[Only a Problem in USA] Mass shooting in Jacksonville

Have we ruled out that the cause of the shooting wasn't related to EA adding back Kaepernicks name in the song?

 

So you are advocating for us to return to the lawlessness of the wild wild west. No thank you

 

That is like playing wack-a-mole and when there are no 'soft' targets they would likely resort to softening the target by bringing more fire power or using other means. Also your proposal will do nothing to prevent something the vegas shooting.

To me there needs to be a more holistic approach that includes identifying people with such tendencies and denying them access to firearms and possibly apprehending them until proven otherwise.

 

what? im saying be able to defend yourself if you are attacked. Thats currently legal.

You can call the cops but they will take at least 10 minutes. good luck during those 10 minutes.

 

So tell me how that would work for the las vegas shooting or the school shootings?

 

That's not really true, very basic security checks would have prevented the Vegas shooting entirely. When you are looking to fix problems, I personally think that the first solutions you should look at are those that can be enacted without stripping people of their civil liberties....even if a fortune teller told you that they might one day do something wrong to justify stripping them of their rights.

 

Basic security check at the hotel (cos he never went to the concert)? So every hotel resident should have their luggage checked and you dont want to strip people of their civil liberties?

No one has the civil liberty to put other peoples lives at risk

 

Checking luggage for guns (or bombs) isn't stripping people of their civil liberties and honestly should be standard practice.

 

I would not want my luggage checked every time I checked into a hotel. That seems like overkill and potentially as frustrating as the "security" in place at our airports.

However, didn't he have a massive amount of firearms/ammunition? How many bags would that take?

Also, I would understand having to do so for certain big events (targets) like parades, superbowl, etc.

 

It would be annoying, but you can send luggage through x-ray scanners to check for weapons or bombs. Obviously you wouldn't have that at EVERY hotel, but I think at spots like that it is a measure that should be taken. The guy had to take multiple trips to his room with weapons and ammunition in order to carry out the attack. For the safety and security of their guests I would think hotels in areas like that would take steps that would sacrifice a bit of privacy for safety.

 

It is cos you are invading their privacy. That may work in a dictatorship like Russia or Syria but would be difficult to justify in any decent democracy, when there are more targeted and less intrusive alternatives like denying psychos access to firearms

 

You have a child's understanding of civil rights it seems. When a company requires your luggage be searched in order to stay with them as their guest, it's not an invasion of privacy. It's something that happens every time you go to the airport.

Even funnier, you suggest that a "less intrusive" alternative would be to have a fortune teller guess which people might one day do something to justify stripping them of their civil liberties.....and then strip those people who have done nothing wrong of their civil liberties. Even worse, that would still do nothing to fix the real problems.

 

The fact that it happens does not mean it is not a violation/suspension of said rights e.g. felons are denied their rights to vote

So you have no problem with a schizophrenic walking around with an assault rifle?

 

You know...the good old days where everyone has a gun hostered on their hip, Ol Doc Holiday is playin the poker down at the Saloon, and all the colored people know their places

What’s that noise? Well, it’s the town idiot, bob, who fell off his horse again and into the water trough.

 

A few things here,

1. You have no absolute right to privacy.....so right off the top you've got an uphill battle.
2. A private company an require things that the federal government cannot without being a violation of civil liberties.
3. Checking luggage is not unreasonable search or seizure be it a private company or the federal government.

Basically your argument fails in every possible way.

That would already be illegal by state and federal laws.

 

No rights are absolute the question is at what point do you draw the line.

Asked for your opinion (not whether the law allows it)
So you have no problem with a schizophrenic walking around with an assault rifle?

 

Yeah.....but in this instance, it's not actually a right in the first place.

Clearly, most people do, that's why it's already illegal for the mentally ill to purchase or own firearms. You were proposing something different.

 

You seem to have a basic comprehension problem - I asked for what is your opinion( not what most people think)?

Maybe it a simpler issue of you having ulterior motives when posting in these threads as you never seem able to speak for yourself

 

They do it in Israel. Why not make everything a Max security prison here?

 

LOL ironically it is you that have the basic comprehension problem. If you know how punctuation is used then you'd realize that my answer to your question was "Clearly", which means "yes". Spend some time brushing up on English punctuation rules so that you'll do a better job following along in the future, comrade.