DO MAKE USE of LINKS,
>SEARCH<
&
>Side Bars<
&
The Top Bar >PAGES<

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
.
American Politicians Hide Behind The 2nd Amendment & Abrogate On Their Duty Of Care For The Innocent! …
.
~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~

Posted by:
Greg Lance – Watkins
Greg_L-W

eMail:
Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com

The BLOG:
https://InfoWebSiteUK.wordpress.com

The Main Web Site:
www.InfoWebSite.UK

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~

.

Hi,

probably the most crass & irresponsible comment I have ever heard from an American President, and there have been many, was when the POTUS Domald Trump sai to a delegation of the bereaved from the latest school shooting, and they have had one every 60 hours so far this year and are on track for 150 this year, was when he made the utterly obscene suggestion:

‘we can protect school children by arming teachers’

Can you think of anything more thoughtless and irresponsible he could have said?

Firstly what a callouse lack of consideration for the bereaved and for the traumatised when you consider the pupils of Parkland School who had been having 5 ‘shooter emergency’ drills a week before the shooting, now they are to be set the example that their teachers carry guns!

Guns are not the solution they are the very problem and arming more people exacerbates the problem. The last thing America needs is more guns in the hands of poorly trained people – you only have to look at howmany innocent people are shot by the police and the military to realise that!

Over 30,000 American civilians die in America of gunshot wounds each year. Clearly it is not more firearms America needs it is a majority of responsible politicians and members of the Supreme Court. Individuals of integrity and wisdom who can understand and take on board the simple logic expressed by a student who lost friends at Parkland School who said:

“guns have developed at a rate that leaves me dizzy. But while the guns have changed, our laws have not”

That student learned that lesson down the barrel of an AR-15 and from the blood splatter & stench of death  no student should experience and at the funerals of her murdered friends.

Yet students in America are not protected by either their politicians or the Supreme Court from being pawns in a macabre, outdated piece of legislation that politicians and judges are too stupid and insecure to modernise, better still repeal!

Perhaps someone whould point out just how few people’s lives have been saved by the distortion of the 2nd. Amendment by inadequates and the corrupt relative to the 30,000+ deaths per annum and the 30,000 funerals a year and the 10s 0f 1,000 who have lost children, siblings, parents, family and friends just to keep politicians on their gravy train, politicians too weak and venal to confront the mad, the sad and the downright criminal who want to arm themselves with machine guns, weapons of war to shuffle round their bedrooms posing in the mirror to bolster their failed masculinity!

Pathetic!

Why the Second Amendment does not stymie gun control

A lack of political will among America’s lawmakers is the main culprit

2nd AMENDMENT PISTOL 01

AMERICA’S latest school shooting on February 14th has renewed calls for the repeal of the Second Amendment, the constitutional provision protecting the right “to keep and bear arms”. Critics claim the Second Amendment has helped make America the world leader in mass shootings. In the 227 years since the amendment was added to the constitution, as one student said after the massacre at her high school in Parkland, Florida, “guns have developed at a rate that leaves me dizzy”. But while “the guns have changed”, she said—alluding to the difference between a musket and an AR-15, the semi-automatic weapon with which the Parkland shooter killed 17 people—“our laws have not”.

For most of America’s history, the Second Amendment stood as an uninterpreted relic of the founding era. It was not until 2008 that the Supreme Court gave serious thought to the nature of the right it protects. In Heller v District of Columbia, four justices insisted that the right to bear arms made sense only in the context of a “well regulated militia” of the 18th century. But a majority found the Second Amendment to protect “an individual right to possess a firearm” for self-defence and held that a total ban on handguns violated that right.

It is impossible to say whether erasing the Second Amendment would bring down gun deaths in America. But this is an academic query: changes to the constitution require the unlikely assent of two-thirds majorities in the House and Senate and three-quarters of the states. The better question is whether repealing the amendment is a must for pursuing gun control. It is not. The Heller majority opinion did not, in the words of its author, the late Justice Antonin Scalia, secure an “unlimited” right to buy or carry weapons.
 The Second Amendment would not, for example, scuttle bans on concealed weapons or machine guns. And Justice Scalia emphasised that nothing in Heller “should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings”. Nearly every gun regulation under discussion today—from expanded background checks to bans on military-style weapons—would seem to pass constitutional muster.
To the dismay of the National Rifle Association (NRA), which takes a much wider view of the Second Amendment, the Supreme Court has consistently refused to embellish the constitutional right to bear arms in the decade since the Heller decision. The NRA was particularly piqued in November 2017 when the justices declined to entertain a challenge to Maryland’s ban on large-capacity magazines and semi-automatic weapons, placing AR-15s outside the ambit of constitutional protection.
It will not be pleased by another demurral on February 20th, when only Justice Clarence Thomas noted his displeasure with the high court’s refusal to hear a challenge to a Californian law that requires the buyer of a gun to wait 10 days before taking possession. His 14-page dissent complained that the lower court treated the Second Amendment “cavalierly” and that the right to bear arms is a “disfavoured right” at the Supreme Court. Whether disfavoured or legitimately circumscribed, it is clear that the Second Amendment is not the primary obstacle to gun control. If legislators in the state capitols and Congress find the political will to clamp down on America’s millions of powerful and often loosely regulated weapons, it seems there is a constitutional way.

To view the original article CLICK HERE

.

Regards,
Greg_L-W.

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~
Posted by: Greg Lance-Watkins
tel: 44 (0)1594 – 528 337
Calls from ‘Number Withheld’ phones Are Blocked

All unanswered messages are recorded.
Leave your name & a UK land line number & I will return your call.

‘e’Mail Address: Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com

Skype: GregL-W

TWITTER: @Greg_LW

DO MAKE USE of LINKS,
>SEARCH<
&
>Side Bars<
&
The Top Bar >PAGES<
I try to make every effort to NOT infringe copyrights in any commercial way & make all corrections of fact brought to my attention by an identifiable individual

Please Be Sure To
.Follow Greg_LW on Twitter.

Re-TWEET my Twitterings

& Publicise My Blogs
To Spread The Facts World Wide

eMail:
Greg_L-W@BTconnect.com

The BLOG:
https://InfoWebSiteUK.wordpress.com

The Main Web Site:
www.InfoWebSite.UK

~~~~~~~~~~#########~~~~~~~~~~

Advertisements