Critics Tell GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert What To Do With Her ‘Prayers’ After Boulder Shooting | HuffPost UK


Yet another shooting and loss of life in America, when will it stop?

The gun lobby feel it will when everyone carries a gun, but was that not the case before ‘so called’ Law and Order was established in America. This was referred to the ‘Wild West‘, when virtually everyone carried a gun.

WShen it did not stop gun killings then and it will not know. Since then the range of firearms has increased considerably, as had the fire power of these weapons, for now instead of the six shot gun, the weapon of favour is the AR-15 semiautomatic rifle, a weapon with so much more fire power as the old six shot guns, a weapon of ultimate destruction, which is put forward as a weapon of defence. With a weapon of that nature there is no defence, just killings.

The only sure way of bringing the killings down is for very tight gun control, a ban on personal use of semiautomatic rifles and a removal of ‘open carry’ for the general population, this is what we do in the UK and our gun killings are no where the numbers of in America.

The referred defence is the, The Second Amendment, one of the ten amendments to the Constitution comprising the Bill of Rights, 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.”.

Which means ‘The right to keep and bear arms (often referred to as the right to bear arms) is a right for people to possess weapons (arms) for their own defense.’.

It was adopted on 15 December 1791, this is well before the development of semiautomatic rifles and should therefore only relate to the firearms of that time and not of the current time.

For today , in certain areas, is back to pre 1791, they have learnt nothing over the years, so the killings go and on.

Where is the Human right to Life in America, for it appears to not exist.

Source: Critics Tell GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert What To Do With Her ‘Prayers’ After Boulder Shooting | HuffPost UK

‘No one deserves to die over a video game’: survivors recall chaos of Florida shooting | US news | The Guardian


Survivors of a shooting at a video gamers’ competition in Florida in which three people died have told of chaotic scenes as those caught up in the violence trampled over others in panic as they tried to escape.

The dead included the gunman, David Katz, 24, a player on the gaming circuit who is believed to have been angry because he lost Sunday’s tournament. Eleven people were also wounded in the gunfire.

One witness who was present during the Madden NFL 19 video game tournament in Jacksonville said she saw Katz as he fired while walking backwards.

“We did see him, two hands on the gun, walking back, just popping rounds,” said Taylor Poindexter, 26, who had been ordering pizza at the bar when she heard the first shot at about 1.30pm.

“I was scared for my life and my boyfriend’s,” she told reporters, standing on crutches after spraining her ankle trying to escape.

 

Source: ‘No one deserves to die over a video game’: survivors recall chaos of Florida shooting | US news | The Guardian

Why Japan has NO Mass Shootings


Mass Shootings, gun control, gun violence are some pointers that come to mind whenever we hear of shootings, especially those connected with civilians. Gun crime can occur in any country irrespective of the level of gun legislation these countries have.

But, at these times do we ever think of the general Society in these countries and how this can have a bearing on the extent of gun crimes these countries have.

The American Society has, certainly within the West been open to extensive gun use and you could say this was virtually from the beginning of America. While for Japan this would appear to be no so.

Could this have some bearing on the level of Gun Crimes within these two countries.

There is also the availability of guns, if it is relatively easy to obtain a gun, as opposed to not being so, could this also have a bearing.

So the level of gun crime may not be always down to the legislation of any country, but could be dependent on many other factors.

Japan appears to have little or no mass shootings while in America there appears to be a high level of mass shootings.

Alexis Chateau

One of the things I find amusing about American Conservatives is how quickly immigration laws must be reformed when immigrants commit crimes; but how quiet they are on gun laws when well-rooted American citizens shoot up schools, churches, and country music festivals.

The end result is that the United States has more mass shootings, and gun violence in general, than virtually anywhere else in the world.

Japan has none. Here’s why.

If the video doesn’t load automatically, you can watch ithere.

One of the cases often made against gun control in America is that Chicago has some of the strictest laws, but high rates of gun violence. This reminds me of the chicken and the egg situation.

