Within minutes of the shooting at a Minneapolis Catholic Church Mass on Wednesday, politicians and pundits were calling for new gun control measures and blaming conservatives for the deaths of the children. These are the same calls that have emerged after past shootings for everything from a ban on “assault weapons” to a total ban on all guns. What the public is not being told is the limited range of options under existing constitutional precedent.
The inconvenient fact in these interviews was that Minnesota has some of the nation’s strictest gun controls, and these weapons were acquired legally in that state by the shooter. The state has “red flag” laws and other provisions, but this was someone who did not raise “red flags” or other barriers. The state is at or near the maximal level of gun controls permitted under the Constitution. What remains are bans that would trigger greater serious constitutional challenges.
After calling for more limits, Sen. Tina Smith (D., Minn.) admitted to CNN that the guns were legally obtained in her state, but insisted that “there are only so many things that an individual state can do, because guns pour into Minneapolis and Minnesota from all other parts of the country.”
Over at MSNBC, pundits were suggesting that it may be time for an Australian-like ban and seizure of all guns. The Trace reporter Mike Spies told MSNBC’s Katy Tur that “[guns are] too powerful, even handguns too, again, that’s why in Australia … The only thing that really works, if you really wanted to bring down gun violence, was to do what Australia did and to do what many other countries in Europe do.”
The problem, of course, is that this is not Australia, and we have a Second Amendment protection of gun ownership with over 490 million guns in private hands back in 2022. In 2008, the Supreme Court handed down a landmark ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller, recognizing the Second Amendment as encompassing an individual right to bear arms. The Supreme Court further strengthened the right in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association Inc. v. Bruen.
Politicians know that, but continue to call for measures that would be presumptively unconstitutional. Any Australian ban would require a constitutional amendment, absent the most extreme interpretation of the Second Amendment to flip its meaning.
As I have previously written, these calls often appear entirely disconnected from the actual crime or the constitutional protections afforded gun owners, including President Biden demanding a ban on assault weapons after a shooting with a handgun. Biden and others often collectively call these guns “assault weapons,” a standard reference to such popular models as the AR-15.
The AR-15 is the most popular gun in America and the number of these guns in private hands is continuing to rise rapidly, with one AR-15 purchased in every five new firearms sales. These AR-15s clearly are not being purchased for armored deer. Many are purchased for personal and home protection; it is also popular for target shooting and hunting. Many gun owners like the AR-15 because it is modular; depending on the model, you can swap out barrels, bolts and high-capacity magazines, or add a variety of accessories. While it does more damage than a typical handgun, it is not the most powerful gun sold in terms of caliber; many guns have equal or greater caliber.
That is why laws to ban or curtail the sale of the AR-15 would likely run into constitutional barriers. Even the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit struck down a California ban on adults under 21 purchasing semi-automatic weapons like the AR-15.
After past tragedies, some of us have cautioned that there is a limited range of options for gun bans, given constitutional protections. There are also practical barriers, with roughly half a billion guns in the United States and an estimated 72 million gun owners; three out of ten Americans say they have guns. Indeed, gun ownership rose during the pandemic. When former Texas congressman and U.S. Senate candidate Beto O’Rourke declared, “Hell yes, we are going to take your AR-15,” he was widely celebrated on the left. However, even seizing that one type of gun would require the confiscation of as many as 15 million weapons.
These calls for greater gun control remain either factually ambiguous or legally dubious. For example, former FBI Deputy Director Andrew McCabe declared after an earlier shooting that it is time to “change the context of gun ownership.” It is unclear what “changing the context” means, particularly when the context is first and foremost constitutional.
While a few courts have upheld such bans in places like Illinois, it has yet to face a full review in the Supreme Court. In Barnett v. Raoul, the ruling of U.S. District Judge Stephen P. McGlynn was upheld. Notably, the appellate majority was composed of conservative Judge Frank Easterbrook and liberal Judge Diane P. Wood. Conservative judge Michael P. Brennan dissented.
The majority stressed that in Heller, the Supreme Court held, “[l]ike most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited.” They further noted that the court has previously found that machine guns are not protected under the Second Amendment because they were not “bearable” arms under the Second Amendment.
