nd amendment is to agree to reasonable weapons reform. After all, civilians are not allowed Second Amendment hand grenades or nuclear weapons, cruise missiles, or tactical bombers, because everything is relative to what is necessary and reasonable.
     
    That would be reasonable, if one were dealing with honest and reasonable people on the other side. But in relation to gun control one is not dealing with reasonable and honest people who could be trusted to stick to a deal and not try to use it as the basis for the next creeping encroachment of their personal drives on other folk's rights, one is dealing with hoplophobes who seek to prevent other people have weapons because they are personally too afraid of them to own them or to deal with the idea that others might own them, and power motivated government bureaucrats and lobbies that seek a disarmed populace that will be ever more dependent upon state protection and vulnerable to state coercion.

    Give them an inch and they will take a mile never applies more perfectly than when it is used to describe gun grabbers and speech controllers.

    The best way to preserve the 2nd amendment is to agree to reasonable weapons reform.
     
    Actually one of the best ways to preserve gun ownership liberty is to stick to hard reason in the face of the endless attempts to exploit tragedies.

    …power motivated government bureaucrats and lobbies that seek a disarmed populace that will be ever more dependent upon state protection and vulnerable to state coercion.

    But when has having an armed population every stopped government forces from arresting people, serving warrants, putting liens on their property, etc.? Is there any “no go” are in the US where law enforcement fears to go? Do Native Americans have the right to uses weapons to defend their territories against incursions from Wašíču, or whatever they call us among themselves?

    The Waco disaster is just about the only the example that anyone can think of where citizens used weapons to defy the government, and it ended horribly. Of course I agree that the Bureau of ATF and FBI made a complete cock’s ass of the whole operation, and that they could easily have arrested Koresh on federal property by just waiting until he made his weekly mail pickup at the local post office and tapped him on the shoulder.

    One likes to think these government agencies might have learned something from the experience, but when you think about it, it seems like the fact that they had guns made them excessively gung-ho and determined to get some shots off, when this was not needed. Had they been disarmed, then the Branch Davidians would probably never have fired the shot that was heard around the world.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS

    The Waco disaster is just about the only the example that anyone can think of where citizens used weapons to defy the government, and it ended horribly.
     
    Oversimplification.

    Just for a sake of conversation, imagine that all that county started an armed confrontation with the State as soon as the siege was imposed.
    Or a couple of counties.
    Or a full state. Say, all Christians of that state.
    That is the point of the 2nd.

    On purely tactical level it was a light militia company against Federal State. Without AT/AA weapons, proper fortifications. Without proper organization, even proper intent.
    So, Waco is not a good example for this topic.

    2nd, properly done by a sizable community in USA would force US government to use heavy military approach. And that changes the game altogether. The paradigm of the conflict.
    That is a different topic.

    That is how insurrections and regime changes are done around the world.
    , @Randal
    If you don't have a gun you are helpless in the face of men with guns, and hence dependent upon state protection and easily bullied by the state as a result, and you will most likely vote for increased state powers whenever you are scaremongered.

    Had they been disarmed, then the Branch Davidians would probably never have fired the shot that was heard around the world.

     

    If you are trying to imply that state gun control makes arming of police less likely, as I pointed out elsewhere, private ownership of handguns has been effectively prohibited in my country for more than two decades, yet the trend is strongly towards ever more routine arming of the police despite the strong cultural background of opposition to that situation.

    America's cultural problem with its militarised, thuggish police force seems to have its authoritarian roots elsewhere in US culture. The ideas that seem to permeate US law enforcement that respect and obedience can and should be coerced by state functionaries, and that force protection should be the over-riding priority (something that suggests a link with the US military) would be good places to start.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  82. @Anonymous
    My suspicion is that the reason so many Americans are reluctant to abandon their weapons is that they don't want to share the vulnerability of Boer farmrers

    EGGS-ACT-LY!

    The militias were originally needed to suppress slave rebellions, and all this Second Amendment guff is about whites wanting guns to defend themselves against black criminals-and to be fair, I think there is SOME justification for this.

    I don’t have a gun, but if I lived in a rural location, I would probably want a firearm somewhere around the place to defend against home invasions–though the problem is that when you have children you need to keep a weapon and ammunition incredibly securely locked up, so it might not be so easy to pop off a shot at the Amazon delivery guy every time you get a knock at the door and see someone running away.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  83. peterAUS says:
    @Randal

    Second Amendment is really a red herring as no one has any plans to disarm militias
     
    Except it's not a red herring, is it, because US courts don't interpret the 2nd Amendment the way you would evidently like to see it interpreted, but rather use it in practice to protect the rights of Americans to have reasonably free access to weapons for the protection of their persons, families and property in the face of attempts by the federal government to disarm them.

