I beg to differ. All amendments carry the same legal weight.

Wonder why they were not included in the original constitution, but signed in later as amendments?

Was this the first example of just sign it and we'll fix it later?

you actually have no idea of how insurgent resistance is organized and conducted. I do, used to train such people. It would not be a "bunch of guys with deer rifles". civlian resistance to the military is occuring all over the world: Syria, Egypt, Libya, to name but a few.

legal citizens not otherwise prohibited by law should be able to possess modern weapons. Please note that although legal, automatic weapons are heavily controlled in the US and have been since before WWII.

the concept of the armed citizen having a way to defend itself against a corrupt government stands the test of time, regardless of your opinion. Ask the Jews of Europe about the loss of that ability to defend yourself, oh wait, you can't....:rolleyes:

I write this post to you specifically, because you're an individual who's fully capable of rational thought without holding a specific bias. The bias on this subject is legendary and those on the RWNJ portion of the spectrum cannot be swayed from their position where they are legally right to own whatever firearm they wish. Arguing with them is a total and complete waste of time and space as there is no possible intelligence that ever comes from them.

As you are certainly aware, when 19 DB's decided to take the lives of 3000 people on 9/11, they accomplished that task with a set of box cutters. Note that these instruments were not permitted on the aircraft at that time, however the scrutiny of such devices was not the best. The government response was to beef up security at the airport so no box cutters could possibly get by the screening checkpoint. This would be a typical reaction of the government.

The government, it the one tidbit of intelligence that it has, decided to reinforce the cockpit doors, figuring, rightly so, that you cannot hijack an airplane if you can't get into the cockpit.

The DB then decides, since box cutters and guns won't get through the checkpoint, to utilize a bomb in his shoe. This failed due to his stupidity but the government's reactive response is to search the shoes of every single passenger on every aircraft on every single day.

Be assured that the DB will not use a shoe bomb again.

The next thing that the DB will do is to use a shoulder fired anti-aircraft missile fired from the ground. This is very easily accomplished and an airliner is a sitting duck for such a weapon. The government's response will probably be to attempt to ban all shoulder fired weapons because they are reactive and they have to do something to placate the population.

It is not difficult to extend this argument to weapons that can be hand carried.

At the present time, in or around NY, it is effectively impossible to own a handgun and carry it outside of your home. This has not made the slightest dent in the gun deaths in NY. Most are caused by illegal handguns.

If I go with your argument to strongly regulate all handguns, the next DB shows up with a rifle (Whoops...........the current DB used a rifle). If you were to attempt to take away all rifles, the next DB shows up with a shotgun. In any case, the unarmed citizens are sitting ducks for a deranged DB who is hell bent on taking the lives of innocent people.

However, if you use the analogy of the airliner:

You cannot take out the aircraft if you cannot get into the cockpit.

I'm not sure what it would take to keep a concerted DB out of a public school. You have seen a perfectly sound system being thwarted by a gun that destroyed the locking capability of the door.

The only solution that I have is a twofold solution that would utilize the locking doors in conjunction with two heavily armed guards that stay in the building at all times.

Note, however, that you have only accomplished the safety of the children while inside the building. They still must arrive and depart from the building, and, as such, are still sitting ducks for a concerted DB with a rifle.

I do realize the emotional response that caused many on here to condemn the specific weapon. However, there is always another weapon that is different from the banned weapon, and/or there is always another method that is different from the current tragedy, and fully preventing another school tragedy inside the classroom will simply result in the DB using an easier target such as a shopping mall or a movie theater.

We have a society that is becoming more violent and random violence has become a fact of life in this country. Banning one or two tools used for that violence won't change that fact.

who exactly do you think you are disagreeing with? :confused:

What is it exactly that "they do" in Mexico?

dont want a war zone, but we have armed guards at banks and it is nothing more than a cost of doing business. Are our children somehow less valuable than our bank accounts? :confused:

BTW, most of Mexico is far from being a war zone.

Just a litte food for thought. Statistically, as a woman, you are twice as likely to be shot in a domestic dispute by a relative or husband than you are to be shot by a stranger if a weapon is in the house.

75% of these murders are with guess what? Handguns that are generally registered.

The statistic is bad enough that in the mid 90s, congress passed gun bans for anyone convicted of domestic abuse and other crimes towards their family.

I personally love black powder weapons, but I would not lose sleep if no one could own handguns. The nations women would definitely have some increased life expectancy from the removal of registered handguns.

Mexico City and other places have armed guards or police at schools

I believe you will find that a majority of teachers would not be willing to carry weapons in school.

Sure you would. It's like pulling GD teeth in this country to get funding to put adequate teachers and materials in our schools, but you believe people will just pony up huge chunks of cash to turn schools into fortresses.
try to put a new heating system into a school and see the kind of fight people put up.

Tragically a basic profile of him has been posted. Honour student apparently always in some form of flight mode or in it in unreasonable ways. Hard to say what drove him this far.

I doubt he displayed behaviours of being potentially this dangerous. He apparently killed his mother at home before going to the school. I wonder over the years what his parents had attempted to get him out of his obvious isolation? Perhaps they were just too busy and ignored the situation. We always kept an eye on our children to make sure they were well within the normal envolope. Took the time to adjust things if they were not. Never just sitting on or ignoring situations. It was not the type of personality profile I expected to emerge for this act.

I am sure that every teacher that died in CT Friday wished that they had a way to defend themselves....

So instead of even an after the fact reactive attempt to address the problem, we should do nothing of any kind?

As you point out, even a little good came out of the cockpit modifications that made sense.

Id prefer to keep the nations schools from becoming the nations airports if I could, whih unfortunately, is a reactive solution that is the only one that no compromise 2nd amandment folkwill probably agree with.

This country is too saturated wih weapons, as you say even with the complete firearm bans in NYC, there is not much effect due to just how many weapons are kicking around. Is say any legislation concerning firearms would be a 2-4 generations before we saw any difference, but I don't think that mans we should do nothing at all in the meantime.

The reactive reactions to airport incidents at least insure that the same method can't be used again, which is a slight good news to the intense irriation of airline travel. However, these firearm mass murders keep happening with the same dismal chain of facts.

Unhinged guy gains access to parents/friends/stolen weapons and ammunition.

New town ct is classic small town america. I've been there a few times. Its the kind of place you drive to to buy a christmas tree and some cuisine at a nice cosy tavern or to stroll in a little new england colonial town in the fall. Chances are the door to your house is unlocked if you live there.
My mother some years back bought her dog from a breeder there for petes sake. It is the LAST place where something like this hell could be expected. Its the type of ittle town you move to to get away from the dangers of the big city.

Its not mexico city.

If the loonys goddam mother hadn't had no less than three firearms and plenty of ammo, and had to resort to some other method when the impulse struck. Maybe a busload of little kids and teachers wouldn't be dead right now.

Security establishment in north american society is increasing anyways. I always will remember a policy of being more open by a government department heard at a meeting I attended one day.

Shortly after the glass barriers went up between the public and employees of that dept that interacted with them. This then seemed to spread like wildfire became obvious.I actually used a little humour about it later at a later meeting.

I am not even sure if there was true justification or not. Perhaps the more rational component of society is less than it was or people are more extreme on average when upset. Hard to say. Are thinks really gettting that much worse out there? Or are a few random events just driving things?

I seriously try to not let my age color too many opinions. Yet if nothing else overall it is not a gentler population in my opinion than it was and may be worse moving forward. I think some of those glass barriers where more proactive perhaps than anything. That they have been required for some time now is fairly certain.

Logic would have to be present to be disputed.