While gun rights advocates have stressed the similarities with other clearly protected weapons, Easterbrook and Wood stressed the similarities between AR-15s and M16s:
The similarity between the AR-15 and the M16 only increases when we take into account how easy it is to modify the AR-15 by adding a “bump stock” (as the shooter in the 2017 Las Vegas event had done) or auto-sear to it, thereby making it, in essence, a fully automatic weapon. In a decision addressing a ban on bump stocks enacted by the Maryland legislature, another federal court found that bump-stock devices enable “rates of fire between 400 to 800 rounds per minute.”
In an analysis that gun rights advocates challenge, they stressed that the guns use the same ammunition and “deliver the same kinetic energy.” Yet, the kinetic energy used in AR-15s is also analogous to that of clearly protected weapons.
The ruling was challenged but a petition for certiorari in the case was denied on July 2, 2024.
In addition to calls for assault weapons bans, some like Biden and former Vice President Kamala Harris have supported handgun bans. (Harris later seemed to reverse that position in her own presidential run in praising her own ownership of a 9mm handgun). President Biden suggested in the past that he might seek to ban 9mm weapons. In reference to guns that use 9mm ammunition, Biden declared, “there’s simply no rational basis for it in terms of thinking about self-protection.”It is a call that has been echoed in Canada where Prime Minister Justin Trudeau announced that his government is introducing legislation to “implement a national freeze on handgun ownership.” He insisted that “there is no reason anyone in Canada should need guns in their everyday lives.”
For gun owners, the political rhetoric shows the slippery slope of gun control in using vague terms to ban large categories of weapons. Many gun owners suspect that these incremental moves are indeed geared to achieve an eventual Australian-type ban and seizure.
Much of this debate has been fueled by the inaction of the Supreme Court in resolving the underlying question of the permissible range of gun control. It is possible that some justices, such as Chief Justice John Roberts, could support an assault weapons ban. However, the question is how it would define the underlying terms and how it would distinguish such ownership from other lawful weapons.
In the meantime, politicians and pundits will continue to call for “major gun reform” without addressing the constitutional limits on such action.
I fully agree with your comments.
Although not part of the original 1789 U.S. Constitution, gun rights were added by constitutional-amendment in 1791.
In 1791, average citizens didn’t own or have access to the Gatlin Gun or rapid fire weapons with large ammo rounds.
When the Gatlin Gun or rapid fire weapons with large ammo rounds were invented and widespread – these weapons were primarily military armaments. Not owned by most gun owners.
About 100 years after the 2nd Amendment, some Wild West towns actually banned all guns inside the town limits.
The 2nd Amendment has the words verbatim “well-regulated” as part of the original text created by the Founding Fathers.
The 2nd Amendment’s militia clause would be similar to each state’s National Guard, where each state’s governor controls the government controlled-militia. Any governor can request the president to lead their militia (National Guard) but only if permitted by state governors.
So common-sense regulation of guns and the National Guard (government controlled-militia) have always been legitimate issues to debate. Since the 2008 Heller ruling (expanding gun rights) nobody is taking your gun away!
No, they are not nor will they ever.
Only from his cold, dead hands….
Loved your movies, Chuck!
Our gun rights were first enumerated in the English Bill of Rights (1689), with no reference to any militias.
The freedoms of speech and press were not technologies to the unamplified voice and the hand cranked press. And yet here we are, expressing ourselves on the internet. Why would the gun right not extend to new technologies as well?
Freedoms of speech and press were not limited to the unamplified voice and the hand-cranked press
The framers were well aware of the possibility of technological advancements — that’s why they put the patent and copyright clause in the Constitution. And in 1789, not only could the average citizen own the military service rifle of that era — a musket that could be loaded and fired at the rate of three rounds per minute, but the Austrian Army was using the Girardoni, which could fire 21 half-inch bullets in 30 seconds
Now we can clean up some English-language and logic errors. There is only ONE clause in the Second Amendment: the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, because there is only ONE verb in that sentence. The rest is a so-called absolute adjective. What does it mean?
Start with “well-regulated” This was an idiom meaning “to function according to expectation,” as a regulator clock kept accurate time
Thanks to gutenberg.org, we can review contemporary uses of well-regulated: households, workshops, and kitchens. Henry James wrote of a well-regulated young woman, while Anna Leonowen wrote of her well-regulated, dirt-covered small son.
A well-regulated kitchen turned out tasty, nutritious meals three times a day, day after day. IOW, it met expectations. And by playing in the dirt, the well-regulated small boy met expectations.
The government did not regulate households, boys, or women.
