Jump to content

admin

Multiple Fatalities in El Paso, Texas Mall Shooting

Topic Summary

Created

Last Reply

Replies

Views

admin -
29
393

Top Posters


Recommended Posts


Probably the whole area was a posted "NO GUN ZONE", which most law abiding citizens will honor, but criminals will not.

That makes that entire area a TARGET RANGE for evil people to make into a slaughter house.

...with little or no fear of being shot in the back by a righteous man with a gun.

He has been disarmed, by the Snowflakes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, admin said:

Everyone in America, myself included, is devastated by the news of this latest attack in El Paso. Sadly, after each of these tragedies the Senate does nothing. That has got to change.

Congress needs to pass laws clarifying "constitutional carry", the right of ever citizen to be armed at all times, everywhere ... which is a NATURAL right, and a constitutionally protected right guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment, and perverted everywhere since the American Civil War.

There are many more righteous men than evil men.

Unfortunately .... they are effectively disarmed, and in fighting for righteousness, have been emasculated.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Second Amendment states:

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

The first thing we can do is reword the phrase based on its meaning within the constitution.

"[Because] a well regulated Militia is necessary for the security [protection] of a free State [Nation?], no laws will be made that would infringe the right of the people to own and carry guns [and other such weapons if appropriate to a well-regulated militia to protect a free State]."

In that original context it appears to mean (at a minimum) that a nation needs an army of people who know how to use firearms in order to protect from potential invasion by outside enemies (or even internal tyranny). Rather than just conscripting a bunch of people at the last minute to then train them how to use weapons, wouldn't it be better to never constrict the use of firearms and allow their free ownership and use by people who will train themselves through hunting and/or target practice? That seems to be the general idea.

This, of course, then turns to a discussion of the purpose and scope of such a militia. Is it a particular state's militia, or does the term "State" refer to a National militia? (as the word in used in the phrase "separation of Church and State")

Then, of course, it will be necessary to determine whether the scope of such weapons ownership should also include anyone and everyone among "the people," whether or not they are willing and capable of supporting a State [National?] militia.

Based on when the amendment was added, we are aware of the types of weapons that were considered appropriate at that time for supporting a militia. Whether or not additional types of weapons should be included is another matter for discussion. Tanks, cannons, machine guns, nerve gas, agent orange, grenades, rocket launchers, anti-aircraft missiles, smallpox-infected blankets, and nuclear warheads are all weapons that have become deemed appropriate for the security of the State, at one time or another. 

We can tell from the wording, that one of the basic meanings was probably that the United States would need an army that might need to be called in a hurry and made up, therefore, from the militias of various communities. Because of this need to keep an prepared national army, there would not be laws that restricted the ownership of weapons -- at least weapons like muskets, pistols, rifles, and cannons. One could easily extrapolate the idea from this that just because people sometimes purposely kill each other with such military weapons, and just because men, women and children are sometimes killed accidentally during the act of cleaning guns, hunting, target practice, etc., -- that these should not become reasons to change the current laws that allowed "the people" in general from owning and using such weapons.

Technically, a lawyer even back when the 2nd Amendment was added, could make a case that "the people" were still being given the right to bear arms, even if the types of those arms were limited. A lawyer could also make the case that specific persons could be limited from bearing arms, as long as the people in general were not infringed. A lawyer could even make a case that it only referred to "the people" who were ready, capable and willing to join a standing militia, whenever called.

But it doesn't matter what the original U.S. constitutional amendment meant. The constitution is not the Bible. It can be amended over and over again. Amendments can be clarified, expanded, constricted, or removed altogether.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Indiana

Suspected shooter attended Collin College

Suspected shooter Patrick Crusius attended Collin College in McKinney, Texas, from 2017-2019, according to a statement from District President Dr. Neil Matkin.

"We are saddened and horrified by the news of the shooting today in El Paso, Texas. A student by the name of Patrick Crusius attended Collin College from fall 2017 through spring 2019," Matkin said in the statement.

