Does a bear defecate in the woods?
Of course. But that’s the MO of the left. The reason is because the left, the progressives, the modern liberals believe that they are on the “side of history”. That’s the very definition of progressivism after all.
Unfortunately, it’s not reality. To understand history, that is to say reality, one must be a conservative, not in the modern American “neoconservative” or “exceptionalist” sense (or even in the Reaganite sense) but in the Burkean, traditionalist (dare I say it?), Christian sense.
Thomas Sowell said it best. Conservatives have a “constrained” view of human nature. Christians do as well: after all, we believe in the Fall. Progressives unfortunately are blinded to this reality. And because they’ve given up on Christianity, they’ve come up with another religion and it’s called progressivism whose central tenet is egalitarianism. Unfortunately, it’s based on magical thinking —not reality.
There are several other problems with adhering to this delusional doctrine. During the Obama Administration, the Dept of Education came up with a new tactic to try and “uplift” the most violent and disruptive students. It was called the “Promise Program” and it worked like this: rather than discipline them (whether by suspension, expulsion or even calling the police) they instructed teachers to downplay any disruptive behavior. If the disruption was violent or threatening enough to call the police, the police were instructed to de-escalate the situation and not arrest the student. This was done to paint a rosier picture of the ugly reality of inner-city public education. This is an example of the old adage that “figures don’t lie but liars figure”. (Another example of this is with the FBI’s crime statistics wherein whites and Hispanics are lumped into the same category in order to elevate the criminal incidents associated with whites. Bet you didn’t know that!)
So, where was I? In the vlog below, I’m going to offer my thoughts on the Parkland shooting, quoting mostly from a writer named Kurt Schlichter (link below). I’ll intersperse it with my own thoughts and of course I’d appreciate your comments.
The political takeaway from this current tumult is basically this: the Democrats are way overplaying their hand. They think that they got the mid-terms in the bag and it’s only a matter of time before Trump is impeached and then removed from office.
Their stupidity is astounding if you ask me. For one thing, they’ve allowed a seventeen-year-old kid to be there spokesman. Look, I understand –he’s a survivor of a mass shooting. But he’s still a snot-nosed little kid. His life experiences cannot fill a thimble. Just because he’s well-spoken doesn’t mean diddly-squat. He’s also a vapid, ill-educated snot-nosed little kid who doesn’t know the first thing about American history. Now the anchorettes on MSNBCNN may be fawning over him, but they always fawn over soy-boys, cucks and other effeminate men all the time. (For their *ahem* extracurricular activities they prefer more masculine men.)
Secondly, they put too much faith in the polls. So did President Hillary Clinton and the fawning, sycophantic Corporate Media. How did that work out? There is a “hidden” Trump vote. Some political analysts put it at 5 percent. So in other words, if the RealClearPolitics average is 48 percent, then add another 5 points to that. That’s the real number. And if a president is over 50 percent on election day, his party remains in power.
Thirdly –and most importantly–the mask that the left has traditionally worn come election time has been taken off. And the face behind it isn’t a pretty one. In fact, it’s damned ugly. It’s the same face that ordinary Russians saw when they were interrogated at the Lyubyanka Prison. “You’re going to take my what away? And then when the time comes that I need one the local sheriff is sitting in his squad car with his thumb up his ass? I don’t think so.”
Meanwhile, real people are taking a look at the lay of the land and don’t like what they see on the horizon. No sirree, Bob, not one single bit. And AR-15s are flying off the shelves at most sporting goods stores. So is ammunition. The gun shows are packed. And voter registration drives are going on at these shows. The NRA is seeing a record number of applications.
Oh sure, the majority of normal, everyday Americans aren’t actually talking about any of this or announcing what they’re doing. But they’re still doing it. And if these trends will continue, the GOP, which traditionally stands to lose seats in the House is looking to actually remain in power.
Why? Because the left is overplaying their hand. That’s why.
https://townhall.com/columnists/kurtschlichter/2018/03/01/they-dont-hate-the-nra-they-hate-you-n2455264
https://townhall.com/columnists/anncoulter/2018/02/28/the-schooltomassmurder-pipeline-n2455793
You have to take a backseat to a snot-nosed 17 year old if you’ve never had a gun put in your ear by some stupid, and not necessarily crazy, person.