And had militia membership been a prerequisite for gun ownership, no woman could have owned a gun till the NG enlisted the first women in the 1950s
“Start with ‘well-regulated'”
That is an excellent point. The meaning of the words is important.
The next issue arises from misunderstanding the English language. First, there is only ONE clause:”the right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,” bc there is only ONE verb, infringed.
The rest of the amendment is an absolute adjective, which modifies the clause. Let’s start with “well-regulated.” This was an idiom meaning “functions according to expectations,” as a regulator clock keeps accurate time.
In 1791, average citizens didn’t own or have access to the Gatlin Gun or rapid fire weapons with large ammo rounds.
That tired old Soviet Democrat police state fascist gun banning law. While your ignorance shows with the “Gatlin Gun” verbal diarrhea that you repeatedly use, while the Gatling Gun was not yet invented, the Puckle Gun that came on the market in 1718 was the predecessor of the multi-barrel cannon that fighter jets and naval vessels are armed with. It a 32mm fast firing canon.
It was described on shipping manifests as a “machine gun”… now you could be the first Democrat who can brag to his fellow communists he knows the origin of the name “machine gun”.
The Puckle Gun: A Revolutionary War Rapid-Fire Weapon Of The 18th Century
https://youtu.be/OXB7mQi45xc?si=jPz8N1zFnXOn1rxO&t=21
Not owned by most gun owners
Irrelevant. Most democrats including you have NEVER written a book – what conditions would you like to claim that fact attaches to you exercising First Amendment rights? If none, then why would you attempt to insinuate the rate of voluntary purchase of any kind of firearm is grounds for government restrictions of Second Amendment rights?
The 2nd Amendment has the words verbatim “well-regulated” as part of the original text created by the Founding Fathers.
‘Well-regulated’ at that time meaning well armed with both the weaponry and all the related infantry accoutrements necessary to wage war. It does NOT mean what you hope: bound in bureaucratic restrictions and crippling red tape.
You didn’t notice that you missed the words verbatim “shall not be infringed” as part of the original text created by the Founding Fathers?
So common-sense regulation of guns
To this point in our history, we have yet to see an infringement on the Second Amendment that is claimed to be a “common-sense” gun law that actually works at doing anything other than infringing on Second Amendment rights.
You ran out of lame rational before you got around to trying to explain away those words “shall NOT be infringed”?
“The 2nd Amendment’s militia clause would be similar to each state’s National Guard . . .”
You’re dropping the context and purpose of the BoR. It does *not* grant government powers, e.g., to raise a militia. It is a limitation on those powers. It is a non-exhaustive list of rights that the government shall not infringe.
The government authorities you’re trying to inject into the BoR are found elsewhere in the Constitution.
Literally nothing in that comment was true.
In 1791 people had the right to own cannon!
The 2nd amendment’s preamble refers to the militia as well-regulated. It says absolutely nothing about the right to bear arms being regulated. Nor does it makes that right depend on anything to do with the militia.
It’s also not true that the National Guard is a state militia, or that the president needs a governor’s permission to take command of it. It’s the exact opposite. The National Guard is a federal force, and thus under the president’s command, but most of the time he lets the governors be in charge, taking control only when he needs to.
The militia in the constitution consists of the entire armed population, who can be called up when needed, and need to bring their own weapons with them. That’s why it was so important to ensure that everyone would be able to have their own weapons. If the government were to ban certain weapons, or all weapons, or to regulate them, then when the militia would next be called up many people would be unable to answer the call, because they’d have nothing to bring. Oh, and “well-regulated” means well trained.
Democrats know that any kind of “ban” is stupid, pointless and absurd. They are only playing politics with it, with many using it to substitute for having a penis, like Bobby Francis O’Rourke did when he threatened to take our ARs away (while safely protected by ARMED security), like the abject pu$$y everybody knows he is.
2A wasn’t conceived and ratified to protect our hunting rights.
Our Founders knew that throughout history governments always seemed to evolve into the masses being enslaved by despots who allowed no 1A or, especially, 2A rights.
Our Founders also knew the only way to prevent that was to allow all citizens to be armed, and they purposely placed no limits on those arms, because they knew in order to protect against a despotic military government, you had to have the same weapons as they had.
Democrats will keep on politicizing ARs, handguns and devices that make them more effective, but no American administration will ever be allowed to take any of our guns away.