    The best way to preserve the 2nd amendment is to agree to reasonable weapons reform. After all, civilians are not allowed Second Amendment hand grenades or nuclear weapons, cruise missiles, or tactical bombers, because everything is relative to what is necessary and reasonable.
     
    That would be reasonable, if one were dealing with honest and reasonable people on the other side. But in relation to gun control one is not dealing with reasonable and honest people who could be trusted to stick to a deal and not try to use it as the basis for the next creeping encroachment of their personal drives on other folk's rights, one is dealing with hoplophobes who seek to prevent other people have weapons because they are personally too afraid of them to own them or to deal with the idea that others might own them, and power motivated government bureaucrats and lobbies that seek a disarmed populace that will be ever more dependent upon state protection and vulnerable to state coercion.

    Give them an inch and they will take a mile never applies more perfectly than when it is used to describe gun grabbers and speech controllers.

    The best way to preserve the 2nd amendment is to agree to reasonable weapons reform.
     
    Actually one of the best ways to preserve gun ownership liberty is to stick to hard reason in the face of the endless attempts to exploit tragedies.

    You posted very good comments here.

    Maybe I could add something:
    The 2nd was introduced (proper expression I hope) to prevent STATE abuse against a citizen.
    It wasn’t about self-defence, hunting or sports. A lot of people miss that for some reason (mostly dishonest).

    Now, while is true that in era of flintlock the parity was close, now it’s obvious extremely large.
    BUT, still, having current weaponry at their disposal (semiautomatic rifles with proper ammo and scopes) it makes US citizens much more efficient against STATE abuse.

    While is true that in direct clash against a state (modern military) US militias have no chance it would require a too hard approach by the state. In essence, a full fledged conventional warfare on own soil.
    On top of it, the current weaponry in citizens’ hands can be used to acquire proper weaponry easier than without having them. That’s for direct confrontation.

    And…on top of that, the current weaponry allow for making life of potential rulers a hell. Wouldn’t be possible to live, let alone enjoy life as they do now with pissed of armed citizens in their mist. It takes just one good semiautomatic rifle with a scope and on biped to make all the upper class hide in their compounds. This is simplification, of course. Besides, there is a limit of “practical talk” on the public Internet.

    Actually, on the related article here it’s written that events as this are willing price for an average American to have the 2nd. Makes sense.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Randal

    Actually, on the related article here it’s written that events as this are willing price for an average American to have the 2nd. Makes sense.
     
    That's certainly the way I would view it in my own country. Sadly, most of my compatriots don't agree.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  84. peterAUS says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    ...power motivated government bureaucrats and lobbies that seek a disarmed populace that will be ever more dependent upon state protection and vulnerable to state coercion.
     
    But when has having an armed population every stopped government forces from arresting people, serving warrants, putting liens on their property, etc.? Is there any "no go" are in the US where law enforcement fears to go? Do Native Americans have the right to uses weapons to defend their territories against incursions from Wašíču, or whatever they call us among themselves?

    The Waco disaster is just about the only the example that anyone can think of where citizens used weapons to defy the government, and it ended horribly. Of course I agree that the Bureau of ATF and FBI made a complete cock's ass of the whole operation, and that they could easily have arrested Koresh on federal property by just waiting until he made his weekly mail pickup at the local post office and tapped him on the shoulder.

    One likes to think these government agencies might have learned something from the experience, but when you think about it, it seems like the fact that they had guns made them excessively gung-ho and determined to get some shots off, when this was not needed. Had they been disarmed, then the Branch Davidians would probably never have fired the shot that was heard around the world.

    The Waco disaster is just about the only the example that anyone can think of where citizens used weapons to defy the government, and it ended horribly.

    Oversimplification.

    Just for a sake of conversation, imagine that all that county started an armed confrontation with the State as soon as the siege was imposed.
    Or a couple of counties.
    Or a full state. Say, all Christians of that state.
    That is the point of the 2nd.

    On purely tactical level it was a light militia company against Federal State. Without AT/AA weapons, proper fortifications. Without proper organization, even proper intent.
    So, Waco is not a good example for this topic.

    2nd, properly done by a sizable community in USA would force US government to use heavy military approach. And that changes the game altogether. The paradigm of the conflict.
    That is a different topic.

    That is how insurrections and regime changes are done around the world.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  85. Randal says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    ...power motivated government bureaucrats and lobbies that seek a disarmed populace that will be ever more dependent upon state protection and vulnerable to state coercion.
     
    But when has having an armed population every stopped government forces from arresting people, serving warrants, putting liens on their property, etc.? Is there any "no go" are in the US where law enforcement fears to go? Do Native Americans have the right to uses weapons to defend their territories against incursions from Wašíču, or whatever they call us among themselves?