Alitheia, there were a lot of snot-nosed kids storming Omaha Beach but they weren’t of the precious snowflake variety that is the adolescent we’re talking about. Truth be told, pubescent boys were marching off into battle along with older men, playing the fife and drum for millennia. Not one of those boys felt they had the wisdom to comment in the presence of their elders as they met around the hearth to discuss important matters. Not until they themselves had taken a wife, sired children and made a gainful living for themselves would they even consider themselves to be men.
And a mature political party, especially the oldest one in the world, would never take advice from any teenager, no matter how traumatized he was.
Then there’s this from –believe it or not–The Washington Post, which is the establishment paper. It may be that even some liberals are waking up to the fact that the NRA (or the AR-15) is not the enemy.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/attacking-the-nra-is-really-attacking-everyday-americans/2018/02/27/915c8c74-1be8-11e8-9de1-147dd2df3829_story.html?utm_term=.bf003703ac4a
It was written by Marc Thiessen a #nevertrumper.
I found it on Instanpundit.com, under the heading “Get Woke, Go Broke”.
The upshot of this article by Thiessen is that the hero that stopped the San Antonio massacre several months ago did so with an AR-15.
He was invited to the SOTU by Henry Cuellar (D-TX).
http://time.com/5176471/national-rifle-association-membership-florida-shooting/
“An armed society is a polite society. Manners are good when one may have to back up his acts with his life.” – Robert Heinlein
Honestly I remain suspicious about this whole thing. I don’t usually dabble in conspiracy theories, but it’s quite interesting how this Hogg kid and others had their demands so well put-together, and all kinds of media appearances lined up, before the bodies were even cold.
Reports of multiple shooters, reports of shooters dressed in tactical gear, reports of students talking with Cruz at the time the shooting started, the police standing down, the building being torn down…I don’t know, there is a lot of strangeness about the situation. A lot of it is just a little too convenient.
I don’t know how to make the impression that I am a person who, for five days a week, twice a day, sits in a room with men who have done time in state prison – and I mean serious time, often 10-15 consecutive years – for a crime involving a fire arm. And much more significant is the fact that their crime almost always involved an innocent victim(s). I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve heard the same story: “I didn’t mean for anything to happen. I’m not that kind of person.” But methamphetamine and several of the know characteristics of “criminal thinking” – impatience, fundamental lack of consideration of the consequences (or “lack of planning”), and the feeling of imperviousness to capture – motivates them to bring along a weapon to “motivate” the victim and reduce resistance: “I just show the gun, people freeze and shut up.” And that is until they don’t. A good number of these men weren’t actually in possession of the firearm themselves, or may not have even known that an accomplice was in possession; according to the law, that is insignificant. What they tell – and what they demonstrate as living proof – is that firearms are freely available if you want them. And if you attempt to offer me “evidence” to contrary, you and the NRA, and all your conspiracy theories, and WWII hero stories, and all the other heroics of stopped mass killings with AR-15’s, and “good manners in an armed society” are bullshit, and I invite you to come visit me – as I have for a number of reasons – to hear it from the mouths of criminals who laugh at your stupidity.
Members of the Sureños, Crips, and Nuestra Familia have openly told me of committing murder with handguns that “appeared and disappeared” within the hour; pleaded guilty to “assault with a dangerous weapon” because there was not enough evidence to convict them for anything else; served 18-months of a 5-year sentence because of overcrowing with 5-years on parole; and brag about the murder(s) because they can’t be tried again. They all seem to have photos of themselves with assorted firearms and brag about getting fired up on meth and spraying homes they’ve been “told” – but not verified – are places enemies live. They all speak of weapons in sexual terms, but so many tell me they can hardly resist the urge at times to put the gun to their own head. This is the everyday reality of the lack of some measure of gun control in the United States.
I say again, to somehow frame all of this weapon talk, and that the protection of these “rights” – defended by the barest of anecdote – are ultimately greater than the harm inflicted upon the innocent and is something “well-pleasing” to our God is fantasy and outright shameful. Dean Alexander Webster, of the Holy Trinity Seminary in Jordanville, NY, ROCOR, has addressed these & analogous issues prolifically and should be read by anyone who believes these ridiculous ideas.
Michael S., the fact that guns are readily available is evidence that no gun law in and of itself will do anything to stop criminals from getting guns. “Gun Courage” will always exist in a population that has the attributes you describe as “criminal thinking”. So, why punish the folks that are actually in more possession of themselves as if we are criminals? Such laws tend to make more folks more criminally minded, IMO.
