BIDEN AND GUN GRABBING LIBERALS TELL LIE AFTER LIE!

 Submitted by: Joseph Grisafi Jr

"Many of the 26 previous shootings involved disputes between students in parking lots, or after athletic events, and all of them resulted in one or zero deaths."

"Obviously, 13 incidents in the last 56 years is a very different statistic than 27 incidents in the last few months. The two figures are so far apart because they measure separate things. One-off gun incidents are a serious problem in the U.S., and those taking place at schools are no exception. Mass casualty events, on the other hand, constitute less than 1 percent of all gun deaths. Suicides and non–mass-casualty murders—usually carried out with handguns rather than assault rifles—constitute the overwhelming majority of gun crimes."

"Given the sheer horror of the violence in Uvalde this week, it’s understandable that the public is interested in ensuring that such a thing never happens again. But for the policy debate to be fruitful, people need to understand the actual contours of the problem."

There is a difference but as mentioned they are all tragic. But let's not mix apple's and orange's. Let's keep the story AND THE TRUTH straight. 

Joe

[https://heartlanddailynews.com/2022/05/there-have-been-13-mass-school-shootings-since-1966-not-27-this-year/]  

There Have Been 13 Mass School Shootings Since 1966, Not 27 This Year

Heartland Author

May 31, 2022

Don’t conflate mass shootings with school shootings.

For many people, the Uvalde, Texas, mass shooting—which claimed the lives of at least 19 children and two adults—seemed all the more horrible after they learned it was the 27th school shooting so far this year. That fact makes it harder to view Uvalde as any kind of isolated incident.

An NPR article highlighting this statistic has been shared frequently on social media. The headline, “27 school shootings have taken place so far this year,” probably gave many readers the impression that gun-related killings in schools have been especially high this year, even before Uvalde. Naturally, the prospect of 26 other previously unnoticed mass shooting events in schools should provoke alarm. It should also raise eyebrows.

The problem here is that three very differently defined terms are being used somewhat incautiously and interchangeably: school shooting, mass shooting, and mass school shooting. Uvalde was a mass school shooting; the 26 previous tragedies at schools this year were not.

The difference is significant. Education Week, which tracks all school shootings, defines them as incidents in which a person other than the suspect suffers a bullet wound on school property. Many of the 26 previous shootings involved disputes between students in parking lots, or after athletic events, and all of them resulted in one or zero deaths. These deaths are still incredibly tragic, of course. But they are fundamentally unlike what happened in Uvalde.   ....   

This article is so full of holes I can drive a truck through it. It's confusing as hell. What case are they arguing? It only mentions something about NY, but no case is mentioned. I didn't see it.

It just sounds like the court will make law from the bench. And they know they can't do that. But hell, no one pays attention to the law any more.

The highlight is from the article:

“I do think that this case will, more than Heller did, tell us what forms of gun regulation are constitutional and why,” he said. (Bunk. Does the 2A say anything about this? No, it does not. If the SC does this they will be writing law from the bench. Joe)

Applicants for concealed carry licenses in the state of New York are required to be able to show that they have some type of special need for the license other than just for basic self-defense. (Bunk. All unconstitutional. Joe)

New York’s strict licensing requirements have made the state one of eight states in total, along with the District of Columbia, that gives license officials wide discretion to make their own decisions in this area. (Of course. They write their own law depending how they feel. Joe)

Despite the Biden administration’s arguments for the law, the conservative majority on the high court appeared skeptical that the law passes constitutional muster. (If the SC truly mean what they say and how they feel they would bring back the 2A as it was originally intended. We know this won't happen. It's just more laws on top of more laws on top of more laws. All the laws that can be rescinded. Joe)

“At least until now, the scope of gun regulation has been primarily a question for politics and we decide collectively the degree and the ways in which we want to regulate,” Blocher told The Hill. (What the shit does this mean? Holy crap. "...we want to regulate." If you think this will change you're dreaming. I won't go into it. It's BULLSHIT. Joe)

“The Second Amendment puts some outside limits on that, but the Supreme Court has repeatedly reiterated that the Second Amendment permits various forms of gun regulation, and in the [New York] case, the court seems likely to restrict the available policy space, so we will probably have fewer options,” he added. (What a bunch of BULLSHIT.  "...various forms of gun regulation..." Really??? It does?  Please explain. So I guess you're allowed this one but not that one. Joe)