    The Waco disaster is just about the only the example that anyone can think of where citizens used weapons to defy the government, and it ended horribly. Of course I agree that the Bureau of ATF and FBI made a complete cock's ass of the whole operation, and that they could easily have arrested Koresh on federal property by just waiting until he made his weekly mail pickup at the local post office and tapped him on the shoulder.

    One likes to think these government agencies might have learned something from the experience, but when you think about it, it seems like the fact that they had guns made them excessively gung-ho and determined to get some shots off, when this was not needed. Had they been disarmed, then the Branch Davidians would probably never have fired the shot that was heard around the world.

    If you don’t have a gun you are helpless in the face of men with guns, and hence dependent upon state protection and easily bullied by the state as a result, and you will most likely vote for increased state powers whenever you are scaremongered.

    Had they been disarmed, then the Branch Davidians would probably never have fired the shot that was heard around the world.

    If you are trying to imply that state gun control makes arming of police less likely, as I pointed out elsewhere, private ownership of handguns has been effectively prohibited in my country for more than two decades, yet the trend is strongly towards ever more routine arming of the police despite the strong cultural background of opposition to that situation.

    America’s cultural problem with its militarised, thuggish police force seems to have its authoritarian roots elsewhere in US culture. The ideas that seem to permeate US law enforcement that respect and obedience can and should be coerced by state functionaries, and that force protection should be the over-riding priority (something that suggests a link with the US military) would be good places to start.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  86. Randal says:
    @peterAUS
    You posted very good comments here.

    Maybe I could add something:
    The 2nd was introduced (proper expression I hope) to prevent STATE abuse against a citizen.
    It wasn't about self-defence, hunting or sports. A lot of people miss that for some reason (mostly dishonest).

    Now, while is true that in era of flintlock the parity was close, now it's obvious extremely large.
    BUT, still, having current weaponry at their disposal (semiautomatic rifles with proper ammo and scopes) it makes US citizens much more efficient against STATE abuse.

    While is true that in direct clash against a state (modern military) US militias have no chance it would require a too hard approach by the state. In essence, a full fledged conventional warfare on own soil.
    On top of it, the current weaponry in citizens' hands can be used to acquire proper weaponry easier than without having them. That's for direct confrontation.

    And...on top of that, the current weaponry allow for making life of potential rulers a hell. Wouldn't be possible to live, let alone enjoy life as they do now with pissed of armed citizens in their mist. It takes just one good semiautomatic rifle with a scope and on biped to make all the upper class hide in their compounds. This is simplification, of course. Besides, there is a limit of "practical talk" on the public Internet.

    Actually, on the related article here it's written that events as this are willing price for an average American to have the 2nd. Makes sense.

    Actually, on the related article here it’s written that events as this are willing price for an average American to have the 2nd. Makes sense.

    That’s certainly the way I would view it in my own country. Sadly, most of my compatriots don’t agree.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  87. The ideas that seem to permeate US law enforcement that respect and obedience can and should be coerced by state functionaries, and that force protection should be the over-riding priority (something that suggests a link with the US military) would be good places to start.

    It would, but I think you would find that the main reason that the police are terrified of the public is that every policeman knows of another policeman who was surprised by a hidden gun, therefore police are trained to act as if everyone has a loaded gun hidden about their person or vehicle until proven otherwise.

    As far as implying that disarming law enforcement would lead to less conflict–not exactly, but I do think that because they had arms that law enforcement agencies in the Waco case did not use their little gray cells very much in figuring out a safe way to arrest David Koresh on a warrant.

    For example, in the UK if there are warrants for people who are believed to be armed and dangerous, the usual practice is to make a predawn raid at 5:00 am using overwhelming force to capture the suspect in his pajamas. Same technique was apparently used with Osama bin Laden. Koresh could easily have been picked up when he left his fortified compound to pick up the mail.

    Read More
    • Replies: @NoseytheDuke
    Waco was a demonstration of force for the specific purpose of sending a message to every American that resistance is futile. It began with entrapment thus creating a crime where there would not have been one and obviously the end was about as far removed from legitimate law enforcement as is possible.
    , @Randal

    It would, but I think you would find that the main reason that the police are terrified of the public is that every policeman knows of another policeman who was surprised by a hidden gun, therefore police are trained to act as if everyone has a loaded gun hidden about their person or vehicle until proven otherwise.
     
    Yeah, sure.

    In the real world it's mostly about power, control and enforcing "respect", when in fact it's the police officers who should be showing more respect to the members of the public even if those members of the public are understandably aggrieved at being inconvenienced by the police. Police use of force, or even threats of force including arrest, should always be required to be responsive to genuine necessity, and required to prove it. Certainly outside the very unusually violent US black communities, anyway.

    Nor should anyone be marched out in handcuffs unless there are real grounds for suspecting resistance. Respectable members of the public charged with non-violent crimes should be respectfully asked to accompany the officers to the station, or contacted by phone and asked to attend within a set period.