Which one came first? The terrible gun violence? Or the laws to curb the issue? But does it even matter? Is the intelligent response to a failing system, no system at…

View original post 424 more words

Here’s what Britain’s tough gun laws have done to cops – Salon.com


Comedy Central’s Jim Jefferies explored life with police officers in the United Kingdom so he could watch their arrest tactics, which almost never involve a firearm or result in a fatal shooting, unlike policing in the U.S., and the important role gun laws have played.

“The Jim Jefferies Show” skit opened with the late-night comedian talking about a Georgia Tech student who wielded a pocketknife and was shot and killed by police.

“On social media, people once again said ‘did the cops really have to shoot, where was the Taser? There must be a better way,'” Jefferies said. “Maybe there isn’t.”

Jefferies then showed a video of his time with Birmingham Police in the U.K., a location dubbed “one of the most murderous places in the country.”

Source: Here’s what Britain’s tough gun laws have done to cops – Salon.com

Shooters of Color are Called ‘Terrorists’ and ‘Thugs.’ Why are White Shooters Called ‘Mentally Ill’?


Original post from Information Clearing House

‘…………..By Anthea Butler

This racist media narrative around mass violence falls apart with the Charleston church shooting.

June 19, 2015 “Information Clearing House” – “WP” –   Police are investigating the shooting of nine African Americans at Emanuel AME Church in Charleston as a hate crime committed by a white man. Unfortunately, it’s not a unique event in American history. Black churches have long been a target of white supremacists who burned and bombed them in an effort to terrorize the black communities that those churches anchored. One of the most egregious terrorist acts in U.S. history was committed against a black church in Birmingham, Ala., in 1963. Four girls were killed when members of the KKK bombed the 16th Street Baptist Church, a tragedy that ignited the Civil Rights Movement.

But listen to major media outlets and you won’t hear the word “terrorism” used in coverage of Tuesday’s shooting. You won’t hear the white male shooter, identified as 21-year-old Dylann Roof, described as “a possible terrorist.” And if coverage of recent shootings by white suspects is any indication, he never will be. Instead, the go-to explanation for his actions will be mental illness. He will be humanized and called sick, a victim of mistreatment or inadequate mental health resources. Activist Deray McKesson noted this morning that, while discussing Roof’s motivations, an MSNBC anchor said “we don’t know his mental condition.” That is the power of whiteness in America.

U.S. media practice a different policy when covering crimes involving African Americans and Muslims. As suspects, they are quickly characterized as terrorists and thugs, motivated by evil intent instead of external injustices. While white suspects are lone wolfs — Mayor Joseph Riley of Charleston already emphasized this shooting was an act of just “one hateful person” — violence by black and Muslim people is systemic, demanding response and action from all who share their race or religion. Even black victimsare vilified. Their lives are combed for any infraction or hint of justification for the murders or attacks that befall them: Trayvon Martin was wearing a hoodie. Michael Brown stole cigars. Eric Garner sold loosie cigarettes. When a black teenager who committed no crime was tackled and held down by a police officer at a pool party in McKinney, Tex., Fox News host Megyn Kelly described her as “No saint either.”

Early news reports on the Charleston church shooting followed a similar pattern. Cable news coverage of State Sen. and Rev. Clementa Pinckney, pastor of Emanuel AME who we now know is among the victims, characterized his advocacy work as something that could ruffle feathers. The habit of characterizing black victims as somehow complicit in their own murders continues.

It will be difficult to hold to this corrosive, racist media narrative when reporting on the shooting at Emanuel AME Church. All those who were killed were simply participating in a Wednesday night Bible study. And the shooter’s choice of Emanuel AME was most likely deliberate, given its storied history. It was the first African Methodist Episcopal church in the South, founded in 1818 by a group of men including Morris Brown, a prominent pastor, and Denmark Vesey, the leader of a large, yet failed, slave revolt in Charleston. The church itself was targeted early on by fearful whites  because it was built with funds from anti-slavery societies in the North. In 1822, church members were investigated for involvement in planning Vesey’s slave revolt, and the church was burned to the ground in retribution.

Early news reports on the Charleston church shooting followed a similar pattern. Cable news coverage of State Sen. and Rev. Clementa Pinckney, pastor of Emanuel AME who we now know is among the victims, characterized his advocacy work as something that could ruffle feathers. The habit of characterizing black victims as somehow complicit in their own murders continues.

