Police confirmed: there were one or more shots fired a teacher was arrested it was in a school You paint the pro NRA narrative. A statement was released by Dalton City Schools: "In response to a threat lock down at Dalton High School, students are being relocated to the Northwest Georgia Trade and Convention Center at 2211 Dug Gap Battle Road. Parents and guardians should pick up their students at that location. DO NOT go to Dalton High School. Dalton Police Department has confirmed that a subject is in custody and no children have been injured. The area has been secured. DPD and Georgia State Patrol are responding. Student safety is always our first priority. Please be patient with us as we implement our emergency plan in conjunction with the Dalton Police Department."
Again, as I said, you know nothing other than supposedly it was a teacher who was arrested, that shots were fired and no one was hurt. That's it. But you immediately make the leap of logic that teachers shouldn't have guns just based on one incident with a brief flash of supposed facts. Someone is painting a narrative, alright. I'm just not sure it is who you think it is.
We can almost on a daily basis show new shootings in schools. Shooting of the day is: https://www.cbsnews.com/news/centra...ots-fired-says-suspect-at-large-live-updates/
So, just to summarize: Federal or State laws prohibiting a 20-year old -without criminal or mental health issues- from owning a long rifle or other firearm are a flat-out violation of the 2nd Amendment. Acknowledging the argument that this would be legal in Canada but also acknowledging the little fact that the United States of America is not Canada.
“Like most rights, the right secured by the Second Amendment is not unlimited…” It is “… not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” “Nothing in our opinion 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, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.” “We also recognize another important limitation on the right to keep and carry arms. Miller (an earlier case) said, as we have explained, that the sorts of weapons protected were those “in common use at the time.” We think that limitation is fairly supported by the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of ‘dangerous and unusual weapons.’” - Antonin Scalia, D.C. v. Heller
Certainly when it comes to constitutional rights, conservative justices have always acknowledged that there can be limitations......and the lefties seize upon that language and therefore assume that anything can therefore be implemented and is open for discussion. NO. Conservative constitutionalist justices have always distinguished between reasonable limitations and AN ACTUAL TAKING AWAY OF RIGHTS WHERE INTENDED BY THE CONSTITUTION. To deny a fully competent, non-criminal adult of age 20 the right to own a basic firearm is not a limitation. It is an actual taking away of the fundamental right itself intended by the Framers. The Revolution was fought by many men less than 21, society was made up of men less than 21 who had families, the dangerous frontier lands were comprised of many men less than twenty one who needed to hunt for food, protect against savages, and protect their communities. The notion that the Framers did not intend fully grown adults to have the most basic of firearms- a rifle- is absurd. Arguments can be made that more modern advanced weapons were not necessarily protected but that is a different argument. What is being talked about is the prohibiting a basic rifle. No. Don't try to put words into Scalia's mouth on that one. The banning of possession and/or purchase of a rifle of any kind- without even getting to clip size, bumpstock stuff- is a taking away of the full right by an adult. Not a just "limitation." That right is guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment.
Actually, no you didn't. The British and Russians stopped the Germans in WW2 and the US and other allies joined in eventually. The US in particular was a late entry in that war.
When did the Brits and Canadians show up to help us with the Japanese? Nevermind. Thanks for nothing. We were late to winning your war for you and then had to fight another one at the same time mostly by ourselves. Oh, and not to forget, that was the SECOND time that century we had stopped the Germans in a European war that your ilk was unable to contain.