    The fault for this not being the way the world works is nothing to do with gun ownership, it's to do with too few people being willing to require it of their police, and the police getting way with their bad behaviour because they can. This is not just an American problem, but it is worse in the US whether or not guns are likely to be present.

    Do you think this city marshal's deputy expected the teacher to be carrying a weapon?

    Teacher handcuffed, arrested after questioning school board about superintendent’s contract. Here’s the riveting video.

    As far as implying that disarming law enforcement would lead to less conflict–not exactly, but I do think that because they had arms that law enforcement agencies in the Waco case did not use their little gray cells very much in figuring out a safe way to arrest David Koresh on a warrant.
     
    Doesn't work that way, though. The US police knew perfectly well how they could get Koresh. That wasn't their objective, though, was it?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  88. @Carroll Price
    Well, excuse me, but I can't help wondering what the 76 people roasted alive by the Feds at Waco would have to say about this rather minor demonstration of senseless violence. And while on the subject, it's enough to make you wonder if Waco was where indiscriminate shooting into crowds of innocents gained its popularity.

    Just the place for a Snark!” the Bellman cried,
    As he landed his crew with care;
    Supporting each man on the top of the tide
    By a finger entwined in his hair.

    “Just the place for a Snark! I have said it twice:
    That alone should encourage the crew.
    Just the place for a Snark! I have said it thrice:
    What I tell you three times is true.”

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  89. Read More
    • Replies: @Rosamond Vincy
    Another Dylan Klebold.
    Why do losers always try to feel tough by identifying with the loser who lost a World War?
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  90. @Hippopotamusdrome

    Another Dylan Klebold.
    Why do losers always try to feel tough by identifying with the loser who lost a World War?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  91. @Jonathan Mason

    The ideas that seem to permeate US law enforcement that respect and obedience can and should be coerced by state functionaries, and that force protection should be the over-riding priority (something that suggests a link with the US military) would be good places to start.
     
    It would, but I think you would find that the main reason that the police are terrified of the public is that every policeman knows of another policeman who was surprised by a hidden gun, therefore police are trained to act as if everyone has a loaded gun hidden about their person or vehicle until proven otherwise.

    As far as implying that disarming law enforcement would lead to less conflict--not exactly, but I do think that because they had arms that law enforcement agencies in the Waco case did not use their little gray cells very much in figuring out a safe way to arrest David Koresh on a warrant.

    For example, in the UK if there are warrants for people who are believed to be armed and dangerous, the usual practice is to make a predawn raid at 5:00 am using overwhelming force to capture the suspect in his pajamas. Same technique was apparently used with Osama bin Laden. Koresh could easily have been picked up when he left his fortified compound to pick up the mail.

    Waco was a demonstration of force for the specific purpose of sending a message to every American that resistance is futile. It began with entrapment thus creating a crime where there would not have been one and obviously the end was about as far removed from legitimate law enforcement as is possible.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason
    What you say may be absolutely true (or it may not be), but even if it is 100% true, the whole episode shows that the whole notion of having an armed population as a counterweight to the power of the state is bullshit. Timothy McVeigh seems to have believed that his action in blowing up a federal office building and the people inside it to protest federal overreach in places like Waco and Ruby Ridge would provoke a generalized uprising, but of course it did nothing of the sort, because he was living in a fantasy world nursing his grievances that stemmed from his military experience in the Gulf War.

    The argument that people need weapons so that they can take the law into their own hands, especially in rural areas where law enforcement may be thin on the ground and take a long time to show up is a bit more convincing, although in reality the practical benefits are few and far between, except as a deterrent to armed robbers and home invaders. In fact guns are used for suicides much more frequently than for do-it-yourself law enforcement and the main beneficiaries of the Second Amendment are the heirs to the estates of suicides.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  92. Want 24 hour coverage of yourself? You can cure cancer or shoot a bunch of people. The latter is a lot easier to accomplish.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  93. @NoseytheDuke
    Waco was a demonstration of force for the specific purpose of sending a message to every American that resistance is futile. It began with entrapment thus creating a crime where there would not have been one and obviously the end was about as far removed from legitimate law enforcement as is possible.

    What you say may be absolutely true (or it may not be), but even if it is 100% true, the whole episode shows that the whole notion of having an armed population as a counterweight to the power of the state is bullshit. Timothy McVeigh seems to have believed that his action in blowing up a federal office building and the people inside it to protest federal overreach in places like Waco and Ruby Ridge would provoke a generalized uprising, but of course it did nothing of the sort, because he was living in a fantasy world nursing his grievances that stemmed from his military experience in the Gulf War.