"Collin College is prepared to cooperate fully with state and federal authorities in their investigation of this senseless tragedy. We join the governor and all Texans in expressing our heartfelt concern for the victims of the shooting and their loved ones."

https://edition.cnn.com/us/live-news/el-paso-tx-shooting-live-updates/index.html

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/3/2019 at 8:14 PM, JW Insider said:

But it doesn't matter what the original U.S. constitutional amendment meant.

I disagree with that ... it is incredibly important!

So incredibly important!

The fact that it has been perverted by political correctness is why the bad guys roam at will.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/3/2019 at 8:14 PM, JW Insider said:

A lawyer could even make a case that it only referred to "the people" who were ready, capable and willing to join a standing militia, whenever called.

Lawyers can make cases when there is NOTHING based on reality.  Occasionally they win when the judge or jury are terminally ignorant, or are predisposed to judge in their favor, irregardless of the facts.

That's why Lawyers do "Judge Shopping", and with Juries, reject potential jurors that have any vestige of common sense.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, James Thomas Rook Jr. said:

The fact that it has been perverted by political correctness is why the bad guys roam at will.

First of all, understand that I have nothing against gun ownership. I have nothing against hunting, animal control, target practice, or even self-defense with whatever weapon is appropriate to the defense of my family. I don't own a gun, and probably never will, because I think the likelihood of needing one in this particular time period in the United States is very low. Also, I am not trained in their use, and could just as easily produce a tragedy under the same stressful circumstances that might require one. Trained police often kill innocents. Part of this is the fact that a person who has a gun tends to think he needs it more often than people who don't have guns. 

That said, I have a constitutionally supported reason when I say it doesn't matter what the constitution says or even exactly what it meant when it was written. That's because even if we understand it perfectly, a nation is free to change it. This is what amendments are in the first place. Some nations have done well to completely change their constitution. Rip up the old one and start over. You already understand well that our constitution was written by and for landowners. Many parts of it were also written specifically to permanently remove and reduce the perceived political power of poor whites, poor blacks, poor native Americans, etc.

So when I say it doesn't matter, I mean that it can lawfully be updated according to its own constitutionally provided processes. This is good when parts of it appear obsolete or unjust. It's not likley that ALL of it will ever be seen that way, but the State has such power, if done in a careful way acceptable to "the people." (And "the people" include many more voices than were intended in the first ratification of amendments using the term.)

We can know the mind of some of the framers by reading the Federalist Papers, and reading the comments and explanations of their actions when serving in office. The strength of the Federal government in the US itself is quite different now than what was originally intended.

One might be afraid of what stupid people will do when they realize they have the power to change the constitution, but it's not written in stone. Checks and balances were added to keep a government as conservative and stable as possible, avoiding wholesale disruption, but it's as fluid as "the people" will allow under those constraints.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now





