No, Sir. YOU “Must Change” NOT US

We can’t tolerate this anymore. These tragedies must end. And to end them, we must change...”

.

Once again, the President finds fault in America writ-large, not LIFE.  Sometimes things happen, Mr. President. NOTHING could have stopped Adam Lanza from the evil he perpetrated in Newtown, Connecticut at the Sandy Hook School. NOTHING.  All the laws we needed we have in place.
.

SOMETIMES EVIL BREAKS THROUGH.
.

It’s NOT OUR FAULT.
.
It’s NOTAMERICA.”

.
It’s NOTAMERICANS.”
.

It INFURIATES me that ONCE AGAIN this BASTARD stands before us when we are our most vulnerable and STICKS A F*CKING KNIFE IN OUR EYES WHILE WE WEEP.
.

Rant over.
.

That is all.
.

  • Daniel Morton

    That is perhaps true. Nevertheless, instead settling for status quo and saying “bad things happen, thus collectively we cant be held responsible” i offer a solution. Because the 2nd Amendment has been incorporated by the States with McDonald v. Chicago, the 14th Amendment Due Process Clause applies. Thus, there is no due process and 2nd Amendment violation if one is given due process of law. So, I would suggest that prospective gun owners should have a hearing from a detached and neutral magistrate along with a forensic psychologist and the your lawyer present in order to obtain a weapon. The higher the caliber, range, fire capacity, etc of the weapon the more scrutiny is placed on the individual for wanting to obtain such a weapon. This fully comports with Constitutional provisions and jurisprudence and is likely to prevent people with either (a) history of mental health disorders that would impair the usage of a gun, and (b) look at the “totality of the circumstances” – i.e. family life, childhood, etc to establish whether or not someone is fit to own such a weapon on a sliding scale of reasonableness.

  • Daniel Morton

    That is perhaps true. Nevertheless, instead settling for status quo and saying “bad things happen, thus collectively we cant be held responsible” i offer a solution. Because the 2nd Amendment has been incorporated by the States with McDonald v. Chicago, the 14th Amendment Due Process Clause applies. Thus, there is no due process and 2nd Amendment violation if one is given due process of law. So, I would suggest that prospective gun owners should have a hearing from a detached and neutral magistrate along with a forensic psychologist and the your lawyer present in order to obtain a weapon. The higher the caliber, range, fire capacity, etc of the weapon the more scrutiny is placed on the individual for wanting to obtain such a weapon. This fully comports with Constitutional provisions and jurisprudence and is likely to prevent people with either (a) history of mental health disorders that would impair the usage of a gun, and (b) look at the “totality of the circumstances” – i.e. family life, childhood, etc to establish whether or not someone is fit to own such a weapon on a sliding scale of reasonableness.