    The argument that people need weapons so that they can take the law into their own hands, especially in rural areas where law enforcement may be thin on the ground and take a long time to show up is a bit more convincing, although in reality the practical benefits are few and far between, except as a deterrent to armed robbers and home invaders. In fact guns are used for suicides much more frequently than for do-it-yourself law enforcement and the main beneficiaries of the Second Amendment are the heirs to the estates of suicides.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS

    ...the whole notion of having an armed population as a counterweight to the power of the state is bullshit.
     
    Disagree.

    Or, maybe it's true for US population. I've had enough debates with Americans into the "2nd" to suspect that. Or, more likely, guys I had that luxury weren't on the bright site.

    For the rest of the world you couldn't be more wrong, actually.

    I'll use the example of Bosnian Muslims at the beginning of the.."troubles"....there. 1992 to be precise.
    There is a belief that they suffered the most at the time precisely because they did not have an access to small arms. I could elaborate if asked.

    In several examples from the period a pattern emerges:
    The local population is armed of sort. Nothing special, mostly hunting rifles, shotguns and handguns. Still, even that was, apparently, enough of a worry for the opposition. So, the opposition simply proposed "we don't want any trouble with you, BUT, we can't be sure you won't jump on us when we go somewhere else. The best is you give us those weapons and we guarantee you we won't touch you."
    Well, the local wise heads, in those cases, decided to do that.
    You want to know what happened next?

    So, having plenty of small arms in hands of people who know how to use them, in a case of INTERNAL conflict, is a HUGE detriment for the powers that be.
    No such guns, you can "pacify" that population just with riot control cops. Easy, smooth, no hassle. No risk for powers that be.
    With guns the game changes. You need, a least, a paramitilitary police. Not easy, not smooth, plenty of hassle. There IS a risk for powers that be too. Takes one guy with a scoped rifle to mess up your golf practice. And, the act of killing/death can, and usually, does spark an escalation.
    As soon as it escalates into a shooting, in just a little town, it gets out of hands of paramilitary police. Armed forces are required. And THAT is another level altogether.
    Today, when the bulk of population is in urban centres, well, fighting in MOUT/FIBUA is totally another beast. Even with improvised ....things....and...setups....it can go Falujah in a blink.
    Having that on own soil can put a damp on some power players ideas.

    And, it all starts with a decent scoped rifle in capable hands of a decent citizen.
    Or, better, a couple of hundreds citizens properly organized and led,with a clear idea what they want and what they don't want.
    And armed.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  94. peterAUS says:
    @Jonathan Mason
    What you say may be absolutely true (or it may not be), but even if it is 100% true, the whole episode shows that the whole notion of having an armed population as a counterweight to the power of the state is bullshit. Timothy McVeigh seems to have believed that his action in blowing up a federal office building and the people inside it to protest federal overreach in places like Waco and Ruby Ridge would provoke a generalized uprising, but of course it did nothing of the sort, because he was living in a fantasy world nursing his grievances that stemmed from his military experience in the Gulf War.

    The argument that people need weapons so that they can take the law into their own hands, especially in rural areas where law enforcement may be thin on the ground and take a long time to show up is a bit more convincing, although in reality the practical benefits are few and far between, except as a deterrent to armed robbers and home invaders. In fact guns are used for suicides much more frequently than for do-it-yourself law enforcement and the main beneficiaries of the Second Amendment are the heirs to the estates of suicides.

    …the whole notion of having an armed population as a counterweight to the power of the state is bullshit.

    Disagree.

    Or, maybe it’s true for US population. I’ve had enough debates with Americans into the “2nd” to suspect that. Or, more likely, guys I had that luxury weren’t on the bright site.

    For the rest of the world you couldn’t be more wrong, actually.

    I’ll use the example of Bosnian Muslims at the beginning of the..”troubles”….there. 1992 to be precise.
    There is a belief that they suffered the most at the time precisely because they did not have an access to small arms. I could elaborate if asked.

    In several examples from the period a pattern emerges:
    The local population is armed of sort. Nothing special, mostly hunting rifles, shotguns and handguns. Still, even that was, apparently, enough of a worry for the opposition. So, the opposition simply proposed “we don’t want any trouble with you, BUT, we can’t be sure you won’t jump on us when we go somewhere else. The best is you give us those weapons and we guarantee you we won’t touch you.”
    Well, the local wise heads, in those cases, decided to do that.
    You want to know what happened next?