It will be difficult to hold to this corrosive, racist media narrative when reporting on the shooting at Emanuel AME Church. All those who were killed were simply participating in a Wednesday night Bible study. And the shooter’s choice of Emanuel AME was most likely deliberate, given its storied history. It was the first African Methodist Episcopal church in the South, founded in 1818 by a group of men including Morris Brown, a prominent pastor, and Denmark Vesey, the leader of a large, yet failed, slave revolt in Charleston. The church itself was targeted early on by fearful whites  because it was built with funds from anti-slavery societies in the North. In 1822, church members were investigated for involvement in planning Vesey’s slave revolt, and the church was burned to the ground in retribution.

USA, should there be a change in the gun law


Poll; Stricter Gun Control

This is a very emotive subject and I would not wish to tell the people of the USA what to do.

From a far, my view is, the poll in question is asking for stricter gun control, not the banning of guns. Any law that is made, no matter what the subject is, can not be 100% effective, but that is no reason not to have laws. Laws are there to protect the people of the country from others who intentionally or not cause harm to others.

Regarding the young man in this instance, it would appear that he suffered from some medical condition that may or may not have some bearing on why he did what he did. It also appears, that although he had access to quite a few guns, he wanted more and two days before the massacre, Adam Lanza went to a sporting goods store in Danbury, Connecticut, and tried to buy a rifle. He was turned down because he did not want to undergo a background check or abide by the state’s waiting period for gun sales.

Perhaps with hind sight this was a situation which should have been reported.

While the law did stop his purchase of further weapons, he did have the access to the weapons at his home.

In the light of what has happened with the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School, should the Gun Law of the USA be looked at, but no one should believe that any change in the law would stop another incident happening. The tightening of a gun law could only reduce the risk of another incident happening.

But many believe that any alteration to the ‘Right to Bear Arms’ as stated in the 2nd Amendment to the United States Constitution, would be a major infringement of this Right.  this was adopted on December 15, 1791, along with the rest of the United States Bill of Rights. This was then included in the United States Constitution, which was originally adopted on September 17, 1787. Over the years the Constitution as been amended seventeen additional times (for a total of 27 amendments), the Bill of Rights being the first 10 of the total 27 amendments. In 2008 and 2010, the Supreme Court issued two landmark decisions concerning the Second Amendment. In 2008 District of Columbia v Heller held that the 2nd Amendment  protects an individual’s right to possess a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home and in federal enclaves . The decision did not address the question of whether the Second Amendment extends beyond federal enclaves to the states. While in 2010 McDonald v Chicago held that the right of an individual to “keep and bear arms” protected by the Second Amendment is incorporated by the Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and applies to the states. The decision cleared up the uncertainty left in the wake of District of Columbia v. Heller as to the scope of gun rights in regard to the states.

Back ground check were brought in by the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act on November 30, 1993. It may be that a check on the person making the application is not sufficient, but checks on the immediate family may also be necessary. In this incident, this may have then brought to light the possible mental condition of Adam Lanza, which could have meant that no guns would have been allowed at his home.

Although not necessarily common knowledge the UK has the Bill of Rights 1689, which among with other rights, gave the rights to bear arms. This, however has been considerably amended by the gun politics in the UK. These changes were mostly made in response to UK shooting incidents .

In over 200 years, from the 18th to the 21 st century, of USA history many changes have taken place to habitat, social and culture, but not to the gun laws, should this be so?

For those of you who, not only wish no change, but also not to even to consider change, bear in mind, would you want on your conscience that when another incident occurs, you stopped the possibility of a change occurring that could have prevented that occurrence. Changes will not stop another incident, but may reduce their occurrence.

Also, you may say that USA Judges have made rulings in court cases, but these were in keeping with the current laws in relation to gun control.  Judges do not make laws, they provide judgments in line with the current legislation in force at that time. If you wish to minimise the risk of another shooting occurring this can only be done by considering changes to the current USA laws on gun control.  Some do say that the laws are there at present, but if that is so, why did they not stop the incident happening?

I do hope that what ever the governing bodies of the USA and its people decide to do or decide not to do, that incidents of this nature will be few and far between.