From a community health stand point I can tell you what my father, one of the most successful and creative local health officers ever, would have done. He would have more education programs on guns, what they are, how they work, how to handle them safely as well as how to respond when being threatened with a gun. At the same time doing what he could to address the underlying needs of the folks who are addicts, etc. Prevention was his focus. Always on his list as a top priority was teaching literacy, encouraging competency and the care of one’s self, one’s family and one’s immediate environment.
For my dad, everything was a public health question. He once, briefly, had the city building code within his department. Instead of simply condemning buildings or citing landlords, etc. He used his resources to educate the folks in the homes on how to do basic maintenance while encouraging the building owners to the benefits of maintaining their buildings. Working to build and maintain community pride from within the community. He also and got those who lived in apartments the tools a materials to do it if necessary. Not complicated stuff, but the simple stuff. It was working, but the city fathers were in love with “urban renewal” . This was back in the 1950’s mind you. He was not only preaching but working on maintaining affordable housing back then.
Laws alone do nothing but create criminals. The less health we have as a culture and society the more laws proliferate. As my dad understood it is the homes, the families and the human interaction that really matter.
In this ideological, nihilist age however, power is all that matters. Power to “change the world” and other such dehumanizing agendas. Education is not about learning, it is about promoting the “right” ideology and about control. Of course guns will be used by those who feel powerless.
How much power will be necessary to stop them?
Of course it is a false dichotomy. But nihilism loves binary thinking which my brother you seem to be falling into yourself. But, I could be wrong.
It certainly was not my intention in the least to speak to matters of the law or anything of the kind. My intention was to abhor this notion that “bullets reach their intended mark at the will of God Himself”; that the concepts themselves of courage, bravery, stamina, even masculinity & whatever we now foolishly consider “manliness” are intrinsically tied to weaponry, rather than character; that the notions of martyrdom, passivity, gentleness, meekness, and “turning the other cheek” are mocked as characteristic of “snowflakes,” queers, faggots, homosexuals, weak & untrustworthy characters we begrudgingly refer to as “men,” despite the fact they characterize our Lord God and Savior, who in the end will ride through the nations in the blood-stained garments of wrath, judgement, and as vindicator of his people. I was writing about the complete hypocrisy of Orthodox Christians who fill page after page of “conspiracy theories” and political bullshit at the expense of children who lie cold at the feet of their parents, all for what? Supposedly “draining the swamp of immorality?” This a complete lie. Politicians and political parities and movements will return our society to morality? How stupid can we be?
And me engage in nihilistic binary thinking? As if I am a Democratic and a liberal? And my gangstas want power? Seriously? They want you to shut the f*** up and give up your watch & wallet. They get high and start all over. That’s about the extent of it. And finally, when they have sold off all their possessions and are ashamed for selling the grandmother’s wedding ring, they may turn to somebody like me. And I won’t live forever, ’cause I won’t carry a gun. I literally want to vomit.
Michael S. Forgive me.
So here’s a thought. Bring back the Asylums!
No where in our debates, or in media or political staged debates, are there any discussions about bringing back government backed mental health hospitals. Napa State asylum was notorious and historic. Growing up as kids we used to joke about getting sent to Napa. Even then, but really now, it’s serious business, and most are gone. It could have a role in reducing future mass shootings, but equally important it would help hundreds of thousands of mentally ill citizens, especially those with no one to care for them.
Back in the eighties, when most government mental health hospitals were closed, many mentally ill patients, became mentally ill homeless citizens, or jailed. A nation as rich as ours, which wastes so much money abroad, can’t seem to find a budget for our mentally ill citizens?
Currently government mental hospitals have only about 50,000 people housed, this is only about ten percent of what we had sixty years ago, and our US population has doubled since then. With the doubling of the US population, this means a 95% decline in mentally ill, hospitalized citizens. I imagine there are a lot more crazy people now than then. These numbers are so wrong in so many ways, and must be reversed in my opinion.
It is time to open them up again, treat and document our mentally ill citizens. Then we can begin documenting mentally ill citizens on a federal data bank so that they will not obtain firearms legally. Of course that begins with enforcing laws, procedures, and ending citizen to citizen firearms sales without proper background checks, done by licensed gun shops. Might put a strain on gun shows, but if all that can prevent even half of our mentally ill shooting sprees, I’m all for it.
“The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.” Thomas Jefferson. “If you live each day as it was your last, someday you’ll most certainly be right” Steve Jobs. What all these newcomers ain’t be understanding is that violence combats control freakery. It discourages officials from grandiose schemes. It makes public servants behave humbly, unlike these transit workers who think it assaulting them is a felony it is ok for them to drop you off on top of a pile of garbage or even to ignore you waiting while they lobby to congestion price you out of your car and further into their web of control. Entrepreneurs would think too much about tomorrow will never take risks today. They would do great things today instead of worry about effete “healthcare” and “occupational safety”! It is the constant death and creative destruction which makes America masculinity great, which ends the ties to the old world which divide us and which makes us worry about what really matters.
