Two good reads relevant to the current debate

[Toby Bradshaw]

If this thread is too political I suppose it will die a quick death, but I've recently found two interesting reads that you might find thought-provoking. Both were written in response to the Parkland school shooting.

One is by Amy Walter, a writer for the Cook Political Report and frequent commentator on NPR. I'd be very surprised if she is a firearms owner, but she has grasped what most non-owners have not. You can also Google to find a video of her on NPR talking about this.

The other is by John Daniel Davidson, writing for The Federalist.

 

[Milo 2.0]

I had said the night of this last school shooting it will bring a political shift like we have never seen. One of them was bound to be at some point though.
Lines are going to be drawn.

 

[snert]

I don't think this is "political" at all. It is, instead, a fine review of the ideas that under gird our society uphold our freedoms/liberty. And if the Second Amendment isn't central to our gun forum, then I guess I am missing something. i appreciate these articles, read them both, and have to say they dig deeper, speak more clearly and (from both sides) engage the debate more thoughtfully than any I have read to date.

I find no reason to even comment on the points made: the articles speak for themselves. Nice post.

 

[nmkid]

I had said the night of this last school shooting it will bring a political shift like we have never seen. One of them was bound to be at some point though.
Lines are going to be drawn.

Thought the same myself. I feel a change is in the air.

 

[retired]

there is no debate,, simply some people that want to take away your guns.

 

[M.Stilley]

Wow that one from the federalist is kinda breathtaking, mostly because I think the majority of Americans could not think through his thought experiment with anything more than a knee jerk reaction.

 

[butchlambert]

I wish you guys had seen Walter E Williams on TV Sun. evening. I am a big fan and don't know why I wasn't aware of him. Put it simply, availability of guns is not the problem. Us older fellers remember 20 pages of weapons and ammo in the Sears Catalog, as well as Monkey Wards, and Western Auto. Why do we have all of our present problems with restrictive gun laws? We carried our rifles around all the time when I was young. Nobody got shot.
Doesn't anybody really wonder why! We had very very little bullying.
Thank about what was really different then and now.
I'll save my Walter Williams stuff for later, but do a search on him.-Professor of Economics at George Mason University.

 

[Dos XX]

Those were both well written and thought provoking.

 

[6ShotsOr5?]

Those were both well written and thought provoking.

Ditto

 

[alinwa]

I have to disagree with a quote from the second article....... "That doesn’t mean that private militias should have tanks and missile launchers, but it does mean that revolution......etc....."

This is just flatout wrong. And the huge problem is that 99% of the "freedom minded conservatives" here and elsewhere will just read this passage and nod and bob..."yup, yup, yup, no need for missile launchers"

"nor full auto weapons"

WRONG!!!

Our Founders absolutely DID expect militias and civilians to be as well armed, in fact BETTER ARMED than govt.

This isn't wacko conjecture, it's not even up for debate. It's simple historical fact. And to imagine otherwise is ignorant, or falling blatantly into the lie of "well it was different then" (ie "the constitution is a living document")

And I purposely did not capitalize Constitution in that quote.

 

[Toby Bradshaw]

Well, since there seems to be some interest in this sort of reading, try this one from Colin Woodard, author of American Nations: A History of the Eleven Rival Regional Cultures of North America.

If you're pressed for time, look at the map near the beginning of the article, then skip down to the paragraph starting with, "Most scholarly research ..." and start reading.

Enjoy!

 

[jsn]

I can't recall or find where I got this originally, but this is a good read also:

https://www.americanthinker.com/art...ence_wasnt_the_problem_in_broward_county.html

 

[people]

I had said the night of this last school shooting it will bring a political shift like we have never seen. One of them was bound to be at some point though.
Lines are going to be drawn.

The lines are already drawn. It just depends if the political left pushes past the line. We came as close as you can to a shooting war with our last presidential election.

 

[kvd]

Probably the best article I've ever seen (long - but worth the effort) about why the founding fathers added the second amendment to the bill of rights and - sadly - how far we've strayed from the original intent.

http://stephenhalbrook.com/law_review_articles/swiss_confederation.pdf

Think a year or two of mandatory militia training after high school for every able bodied male citizen and any women that wish to participate. Think being sent home with your fully automatic weapon and participation in frequent drills and shooting exercises until you're fifty or so years old. We're not talking about the National Guard - a reserve component of the military that came about in the twentieth century. We're talking about armed citizen/soldiers - like the ones that defeated the mightiest army in the world and won the American Revolution.

Think this was not the intent? Then why is one of the responsibilities of congress outlined in Article I, section 8 of the Constitution "To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress"

and,

"To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions"

Is congress doing its job?

I'm fairly certain that if we had stayed with the idea of an armed and fully trained Militia, there would be no such thing as a "gun problem" - and far less crime and disrespect for our Country.

 

[Milo 2.0]

The lines are already drawn. It just depends if the political left pushes past the line. We came as close as you can to a shooting war with our last presidential election.

Wow, so you were close to going into battle? When were you going to inform the rest of us?
My point was we're losing moderate conservative support with every mass shooting.

 

[22BRGUY]

My point was we're losing moderate conservative support with every mass shooting.

That's what the MSM says but I stopped believing them a long time ago.

 

[Milo 2.0]

That's what the MSM says but I stopped believing them a long time ago.

Me too, but look what has went on since, it's a pivotal point.

 

[Toby Bradshaw]

Probably the best article I've ever seen (long - but worth the effort) about why the founding fathers added the second amendment to the bill of rights and - sadly - how far we've strayed from the original intent.

http://stephenhalbrook.com/law_review_articles/swiss_confederation.pdf

Fabulous -- thanks for sharing!

 

[alinwa]

Thank You kvd and jsn..... more good stuff.

 

[L1986]

It occurred to me that the left frequently calls for disarming society while comparing our president to Hitler and the likes...One would think if that were true the last thing they would want is a disarmed United States...