    So, having plenty of small arms in hands of people who know how to use them, in a case of INTERNAL conflict, is a HUGE detriment for the powers that be.
    No such guns, you can “pacify” that population just with riot control cops. Easy, smooth, no hassle. No risk for powers that be.
    With guns the game changes. You need, a least, a paramitilitary police. Not easy, not smooth, plenty of hassle. There IS a risk for powers that be too. Takes one guy with a scoped rifle to mess up your golf practice. And, the act of killing/death can, and usually, does spark an escalation.
    As soon as it escalates into a shooting, in just a little town, it gets out of hands of paramilitary police. Armed forces are required. And THAT is another level altogether.
    Today, when the bulk of population is in urban centres, well, fighting in MOUT/FIBUA is totally another beast. Even with improvised ….things….and…setups….it can go Falujah in a blink.
    Having that on own soil can put a damp on some power players ideas.

    And, it all starts with a decent scoped rifle in capable hands of a decent citizen.
    Or, better, a couple of hundreds citizens properly organized and led,with a clear idea what they want and what they don’t want.
    And armed.

    Read More
    • Agree: Randal, bluedog
    • Replies: @Randal
    I think the issue is that most Americans in practice are pretty docile before authority, or if you want me to put it less tendentiously are not sufficiently upset by the abuses to which mostly other Americans are subjected to, to overcome their generally fat and happy condition. So far, at least, so that where there have been local confrontations they haven't led to longer term, wider based uprisings.

    If and when Americans are ever pushed too far (probably in the context of a sustained economic squeeze), the promise of the 2nd Amendment might come into its own.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  95. Randal says:
    @Jonathan Mason

    The ideas that seem to permeate US law enforcement that respect and obedience can and should be coerced by state functionaries, and that force protection should be the over-riding priority (something that suggests a link with the US military) would be good places to start.
     
    It would, but I think you would find that the main reason that the police are terrified of the public is that every policeman knows of another policeman who was surprised by a hidden gun, therefore police are trained to act as if everyone has a loaded gun hidden about their person or vehicle until proven otherwise.

    As far as implying that disarming law enforcement would lead to less conflict--not exactly, but I do think that because they had arms that law enforcement agencies in the Waco case did not use their little gray cells very much in figuring out a safe way to arrest David Koresh on a warrant.

    For example, in the UK if there are warrants for people who are believed to be armed and dangerous, the usual practice is to make a predawn raid at 5:00 am using overwhelming force to capture the suspect in his pajamas. Same technique was apparently used with Osama bin Laden. Koresh could easily have been picked up when he left his fortified compound to pick up the mail.

    It would, but I think you would find that the main reason that the police are terrified of the public is that every policeman knows of another policeman who was surprised by a hidden gun, therefore police are trained to act as if everyone has a loaded gun hidden about their person or vehicle until proven otherwise.

    Yeah, sure.

    In the real world it’s mostly about power, control and enforcing “respect”, when in fact it’s the police officers who should be showing more respect to the members of the public even if those members of the public are understandably aggrieved at being inconvenienced by the police. Police use of force, or even threats of force including arrest, should always be required to be responsive to genuine necessity, and required to prove it. Certainly outside the very unusually violent US black communities, anyway.

    Nor should anyone be marched out in handcuffs unless there are real grounds for suspecting resistance. Respectable members of the public charged with non-violent crimes should be respectfully asked to accompany the officers to the station, or contacted by phone and asked to attend within a set period.

    The fault for this not being the way the world works is nothing to do with gun ownership, it’s to do with too few people being willing to require it of their police, and the police getting way with their bad behaviour because they can. This is not just an American problem, but it is worse in the US whether or not guns are likely to be present.

    Do you think this city marshal’s deputy expected the teacher to be carrying a weapon?

    Teacher handcuffed, arrested after questioning school board about superintendent’s contract. Here’s the riveting video.

    As far as implying that disarming law enforcement would lead to less conflict–not exactly, but I do think that because they had arms that law enforcement agencies in the Waco case did not use their little gray cells very much in figuring out a safe way to arrest David Koresh on a warrant.

    Doesn’t work that way, though. The US police knew perfectly well how they could get Koresh. That wasn’t their objective, though, was it?

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  96. Randal says:
    @peterAUS

    ...the whole notion of having an armed population as a counterweight to the power of the state is bullshit.
     
    Disagree.

    Or, maybe it's true for US population. I've had enough debates with Americans into the "2nd" to suspect that. Or, more likely, guys I had that luxury weren't on the bright site.

    For the rest of the world you couldn't be more wrong, actually.

    I'll use the example of Bosnian Muslims at the beginning of the.."troubles"....there. 1992 to be precise.
    There is a belief that they suffered the most at the time precisely because they did not have an access to small arms. I could elaborate if asked.

    In several examples from the period a pattern emerges:
    The local population is armed of sort. Nothing special, mostly hunting rifles, shotguns and handguns. Still, even that was, apparently, enough of a worry for the opposition. So, the opposition simply proposed "we don't want any trouble with you, BUT, we can't be sure you won't jump on us when we go somewhere else. The best is you give us those weapons and we guarantee you we won't touch you."
    Well, the local wise heads, in those cases, decided to do that.
    You want to know what happened next?