Those who advocate for that should remember that the unconstitutional Clinton/Feinstein “Assault Weapons Ban” from ’94 to ’04 didn’t confiscate any existing weapons, but it surely did put many more on the streets, both prior to the effective date of the “ban” and after production resumed, with many more manufacturers than ever before making them, which is yet another reason why they became America’s most popular weapon.
What’s NEVER mentioned in any liberal rant about “gun control” is the need for a supportive and functional mental health system. It not only “trans” individuals, though they seem to be made the poster child of the inadequacies of our mental health system. There’re many other individuals who are in the midst of a mental health crisis or are permanently mentally ill.
Liberals don’t want to discuss mental health because first they would have to own up to their own actions in the neglect of our mental health system, and second they would have to admit that they’ve abandoned the concept of personal responsibility for illegal activities taken in the commission of a crime.
I’m not smart enough to know the answers but I’m sure that the answer isn’t the curtailing of our liberties.
Mental health concerns exist worldwide, yet the U.S. carries the highest level of gun violence. The gun lobby seems to have trouble explaining this away.
MORE Trans issues.
______________________
A “transgender” Maine suspect was arrested after allegedly trying to run over a Border Patrol agent and a state trooper during a crash investigation that involved suspected illegal aliens.
Incident and Arrest
Authorities said Olivia “Stevie” Wilkins, 24, of Thomaston, drove a Lexus toward U.S. Border Patrol Capt. Willis and Maine State Police Trooper Jeremiah Wesbrock on Monday in Washington, Maine.
But, there is no problem, right?
Plus another.
The day after a trans-identifying man shot up a Catholic church full of children in Minneapolis, an apparent trans-identifying radical allegedly opened fire in Massachusetts — this time leaving a father dead who had just walked his 6-year-old boy to school in Shrewsbury.
Only learning of the transgender factor this morning during another personal episode of FDA instigated insomnia (toxic food additives), I’d like for all to know that modified soy protein (FDA approved by the early 1970s) was known as early as 2006 to cause gender issues, at least in boys and men (https://www.wnd.com/2006/12/39253/). Add to that the possible neurological effects of the cooking oil preservative TBHQ (FDA approved in 1972) aggravated with the brain damaging, mind altering potential of added artificially cultured “free” (can cross the blood brain barrier) MSG since 1980 and you have a perfect storm of hormones, confusion and anger in some, no Ph.D. in psychology required. If the shooting was an isolated incident we could attribute it to defective genes, bad parenting and/or simple bullying but it was not an isolated incident. The fact of the matter is we now have two and a half generations of mostly young males who have been exposed to toxic FDA approved food additives all of their young (relative to me, with less injurious personal experiences with the same FDA approved food poisoning) lives involved in senseless killings and creating inestimable grief to victim’s families, friends and communities. I can’t personally prove what I write but does anyone else have a more functional explanation? To Bill Hall, below, I agree with you on the 2nd Amendment gun rights and imagine the drugs you mention could be contributing factors, perhaps even ‘triggers?’ Charles G. Shaver/anonymous.
Soy protein contains plant estrogens.
Plastic containers are made from esters, a hydrocarbon molecule that is also a major building block of the hormone estrogen. Micro plastic is now visible in everything we consume and in our bodies. Glass and paper is the future.
Madman, I am concerned about microplastics but not in the same way as this statement suggests. Esters are not Hydrocarbons (exclusively H and C). The linkage of estrogen to microplastics (chemically) is an exaggeration. I am not criticizing you, but rather I am interested in the origin of this statement. It is persuasive but not scientifically accurate, so where the statement comes from is important.
pbinca spoke up from Kalifornia to proudly display her lack of understanding of the Second Amendment and logical thought:
Thus the Preamble to 2A “A well regulated militia being necessary….”
pbinca, you poor dear: at the time that was written ‘well regulated’ meant well equipped with weapons and a soldier’s accoutrements to be able to fight in a war – NOT tied down with bureaucratic regulations, bylaws, California style red tape, etc. Are you embarrassed for yourself yet
But wait! The display of your ignorance of the Second Amendment and rational thought got even worse!
One idea not mentioned by Prof. Turley is to make gun ownership by the youngest adults contingent on an older adult co-signing for the purchase. For example, those under 25 years old would require a sponsoring adult over 35.