From an Orthodox Christian perspective, the answer is clear enough.: no guns.
However, seeing as the topic is not confined just to Orthodox Christian thinking (unfortunately) allow me to speak more like another.
In all of this there’s also the fact that these particular kinds of gun crimes are really a modern-American problem. No other place on earth suffers so much in this way. Does this, then, leave room for asking whether guns or America are the real problem?
Actually, I think it does; and more to the point: I have my answer. But this question will never be raised in any meaningful way; and if it ever was, it would never be matched by the investigation that followed; and what results is the call for the banning of guns, as though bandaging the affects can heal the cause. Seriously, what is it about modern-America that sees it so far ahead (in public shootings) of other developed nations, which also more or less share its values and lifestyle?
Having missed my chance to delete my first post above, I’ll have to be content with contradicting it and saying that it’s a worthless point I’ve raised.
Stefan, if you take these four or five cities out of the equation: Chicago, New Orleans, Detroit, Baltimore, Oakland, etc. then the murder rate of the US approaches that of Belgium.
In other words, the heavily armed Red States are a comparative paradise of Leave It To Beaver style happiness. (Except of course Blue cities within Red states such as Omaha. This works the other way as well with Red counties within Blue states: the Inland Empire of California is decent but LA is a hellhole.)
Ridiculous assertions. Don’t you hail from Tulsa?
Tulsa, with a population of ~400,000 and 82 recorded homicides in 2016? Which would give it a homicide per 100,000 rate of 20.5. Comparing to Belgium which is at, 1.9. I guess you’ll No True Scotsman Tulsa next.
So not only are you living in a spot that has a murder rate more than ten times Belgium, but on a raw numbers level, one small midwestern US city reaches over a third of the body count for an entire major western European country.
But go ahead, disparage literally anyplace in western Europe as a hellhole from the Mad Max environment where you actually live.
And even your California example is baloney, although it pales in comparison.
Nate, it’s good to have you back! And as usual, you compare apples to oranges.
Regarding Tulsa: we have (for us) a growing and worrisome homicide rate. That’s thanks to all the “vibrancy” and “diversity” that the evil globalists insist is good for us. I.E. illegal immigration. The only silver lining to this is that the overwhelming majority of those murders are perpetrated against and within those communities. Kind of like Chicago.
Still, even with Tulsa’s increasing murder rate you pull a Snopes and cherry-pick the numbers which best suits you. The Greater Tulsa area approaches one million in population; you simply cannot divide up Tulsa from its suburbs as they bleed into each other.
When time permits, I’m going to write a thought-piece on the homicide rates of Blue-ruled America vs Red-state America. This will be an uncomfortable piece in that it will state some uncomfortable facts about the demographic makeup of post-1965 America (when among other things, the immigration flood-gates were opened).
I could be wrong, but is not Belgium a much more homogeneous population than anywhere in the United States? I am ignorant of the facts on that but that is my impression.
Not really, it’s a kingdom hastily cobbled together by merging two antagonistic ethnic groups: the Walloons and the Flemings. Switzerland is likewise not homogeneous but it’s three ethnicities (Italians, French and Germans) live in extremely homogeneous, quasi-autonomous cantons.
As for Iceland, it’s extremely homogeneous, being an off-shoot of 10th century AD Norwegian culture.
Thank you George, but both Belgium and Switzerland have clear ethnic, cultural and political boundaries do they not? Here we have the situation where every “identity” must have a voice, a movement and rights. There is no commonality in anything.
Iceland just wants to kill those with Down’s Syndrome in the womb.
What would happen to murder rates in European countries and the US if abortion were included as well as it should be?
I am not comparing apples to oranges, I am merely pointing out that your core assertion is entirely false, and providing some context.
If one were going to come up with an example of a stereotype of a intellectually lazy and racist false assertion, one could hardly construct a better one that ‘take 5 US cities with a reputation for lots of murders and a high population of black people and posit that if you removed them from US murder statistics the US murder rate would look like Belgium’.
This is not even remotely true. As usual, while I know you believe it to be true, you don’t actually bother to check whether it is actually true before asserting it. Which would have taken you less than 5 minutes. The most offensive thing is that if you have any rudimentary knowledge of the subject you would know that assertion doesn’t even pass the smell test.