    So, having plenty of small arms in hands of people who know how to use them, in a case of INTERNAL conflict, is a HUGE detriment for the powers that be.
    No such guns, you can "pacify" that population just with riot control cops. Easy, smooth, no hassle. No risk for powers that be.
    With guns the game changes. You need, a least, a paramitilitary police. Not easy, not smooth, plenty of hassle. There IS a risk for powers that be too. Takes one guy with a scoped rifle to mess up your golf practice. And, the act of killing/death can, and usually, does spark an escalation.
    As soon as it escalates into a shooting, in just a little town, it gets out of hands of paramilitary police. Armed forces are required. And THAT is another level altogether.
    Today, when the bulk of population is in urban centres, well, fighting in MOUT/FIBUA is totally another beast. Even with improvised ....things....and...setups....it can go Falujah in a blink.
    Having that on own soil can put a damp on some power players ideas.

    And, it all starts with a decent scoped rifle in capable hands of a decent citizen.
    Or, better, a couple of hundreds citizens properly organized and led,with a clear idea what they want and what they don't want.
    And armed.

    I think the issue is that most Americans in practice are pretty docile before authority, or if you want me to put it less tendentiously are not sufficiently upset by the abuses to which mostly other Americans are subjected to, to overcome their generally fat and happy condition. So far, at least, so that where there have been local confrontations they haven’t led to longer term, wider based uprisings.

    If and when Americans are ever pushed too far (probably in the context of a sustained economic squeeze), the promise of the 2nd Amendment might come into its own.

    Read More
    • Replies: @peterAUS
    Agree.

    I believe there is some sort of relevance there (for a lack of a better word).

    They are

    not sufficiently upset by the abuses to which mostly other Americans are subjected to, to overcome their generally fat and happy condition.
     
    because, among other reasons, there is the 2nd there. Unspoken but implicit.
    Still, because of its existence (and related possibilities and consequences for TPTB) those down have to be treated with care. That care creates fat and happy conditions.

    Now, the thing is, the fat and happy conditions create soft people. Soft people do not get the 2nd and aren't that keen on preserving it. Or even if they do get it they simply don't have that will to use it anymore.

    So I guess we'll see that balance re

    If and when Americans are ever pushed too far (probably in the context of a sustained economic squeeze), the promise of the 2nd Amendment might come into its own.
     
    Will they lose it before it gets that bad they start getting but then it will be too late?
    Or, it will get that bad to make them really get it before they lose it?

    The timing will be everything there I believe.

    But, in the game that really matters, I also don't believe it is that important.
    Likely scenario:
    They don't fight the encroaching loss of the 2nd (incremental but real)->when they lose it TPTB really go for it (squeeze and make life really miserable)->that creates the most important element of the game, the will.

    At the moment there are guns but no will.

    Maybe loss of the 2nd is actually required to get that will. Getting guns after that is easy.

    Just a thought.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  97. peterAUS says:
    @Randal
    I think the issue is that most Americans in practice are pretty docile before authority, or if you want me to put it less tendentiously are not sufficiently upset by the abuses to which mostly other Americans are subjected to, to overcome their generally fat and happy condition. So far, at least, so that where there have been local confrontations they haven't led to longer term, wider based uprisings.

    If and when Americans are ever pushed too far (probably in the context of a sustained economic squeeze), the promise of the 2nd Amendment might come into its own.

    Agree.

    I believe there is some sort of relevance there (for a lack of a better word).

    They are

    not sufficiently upset by the abuses to which mostly other Americans are subjected to, to overcome their generally fat and happy condition.

    because, among other reasons, there is the 2nd there. Unspoken but implicit.
    Still, because of its existence (and related possibilities and consequences for TPTB) those down have to be treated with care. That care creates fat and happy conditions.

    Now, the thing is, the fat and happy conditions create soft people. Soft people do not get the 2nd and aren’t that keen on preserving it. Or even if they do get it they simply don’t have that will to use it anymore.

    So I guess we’ll see that balance re

    If and when Americans are ever pushed too far (probably in the context of a sustained economic squeeze), the promise of the 2nd Amendment might come into its own.

    Will they lose it before it gets that bad they start getting but then it will be too late?
    Or, it will get that bad to make them really get it before they lose it?

    The timing will be everything there I believe.

    But, in the game that really matters, I also don’t believe it is that important.
    Likely scenario:
    They don’t fight the encroaching loss of the 2nd (incremental but real)->when they lose it TPTB really go for it (squeeze and make life really miserable)->that creates the most important element of the game, the will.

    At the moment there are guns but no will.

    Maybe loss of the 2nd is actually required to get that will. Getting guns after that is easy.