You never got past the preamble to the Second Amendment that you mentioned? Attention span so limited you never got to the part that reads SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED – like a requirement to first be 25, and then in addition require a sponsor?
Under your idea of what the Second Amendment should allow with your latest California bred infringements, most of the soldiers in both the Revolutionary War and in WWII would have been considered too juvenile to be allowed to own firearms – under 25. Old enough to volunteer to fight and perhaps die for their country – but too young for pbinca and her fellow Democrats to trust them to own firearms under the Second Amendment!
Here’s a different idea as you’re obsessed with stripping young American adults of their rights: make firearms possession a felony for young adult males under age 25 in the inner cities of large cities run by Democrats. Go one step further: make firearms possession a felony for anyone registered as a Democrat!
Now THAT would be more likely to have an affect on the murder rate in the USA.
Did they call you Old Pussy(foot) at battalion HQ?
Wait, what were you doin’ at battalion HQ, workin’ in the mess hall, eh, cookie?
Did the navy give you a Hunter Biden type discharge to avoid embarrassing the navy after you were repeatedly caught grooming the young base brats – along with an airsoft replica sniper rifle so you could hang out with the other Couch Commando Gun Bunnies and engage in circle jerks?
Too stupid to debate?
Go full ad hominem like a true intellectual, nay, a–hole!
In non-human primate societies they segregate young males.
Not a bad idea. Al dems shall voluntarily disarm for the good of everyone. Yep, that would work! Platform it.
The church children killer was another in the long line of FTM Trans persons hopped up on testosterone.
The MSM is completely ignoring something that with near certainty ACTUALLY contributed to this mass shooting.
F#$King arround with testosterone is in general a bad idea – We have known about “roid rage” in biological men for decades”
We can argue about gun control all we want but as far as I’m concerned even the simple act of requiring a gun owner to register his gun is unconstitutional.
“… The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.
I should be able to own weapons without the government knowing it.
And the only time the government should know about it is if I use my weapons to take someone’s ability to enjoy life, liberty and a pursuit happiness away from them.
Having said that, we need to look at how many people under the age of 25 are on SSRIs like Prozac. And we need to see how many of these Mass shooters under 25 are on these medications. And we must demand complete transparency to obtain this information.
Two side effects of SSRI medications are suicidal ideation and homicidal ideation for people under 25. A warning phrase comes with every prescription and is accompanied by a giant black skull.
Evolutionary biologist Colin Wright makes great points in the following excerpt about the Minneapolis killing and harming of children at the Catholic Mass at Annunciation Catholic School. Democrats deny reality, deny science, deny culpability, use others for political advantage. As Ive argued many times, Democrats use people for talking points and power. As Jonathan Turley mentioned on Twitter / X today:
Jonathan Turley
@JonathanTurley
… Bishop Barron put it succinctly: these comments are “completely asinine.” https://foxnews.com/media/minnesota-bishop-rebukes-dem-mayor-dismissing-prayer-following-deadly-catholic-school-attack Frey and Psaki achieved the rare distinction of rushing forward to make themselves the story and to enrage those grieving after this tragedy.
Lessons from the Tragedy in Minneapolis
Colin Wright
The shooter, Robin Westman, a male who identified as a woman, left behind a manifesto and notes on his weapons laced with violent fantasies, political rage, and admiration for other mass murderers. It would be easy, especially on the political right, to reduce the cause of this tragedy to “transgenderism.” That misses the point. In this case and others like it, we are dealing primarily with the product of mental illness, which has been intensified by activists, policymakers, and medical institutions’ distortions of reality…..
Westman was not just “trans”; he was profoundly disturbed. His case followed a familiar pattern, in which mental illness precedes the adoption of a transgender identity. Indeed, trans identification is often a coping mechanism for underlying distress rather than its root cause. For Westman and others like him, apocalyptic messaging around transgender identity has provided a script that justifies violence….
Just last week, a leaked video showed the president of the American Medical Association claiming that the suicide rate among trans-identifying people might be as high as 70 percent. Such vastly inflated figures are routinely invoked to justify medical procedures that every systematic review to date has found lack clear evidence of benefit. Activists weaponize these distorted numbers in public debate.
