SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
Mass Shooting at Video Game Tournament in Jacksonville Leaves Multiple Dead:
Multiple people were killed in a mass shooting during a video game tournament at a shopping and dining complex in downtown Jacksonville, Florida, the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office said Sunday afternoon. Preliminary reports say four people were killed of the 11 people who were shot at the Jacksonville Landing, according to a law enforcement official briefed on the incident.
The Jacksonville Sheriff's Office said on Twitter there were "multiple" fatalities and "many" transported to hospitals. One suspect was dead at the scene, the Sheriff's Office said, and it was not known if there was another suspect.
Memorial Hospital in Jacksonville, Florida is treating at least three patients that were involved in the gaming shooting incident, Hospital spokesman Pete Moberg tells CNN. All of the patients are in stable condition, Moberg says.
Live Updates: Shooting at Madden tournament in Jacksonville.
The shooting occurred at the Jacksonville Landing complex during a qualifying event for the Madden 19 Tournament at the GLHF Game Bar, according to the Twitter [feed] of CompLexity Gaming, one of the gaming teams.
Also at: NY Daily News and Fox News.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 27 2018, @01:59PM (3 children)
I disagree.
If you read the 2nd, and then read the respective federal codes on malitias and firearms regulations, it is quite clear that there are practical ways to implement a certain degree of gun control within the constraints of the 2nd amendment. And while I could enumerate those approaches I won't because, sod off read it yourself.
I believe that those of congress on both sides who've gone down this road never suggest any of those approaches because; while it would reduce the number of deaths; it would also lend credence to the fact that the 2nd amendment serves a legitimate purpose. And keeping the people in a perpetual ignorance about their constitutional rights, is much more important to congress than a bunch of kids having their guts splattered all over the walls of some school.
It can be done. It can't be done the way the memes and propaganda say it should be done. Which is to say, that the popular dogma on gun control exists, in order to prevent gun control from ever existing. The issue is approached by congress and the corporate media interests whom they serve, in a way that is maximally confounding. The simplest interpretation of the facts, is that this is by design.
Fundamentalist dogma is misdirection. Fundamentalism, is being suckered by that dogma.
(Score: 1, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 27 2018, @02:59PM (1 child)
I did read the second amendment, which speaks of "the right of the people." While it also mentions a well-regulated militia, that is just one reason the right to bear arms is important, and was not intended to be a limitation upon it. I am therefore unconvinced that any level of gun control would be Constitutional, despite what courts may argue. Even Scalia was wrong.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday August 27 2018, @04:36PM
The federal code does define "militia". Incidentally that definition doesn't include women. Which is to say under federal statutory law, women have no second amendment rights. Why feminists don't about that I will never know. While it may not be enforced that way, that is how the law is written. And the dictionary act and then SCOTUS defined "people" as meaning "corporations", and apparently their respective multinational fiduciary interests. So if a foreigner incorporates in the U.S. they probably have more right to bare arms than a woman citizen under federal statutory law. Again, how it is written, not how it is enforced.
My point is that nobody is articulating either the problem or the solution, and that credibility of statutory or bench law on this matter is far from sacrosanct. Generally I'm with you, that the smaller risk is with a fully open system. That isn't to say that there isn't a lawful way to implement gun control intelligently. But such a way will never happen, because congress doesn't want it to happen. They want to use the issue to forment disruption. Which is why all you hear is a din of fundamentalist twaddle, with both parties conspiring to mine their half of the dupes for every sent they can get.
If you aren't considering third parties, then you aren't considering a two party system.
(Score: 2) by takyon on Monday August 27 2018, @07:01PM
For some reason I forgot to mention the black market in my comment. That aside:
Interpretation of the Constitution is always subject to change. It means whatever 5 Supreme Court Justices decides it means.
Meanwhile, we have a large number of people in the U.S. that will violate what they see as oppressive gun control laws, followed by some kind of insurrection if the government tries to take their guns away.
As it stands, people can sell/trade firearms privately, make their own firearms from scratch or from partially carved components, and build up their own arsenal, as long as they have some money. There is little interest in stopping them.
Gun control may prevent some of the stupider kids and mentally disturbed individuals from picking up a gun. Then again, the Drug War hasn't been such a success. All that is needed is a cheap handgun and some bullets in order to replicate what was seen on Sunday. If a 24-year-old liquidates their meager assets, they should be able to afford a weapon, one-way bus ticket, etc.
[SIG] 10/28/2017: Soylent Upgrade v14 [soylentnews.org]