The numbers from 2015:
US homicide total 15,696
Chicago 468
Baltimore 344
Detroit 295
New Orleans 164
Oakland 93
Your five cities add up to…only about 8.6% of the total US homicides for the year. While that is without a question a significant percentage, it is nowhere near enough to significantly move the needle. It takes the per 100,000 ratio from 4.89 to 4.46, which is still way, way above 1.9.
Do you actually care that you repeatedly demonstrate that you are fundamentally untrustworthy in your assertions? It never seems like it.
Funny, you don’t seem to have a problem doing that with Oakland! I find it interesting that Oakland has a certain prominence in your mind, when, in fact, by the numbers and population, Oakland is only slightly more homicidal than Tulsa. I’m not “snopsing” or cherry-picking anything, just pointing out an inconvenient truth that lays bare your cognitive biases.
After your performance above, your readers should have a complete lack of confidence that you are capable of constructing a quality, accurate piece of work on the subject. You come across as wanting to peddle a fantasy that if you could just remove all non-white people from the equation, that even though America is swimming in guns it isn’t any more violent or murderous than western Europe. That isn’t going to work.
Nate, in time I will write about the homicide rate in the US and the demographic makeup of both murderer and victim. I will use the FBI stats for it.
Knowing a few policemen as I do, and knowing that Tulsa has not succumbed to the “Ferguson Effect” (as of yet) I know where they concentrate their efforts and where they do not.
The “Ferguson Effect” is no more a real thing than your false assertion about Chicago/Baltimore/Detroit/New Orleans/Oakland driving the overall US murder rate. I might add, I’ve already looked at raw FBI UCR data over the years, so I have some familiarity with what it is, what it covers, what it doesn’t cover, and its limitations.
You don’t know any cops, do you?
“You come across as wanting to peddle a fantasy that if you could just remove all non-white people from the equation, that even though America is swimming in guns it isn’t any more violent or murderous than western Europe. That isn’t going to work.”
That, actually, is the objective reality:
https://www.indy100.com/article/the-chart-that-shows-americas-shocking-murder-rate-compared-to-other-countries–bkAvfB5lwx
https://www.economist.com/blogs/graphicdetail/2015/04/daily-chart-16
The Economist graphic treats the two populations White America and Black America as if they were different countries and compares them with Europe. White America’s murder rate is slightly higher than Norway’s (2.5 v. 2.2, respectively). They found Black America’s to be comparable to Namibia’s, one of the twenty worst in the world.
It is willful blindness to rationalize away the obvious fact that race is the major variable.
The Economist data is flat out wrong in the case of Norway, I see data ranges of around 0.7 to 0.6 (and falling to a 44-year low in 2015, at 0.4).
2014 0.6 -37.78 %
2013 0.9 66.67 %
2012 0.5 -75.89 %
2011 2.2 279.66 %
2010 0.6 -1.67 %
2009 0.6 -15.49 %
2008 0.7 10.94 %
2007 0.6 -9.86 %
2006 0.7 0.00 %
2005 0.7 -8.97 %
2004 0.8 -30.36 %
2003 1.1
Oh, wait! There was one year where Norway’s homicide rate skyrocketed and it comes in at 2.2.
Because Anders Breivik more than tripled the homicide rate in 2011 for the entire country of Norway versus its running average from one solo white supremacist terrorist event.
That is, frankly, an inexcusable error by The Economist.
Which:
1) Makes the unknown methodology of the 2.5 figure for the US suspect, it’s easy to misuse or misapply the FBI tables.
2) If the US figure were accurate, would still make the US 4 to 6 times as homicidal as Norway.
3) I must add, while a different between a 5.0 and a 1.0 seem obviously significant, 3.0 versus 2.0 is also very significant! I would suggest that 50% more murders per 100,000 is, in fact a significant figure.
To sum up:
Even if you assign ‘white America’ a value of 2.5 (which might be accurate, it certainly passes a sniff test, but I’d guess it might be off by +/- 0.5/-0.2), this is still substantially higher than a Belgium at 1.9, and way higher than a France at 1.6, a Germany at 0.9, much less a Norway at 0.4.
Nate,
And compared to the “black America” rate, it is still miniscule. Whites here, guns or no guns, behave much more like whites in Western Europe. Blacks here behave more like blacks in Namibia, Somalia, etc.
Your trifling with the exact numbers on the white end. It’s the gulf between white and black that’s indicative.