It may be tempting for people on the right to blame “transgenderism” itself for this tragedy. But most youth swept up in this ideology are not violent. Rather, they are victims, turned into pawns by powerful institutions that exploit their suffering. The medical establishment feeds them pseudoscience about being “born in the wrong body” and profits from irreversible interventions that do nothing to resolve their deeper problems. The political establishment elevates them as a victim class to be used in a new civil rights crusade, seeing their immiseration not as something to be cured but as something to be maintained for leverage.
https://www.city-journal.org/article/minneapolis-shooting-robin-westman-trans-mental-illness
*. All the worse because of the medical community.
And dem-o-rats pushing this.
Great post. Thank you. We must also consider the likely role of SSRI’s in this and all mass shootings of this nature–although probably not so much in gang-related events. There are a few papers showing increased suicidal/homicidal ideation of over 25% when taking these drugs–and lasting for months after cessation.
*. FBI has a study for similarities among mass killers. Yes, Westman fits. Trans is no longer classified as a mental illness. Some killers were found to have various diagnosis others not.
Leakage or telling a close friend or family happens in all. Again Westman did such. His mother reported?
Purchasing a gun happens in the prep phase 1 week to 1 year prior. The venue is most commonly a school or workplace. A grievance is present or a 0erceived injustice. Westman attended the school so the motive is in that venue.
The greatest number of mass killers arrived with Buraq H. Obama in 2017 , at 30 shootings , a record. What is it about the steed of Iz-lame that caused it? Propaganda? Mass propaganda? Res ip loqu8tor..
AI Overview
A federal appeals court has ruled that a large portion of President Trump’s tariffs, including sweeping reciprocal tariffs imposed under emergency powers, are illegal. The ruling, issued on August 29, 2025, by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit, affirms a lower court decision but allows the tariffs to remain in effect while the administration seeks an appeal to the Supreme Court.
___________________
Here are the main laws wherein Congress delegated the authority to set tariffs to the president:
– Tariff Act of 1930 (Smoot-Hawley)
Primarily set tariff rates itself, but also allowed the President to negotiate reciprocal tariff reductions.
– Trade Expansion Act of 1962 – Section 232
Lets the President impose or adjust tariffs if the Department of Commerce finds that imports threaten national security.
This is the law President Trump used in 2018 to impose tariffs on steel and aluminum.
– Trade Act of 1974 – Section 301
Authorizes the President (via the U.S. Trade Representative) to impose tariffs or other trade restrictions if a foreign country is engaging in unfair trade practices.
– International Emergency Economic Powers Act (IEEPA, 1977)
Broader in scope: gives the President power to regulate imports/exports (including tariffs) during a declared national emergency related to foreign threats.
– ChatGPT
As in Marbury v. Madison, Congress has no power to amend the Constitution and provide or transfer the power of the legislative branch—to lay taxes—to the executive branch.
But they can turn over their power to mint coin and set values (Art 1, Sec 8) to a private bank that prints money and loans it to the citizens with interest attached. That’s okay in your book?
The Federal Reserve Act is unconstitutional; Congress enjoys no enumerated power to regulate the private enterprise, private banking industry.
Congress has the power to “coin money, regulate the Value thereof,….”
With regard to money, finance, and the banking industry, that is all.
__________________________________________________________________________
Article 1, Section 8
The Congress shall have Power…
To coin Money, regulate the Value thereof, and of foreign Coin,…
The singular American failure is the judicial branch, with emphasis on the Supreme Court.
*. Two parts- States wanted to keep their freedom from a federal government and other States. A well regulated militia is necessary for that freedom. The second part is the people, citizens have the right to keep and bear arms.
It’s exemplified in the Civil War. The States wanted their freedom from the feds and other States. They had militias and were armed. The only mistake the South made was in forming a separate nation,
The Confederate States. This allowed the United States to attack another nation constitutionally as the United States cannot attack a State.
OT –The NG isn’t attacking citizens of States currently. They are attacking foreign nationals. It’s constitutional. Just as there are millions of foreign nationals some unfortunate mistakes are made by the numbers.
It’s national security, fiduciary, and upholds lawful elections by census and other. Many may find their loyalty conflicted.
*. Gun control.and mental illness might caused by information overload. The net is new to human psychology. Because it’s so intense it may cause distress.
I recall a time before cell phones and the net. Life was slow. Time went by slowly. It was restful, peaceful, quiet. I miss it.
*. 1st sentence correction– gun control.
Mental illness might be caused by information overload as a stressor.