    Just a thought.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  98. Iberiano says:

    Blacks murder thousands of people every year, yet every time there is one of these mass shootings the same old cliche comments get brought out, about gun control, school violence. NOT ONE SINGLE American is safe walking down dozens of streets in dozens of American cities due to black violence.

    They are literally like school kids walking into a firing range of maniacs who have trapped them in a school. These outliers, as horrific (and seemingly more frequent) as they are, pale in comparison to the daily violence blacks, and out west, Latinos impress upon citizens (of any race).

    If guns are taken away, you can count on it being free reign/range on whites and everyone, everywhere, all the time, as it already is in the “inner cities”.

    Read More
    • Replies: @Jonathan Mason

    NOT ONE SINGLE American is safe walking down dozens of streets in dozens of American cities due to black violence.
     
    For a couple of years I was working in Jacksonville, FL which is one of the largest and blackest cities in America, and supposedly has a high crime rate. Every day I was visiting clients in their homes, more that half of which were located in the "ghetto" zip codes like 32206, 32209. 32218, and 32208, and yet I never saw a shooting or mugging, or heard a shot, and never carried any kind of weapon more lethal than a patella hammer. I saw a lot of poverty, but never any violence. Admittedly this was mostly in the day time, but sometimes at night too. I was welcomed into numerous black homes and always well treated once my eyes had adjusted to the darkness.

    I did have one client out of hundreds who was recovering from a bullet wound in his leg and I daresay he has done something to merit being shot, but that was the exception to the rule.
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  99. Anon • Disclaimer says:

    The local police were called to the killer’s house 39 times! 39 times! That could be once a month for more than 3 years. The police knew he was extremely dangerous.

    They could easily have found some cause to arrest him, and maybe derailed this evil. But if they had, then the headlines would have been “Racist Cops Hassle Innocent Hispanic Victim”.

    Why are so many young men in prison for “nonviolent” drug crimes? Often because police know that they have done a lot worse, but witnesses have been intimidated from testifying.

    Until police are given more leeway to deal with violent young men, these mass murders will continue.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter Display All Comments
  100. @utu
    Banning guns would help.

    Banning CIA/Mossad/MIC/FBI would help more.
    Would a gun ban have prevented 9/11?
    How many people die every day of heroin/opiates pushed by CIA/Mossad, Big Pharma.
    How many people have been murdered land and resources looted as a result of 9/11 false flag?

    You’re lucky we still have our guns, its the only reason you’re still able to voice your opinion here on the internet. You’re welcome.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  101. Anonymous • Disclaimer says:
    @Johnny Smoggins
    Everyone I've ever known who was adopted was messed up. It must do some incredible psychological damage to know that even your own mother didn't want you.

    Quite true. Some children are put up for adoption from the best of motives by mothers who are quite unable to take care of the child and quite unsuitable to the role by any reasonable standard.

    Nevertheless, the adopted child never quite overcomes the feeling that he or she was unwanted by the birth mother.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
  102. @Iberiano
    Blacks murder thousands of people every year, yet every time there is one of these mass shootings the same old cliche comments get brought out, about gun control, school violence. NOT ONE SINGLE American is safe walking down dozens of streets in dozens of American cities due to black violence.

    They are literally like school kids walking into a firing range of maniacs who have trapped them in a school. These outliers, as horrific (and seemingly more frequent) as they are, pale in comparison to the daily violence blacks, and out west, Latinos impress upon citizens (of any race).

    If guns are taken away, you can count on it being free reign/range on whites and everyone, everywhere, all the time, as it already is in the "inner cities".

    NOT ONE SINGLE American is safe walking down dozens of streets in dozens of American cities due to black violence.

    For a couple of years I was working in Jacksonville, FL which is one of the largest and blackest cities in America, and supposedly has a high crime rate. Every day I was visiting clients in their homes, more that half of which were located in the “ghetto” zip codes like 32206, 32209. 32218, and 32208, and yet I never saw a shooting or mugging, or heard a shot, and never carried any kind of weapon more lethal than a patella hammer. I saw a lot of poverty, but never any violence. Admittedly this was mostly in the day time, but sometimes at night too. I was welcomed into numerous black homes and always well treated once my eyes had adjusted to the darkness.

    I did have one client out of hundreds who was recovering from a bullet wound in his leg and I daresay he has done something to merit being shot, but that was the exception to the rule.

    Read More
    ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
Current Commenter says:

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone


 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments become the property of The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Pat Buchanan Comments via RSS
PastClassics
Are elite university admissions based on meritocracy and diversity as claimed?
The evidence is clear — but often ignored
The “war hero” candidate buried information about POWs left behind in Vietnam.
Talk TV sensationalists and axe-grinding ideologues have fallen for a myth of immigrant lawlessness.
The major media overlooked Communist spies and Madoff’s fraud. What are they missing today?