In other words, the assertion I was making was accurate.
It is not remotely controversial that the homicide rate of black Americans is higher than white. I find it curious and telling that you focus exclusively on race as the differentiating feature without any other concern for mapping of socioeconomic factors. So, answer me these questions:
1) What percentage of the population of Russia qualifies as ‘white’
2) What is the homicide rate of Russia
3) Does Russia ‘behave more like blacks in Namibia, Somalia, etc’ (your words, not mine) than ‘white America’ much less western Europe?
News flash Mate: I live in America
The questions weren’t addressed to you, although you would be welcome to answer them (not holding my breath). Interesting that you are preemptively evading questions that weren’t even directed at you!
I will say this Nate (I meant to address you as Nate earlier, not as “Mate”, forgive me): the murder rates in Russia (which are high) are disproportionately higher in the Moslem provinces.
The fallacy you are engaging in would lead us to believe that the average Englishman, Welshman or Cornishman is hell-bent on raping women and young girls 24/7. This ignores the fact that the overwhelming majority of those “Englishmen, Welshmen or Cornishmen” who are doing the raping are not English (or British) at all. They are Moslem migrants from Pakistan.
We can parse this even further: the majority of social and criminal pathology in Britain is from the Sub-continent. That means that all those Hindustanis must be murderers and rapists. The reality is that the Hindustanis have almost completely assimilated into British society and not engaged in any criminal activity. In reality, it is the Pakistanis (who are Moslem) who engage in such activities.
Yay, a new set of ridiculous assertions from George Michalopulos!
At the end of the day, you aren’t going to be able to blame Russia’s homicide rate on Muslims, any more than you can pretend America’s homicide rate would be like western Europe if it weren’t for non-whites.
I have said nothing of the sort, nor have ‘engaged in fallacy’. Ironically, because of this, in your statement above, you are pretty much constructing a textbook strawman. Learn to take the L.
I never said it was a matter of race, but demographics. Monocultural, homogenous societies always tend to be “high trust” societies with far less criminality.
1) What percentage of the population of Russia qualifies as ‘white’
most of it is Russian and Ukrainian
2) What is the homicide rate of Russia
about 9.2 per 100K, considerably higher than the rest of white Europe
3) Does Russia ‘behave more like blacks in Namibia, Somalia, etc’ (your words, not mine) than ‘white America’ much less western Europe?
Even at their worst, after the decade of looting (the 1990’s), Russia’s homicide rate was only about 10 per 100K and has dropped since 2003. This is about half the rate of Namibia, etc. and substantially less than black America.
However Russia’s murder rate has been in flux for the last few decades. It used to be lower than that of the United States and was comparable to that of the United States up until the late 1980’s.
It’s definitely an American cultural issue. Every household in Switzerland is armed with assault rifles, due to the militia culture over there. Their gun crime is nothing like that of the United States and you don’t hear about mass shootings in Switzerland too often.
Something to mull over.
1) It is not every household, only a subset related to military service
2) https://www.swissinfo.ch/eng/soldiers-can-keep-guns-at-home-but-not-ammo/970614
Something to mull over: you don’t know what you’re talking about.
Anon: Historically the milita culture in the U.S began dying after the Civil War. It was kept alive on the frontier for awhile, but began to die out after that. Especially with the pressure by the KKK and others of their ilk to deny guns to the folks they hated. Add to that the gun violence spawned by Prohibition.
Slavery; Unchecked immigration; Prohibition; War on Drugs; Individualism/identity politics. All these and more play a role.
A great case for term limits on the Supreme Court: retired Justice John Paul Stevens wants to repeal the Second Amendment.
I beg, nay, I get on my knees exhorting, begging, prostrating all liberals to run on the repeal of the Second Amendment. I will write a $100 check to any Democrat who is bold enough to make this a part of his campaign platform. I will round up the money to get that little snot David Hogg to fly wherever and campaign for said candidate(s). Please God, please! Do this for me! I promise to be good!
This little snot is in for a big fall:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRi-UouACL8&feature=youtu.be&bpctr=1522244497
His body language is scary.
Well, George, you might get your wish. One of the top policy wonks, Greg Popovich, from the astute political think tank, the NBA, has come out in full support for the idea that ONLY repealing the Second Amendment will do any good. Shoot, would he agree to be Attorney General under Pres. Mark Cuban?
Cuban is an odds on favorite because you cannot find a bigger maverick and with Popovich to spur on the repeal, how could they loose? It would be a slam dunk wouldn’t it?