Smh
OT. Robin Westman mass murderer
FBI report covering 2005 to 2013 is available examining similarities among mass murderers. Robin Westman fits the similarities. Interpersonal conflicts, went to the school, knew the layout, pre-planned and prepared in legal purchase of gun, stressors, age, 94% male, grievance is still unknown.
For mass murderers there’s a grievance or a perception of injustice. 2017 was a record year for mass murderers. I think it was 30 such.
Not only does this shed light on individuals committing mass murders but it sheds light on groups committing mass murder such as Hamas attack upon Israel murdering 1200 young people and taking hostages with atrocities engulfing defining corpses.
There is an internal US alert as various groups speak of no justice no peace and grievances , as other groups speak of and accuse the US should put the US on high alert for national security.
Have a good labor day holiday one and all.
^^^ correction defining–> defiling.
The Confederate States availed themselves of not prohibited and fully constitutional secession. “Crazy Abe” had no constitutional power to deploy military forces in sovereign Confederate territory or otherwise commence a war. Congress had no constitutional authority to declare war on that sovereign foreign nation. Everything “Crazy Abe” and his communist successors did was and remains unconstitutional and awaits rescinding, revocation, abrogation, and complete extirpation. The disposition of illicitly freed slaves was addressed by the Naturalization Act of 1802, which was in full force and effect on January 1, 1863.
You have Lincoln Derangement Syndrome!
Thank you for your patronage and concern, but you have the wrong syndrome. In fact, I am severely afflicted with Constitution Rationality Wholesomeness.
The American Founders fully and expressly intended to “secure the Blessings of Liberty to Ourselves and Our Posterity” and perpetuate their America in absolute freedom under their Constitution and Bill of Rights. Certainly, they had that right.
Lincoln is the evil force that threw the baby out with the bathwater; that threw the Constitution out with reprehensible slavery, which was “withering on the vine” and must have concluded with eminently necessary and appropriate compassionate repatriation; and that destroyed American freedom and took America off of its Constitution.
When all things Lincoln are struck down and extirpated, America will be restored, and Americans will once again enjoy the absolute rights, freedoms, privileges, and immunities of their true fundamental law as the Founders intended and endeavored.
The Confederate States availed themselves of not prohibited and fully constitutional secession.
Black American Freedom Derangement Syndrome. Absolutely nothing to do with Commie Democrat hatred of the Second Amendment via “gun control”.
Confederate Kluxxer George: you now self-identify as the Commie Confederate States. You’re never going to forgive Lincoln for depriving you of American born black Americans that you could enslave and order to help you and your fellow commies wipe your asses for you.
You declared war and fired the first shots on the Union, long before Fort Sumpter. Would you like to play Commies and Americans the next time around?
And are you willing to offer yourself to be booked to make house calls to present your grievances in person during your next insurrection?
Thanks for your patronage and thanks for reading, again.
You’re my greatest fan and I want you to know that I appreciate it very much.
Leftists like to disparage prayer, yet they pray after every tragedy like this. “Dear God, please let the shooter be a straight, white guy.”
*. The FBI indicates percentages by ethnic group or race in percentages that align with the overall percentage make of the general population. Whites being the largest percentage as in general population.
Sounds quite sensible to focus on ‘gun control’; not the mental state of individual members of society.
N O T !
National Guard soldiers were deployed to Washington, D.C., earlier this month, but since arriving, they haven’t done much. Two reporters found that even the soldiers have no idea what their mission is.
When asked what their mission is the soldiers answered as follows:
“We’re the president’s patrol, ma’am,” said a small group of South Carolina Guard soldiers standing along the waterfront.
Another group characterized their mission as, “Just walkin’ around.”
A third group walking along the National Mall told reporters that they were from West Virginia. When asked what they were doing, they confessed it was nothing more than “Smiling and waving.”
Photos captured them standing around in extreme heat and humidity. Last week, they were seen grabbing ice cream from a food truck and guarding the Krispy Kreme. In the past few days, it seems to have evolved into Guard soldiers picking up trash and spreading mulch around the landscaping in the city.
Even in areas where the Guard has a big presence, it isn’t necessarily helping reduce crime. The report described a stabbing that happened at a major intersection along the “H” Street corridor at 3 p.m. on a Wednesday. Guard soldiers had spent the day walking back and forth through the area, and a group of three were having lunch on the patio nearby when it happened. The suspect escaped
“. . . it isn’t necessarily helping reduce crime.”
That’s a lie.
As just one example, carjackings are down some 80%.