  • Topics

  • Posts

    • Agreed.  What they want is a government which will outlaw the bible and Jesus (I think of Matt 24 where it indicates that those having faith in jesus' randsom sacrifice will be persecuted). California recently tabled a law which would have basically outlawed the bible - but it did not pass...... but how long before it does?  We cannot be deceived to take sides because some political party is 'perceived'  as loving God a little more than the other side and fights infantacide...... when they are in fact - the beast.  The racial hatred and injustice in USA has tripled in the past few years because of official statements made,  perceptions created and the outrageous reaction of the opposing press......it is like a cold civil war going on. On the other side of the beast is the secular, humanist, feminist, LGBTQ, materialist goals and this side has a stated hate for the God of the bible and its white supremacist leaders... (again a generalization:  but its members belong to a party who loves Islam and shuns the bible's values - even if they go to church.)  For us as JWs - there is no choice between the two...... because both are playing their part to lead us to Armageddon..... the one a little faster than the other. Human government sucks and it gets clearer and clearer every day.  We should keep focussed on Jehovahs government.... watch just enough news to know where things are going..... and keep focussed on preaching and building each other up.
    • There are dozens. When I mentioned going back 300 years I was thinking that a lot of people start with Matthew Henry's from the 1700's. https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/mhc/Dan/Dan_004.cfm?a=854001 But there are many more modern ones these days that might appear too long, but that's partly because they also reprint the entire Bible text, split up into sections. https://wernerbiblecommentary.org/?q=node/732 https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/jfb/Dan/Dan_004.cfm?a=854001 https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/smith_chuck/c2000_Dan/Dan_001.cfm?a=854001 The Chapter 4 portion of this one, above, includes the following supposition: The seven times are probably a year and three quarters. Referring to the summer, fall, winter, spring, rather than seven years. And so for a year and three quarters, king Nebuchadnezzar was to be insane. He was to live with the ox and out in the field. He was to eat grass like a wild animal. This was to continue until he realize that the God in heaven is the One who rules over the earth as far as establishing kingdoms and setting in power those whom He will. God still rules in the overall sense. And sometimes God puts evil men into power in order to bring judgment upon the people. But God rules over all. So after Daniel interprets, he said, "Now look, king, straighten up, man. Live right. You know, it may be that you can increase the days of your peace because you know this is going to come on you. But maybe by living right you can forestall it a bit." [Others have guessed 7 "time periods" were 7 months. But the point is, that we don't know for sure] https://www.blueletterbible.org/Comm/guzik_david/StudyGuide2017-Dan/Dan-4.cfm?a=854001 That one, above, includes the idea that if there is any further prophetic significance to the dream, that it could mean this: Some find prophetic significance in this account. Since Babylon is used in the Scriptures as a figure of the world system in general, we can say: · Nebuchadnezzar’s madness foreshadows the madness of Gentile nations in their rejection of God. · Nebuchadnezzar’s fall typifies Jesus’ judgment of the nations. · Nebuchadnezzar’s restoration foreshadows the restoring of some of these nations in the millennial kingdom.  
    • This is so typical.....loved this experience !  People are people, and their ideas on neutrality are not the same - even after the lessons have been repeated over and over  in the watchtower.  Keeping neutral .... but not understanding what true neutrality is.   Neutrality does not mean you are not supposed to know what is happening around you or that someone has to be silenced when they mention something ... But I reckon.... this is where true humility comes into play and for the sake of peace,  refrain from having  your say.  It can also come back to bite you. There is a time to keep silent. Neutrality is making a choice every time an issue comes up.  Granted, it us hard not to take sides when you have an idea about who is lying in a particular situation....!  But deceit and lying is all part of the political game. These politicians gave up something to be where they are.  Truth and sincerity are replaced by ambition and lies and many hidden deals.  I am astounded at the open nepotism tolerated everywhere in Washington- on both sides of the isle! People have truly lost their moral compass!   And the staggering amounts of money to be made ....... poor politicians become multi-millionaires pretty quickly .... and so do their children make tons of money and extend their influence in other countries!   These days, no politician  can fight a clean fight and expect to win..... too much spying,  false leaks in the news, misinformation and outright acrimony.  I do watch world news and events to see fulfillment of bible prophecy.  No matter who wins the next election - USA is on a downward spiral and the spectators will be agast when they realise the plane is totally out of control.  The speed of the decent depends on who is next elected....... the speed of the decent may be fast or slow.  The self-deceit of the public is amazing and helped by the press who mostly tell the public what they want to hear.   America will still exist when the end comes but it will have handed over it power willingly to the eighth king....... So, if a certain party - which is very willing to hand over its autonomy, wins - then I will gauge that the decent will be faster than i anticipated......  The "clay and iron" has reached a point of  irreconcileability......and this same scenario is playing out in Europe, Australia, Canada etc.  (Bible so accurate in its predictions) . In the meantime Russia, China and all their allies are extending their economic influence and territories. It is really now just a matter of time then things will truly become ugly and we will know that we have arrived at the time we were waiting for!  We will see jehovah in action! 
    • That's already been done. Just read nearly any Bible commentary on Daniel 4 written during the last 300 years or so.
    • Yes That immediately crossed my mind too! And also when talking about the pyramids, he quoted Rutherford who said "Jehovah doesn't need a stone monument built by pagans to accomplish his purpose" it made me think why would he use pagan Nebuchadnezzar to illustrate Christ's rulership?
  • Popular Now

  • Recently Browsing

    No registered users viewing this page.

  • Who's Online (See full list)

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

Terms of Service Confirmation Terms of Use Privacy Policy Guidelines We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.