^^^^ yes, deterrents work. It isn’t the population has become moral. It’s the probability of arrest increased. DJT wants to use capital punishment as another deterrent and a further decrease will result. It would have to be carried out without endless delay.
We know there’s errors.
Troll troll troll your boat gently down the stream
Merrily Merrily Merrily
Dems live in a dream…
That’s why Mayor Bowwow thanked President Trump for the law force assistance.
Very witty.
I like it !!!!
As a professional troll I actually appreciate witty and creative responses.
An occasional chuckle makes my work worthwhile
Unfortunately, the MAGA responses I get here are rather vitriolic and half-witty at best.
Why thank you!
They’re specifically designed by MAGA for people just like you, simple and half witted. 🤣
I wish all of the anonymous writers had the courage to attach their names to their words. It is cowardice to speak and troll anonymously. Anyone have the guts to disagree and attach their name?
How about we ban trans indoctrination in schools. Ban puberty blockers. Ban trans surgeries for minors. Limited and very judicial use of psychotropic drugs and people on then being closely watched and not allowed any dangerous weapons, not just guns.
That would be a much better start.
47,000 U.S. vehicular highway deaths per year.
– National Safety Council
_____________________________
BAN CARS!
VVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVVV
Way to deal with the semiautomatic epidemic is to let victims families team up on class action suits against gun manufacturers after mass shootings. The country should finally sack up enough to fend off the stupid gun vs. Car argument.
Also semiautomatic ammo should only be legal at the range.
Everything else just leaves gun lobby lawyers like you Turls navel gazing and excuse making.
As Heller said, you have the right to a gun in your house.
You going to sue car manufacturers too like the guy that plowed through the crowd in Waukesha WI? The SUV did the killiynot the person right? Do you understand what that would open up as liabilities for all manufacturers? If a mad man misuses your product you are liable. Stupid idea
Your ignorance is breathtaking.
WTF is “semiautomatic ammo”?
5.56/6.8, 7.62 mm, and .50 in caliber ammunition for fully automatic (rock ‘n roll), burst (3-round), and semiautomatic U.S. et al. military and military-style assault weapons.
Best Handguns for Women in 2025
https://thegunzone.com/best-handguns-for-women/
Now THAT’S damn funny !!!
^^&, nah, I want a Winchester lever action.
The same 5.56 ammo is used in Semi auto and bolt action rifles
Same for every other ammmo, moron.
That’s what it says, Einstein!
And no combat professional uses a bolt-action rifle; a sniper possibly but not a combatant who seriously needs to get rounds down range ASAP!
You cannot have the ammo…we make our own.
You cannot have the guns…we will shoot you if you try.
Next?
Semiautomatic ammo lmao
What an ignorant stooge.
As I say very often. Typical lib/dems. Brain power not required.
And that’s the reason why I call them demwits. 😊
My God, you need a basic/fundamental education in firearms. It is readily apparent that you are getting your info from anti-2A loons – incorrect on all levels.
Also semiautomatic ammo should only be legal at the range.
No better way of proudly self identifying as a Commie Democrat Gun Retard, than posting about “semiautomatic ammo”… as though that were actually a thing
Why not try some newer unconstitutional infringements – like press bans that violate the First Amendment instead of the Second Amendment, to stop the media glorifying mass murdering trannies and providing role models and templates for the next attention seeking mass murderer?
Says the coward. What’s your MOS braveheart?
This issue and all the howling about gun control surely fit’s a quote of Teddy’s:
Speech St. Louis May 1916
“One of our defects as a nation is a tendency to use what have been called ‘weasel words’. When a weasel sucks eggs the meat is sucked out of the egg. If you use a ‘weasel word’ after another, there is nothing left of the other.”
The Constitution is a stubborn document to willy nilly change.
The wiring in the brain of the ‘shooter’ is the common sense focus in every one of these ‘school shooting’ incidents.
The wiring in the brain of the Democrat politician is materially different from that of the Independent or Republican.
But much the same as a Satanist
🎯
47,000 U.S. vehicular highway deaths per year.
– National Safety Council
_____________________________
BAN CARS!
Communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) are not genuinely concerned with deaths.
Communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) are bound and determined to ensure that Americans are subjugated by communists (liberals, progressives, socialists, democrats, RINOs, AINOs) and retain no method or power to defend and protect their Constitution and their Republic.