sunnyFair, 79.0°

Brock Masters

Comment history

fred_mertz (Brock Masters) says...

This I understand and agree with but not the statement that the Constitution supplies safety.

fred_mertz (Brock Masters) says...

It was a typo. Meant to say does not.

The ban does not ban all so-called assault weapons, but is limited to cosmetic features and some specific models. Criminals will ignore the ban and even if they did abide by it they will use a non-banned “assault” weapon.

Look the Deerfield ban up and tell me other than a symbolic act what sis they accomplish that will stop violence.

fred_mertz (Brock Masters) says...

I don’t understand your statement about the Constitution supplying safety. I don’t see safety mentioned in the Constitution. I see affirmation of rights of the people and limits on government but nothing about safety.

Many are calling for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment so we need to take it seriously.

A suburb of Chicago has made certain rifles illegal and have given residents 60 days to turn them in. This law did not to stop gun violence but unfairly seizes property without compensation. The joke about the law is it is intended to ban assault weapons but only bans certain models of AR 15,style weapons while keeping others almost identical ones legal.

fred_mertz (Brock Masters) says...

I am opposed to arming teachers so in that respect I agree with the LET writer, however he misstates the finding of Heller in regards to schools. Heller does affirm that firearms can be prohibited in schools, but Heller does not explicitly forbid weapons in schools as the LTE writer states. I pasted an excerpt below.

2. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court’s opinion should not 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. Miller’s holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those “in common use at the time” finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons. Pp. 54–56.

fred_mertz (Brock Masters) says...

No one is forcing teachers to carry guns or fine districts. You’re misinformed.

On Editorial: No guns in our schools

Posted 31 March 2018, 5:30 p.m. Suggest removal

fred_mertz (Brock Masters) says...

Your first sentence is spot on. I forget sometimes and try to have a reasonable discussion with him, but it isn’t possible fo the reason you stated.

fred_mertz (Brock Masters) says...

Interesting reads but not relevant.

On Opinion: Gun rights and common sense

Posted 31 March 2018, 10:07 a.m. Suggest removal

fred_mertz (Brock Masters) says...

Greg, this is the reason I post here. I don’t think my posts will change anyone’s mind, but instead I learn from others in not only what they offer, but in the challenges they make of my positions.

Your point about making everyone feel a part of the country resonated with me. It is one that is easily dismissed, but I think it is valid.

I agree with your suggestions on how to do it and here is my view on them. We do all these things for foreign countries so why not our own? Let’s invest in America. Let’s be proactive and help Americans stay out of prison. Let’s get them the access they need to mental health care.

Let’s get the schools back on track in terms of educating and not social engineering while providing the resources they need. Resource aren’t just books but providing meals for the children. They can’t learn if they are hungry.

Should taxpayers do this? No, it is the responsibility of the parents, but it isn’t getting done. So we can point fingers and say pull yourself by your own bootstrap or we can intervene and break the cycle of poverty and in doing so reduce violence.

It is an investment that will pay dividends for all.

Think about this...look at all the billions we spent fighting in Iraq and rebuilding their schools and infrastructure so why not here?

So we need to recognize that no matter how great America is there are those that have limited opportunity to achieve the dream because of to whom and where they were born. So yes let’s rebuild that sense of national pride by making America great for all Americans and instead of saying it is achievable for all without help from the rest of us.

But what do I know? I’m just a gun nut manipulated by the NRA LOL

On Opinion: Gun rights and common sense

Posted 30 March 2018, 3:20 p.m. Suggest removal

fred_mertz (Brock Masters) says...

Ken, so it isn’t military training that is needed, but appropriate training.

With that said, I still oppose teachers being armed to protect the students regardless of the training or whether they are ex-military.

Teachers should teach and we should invest in professional security to protect them.

On Opinion: Gun rights and common sense

Posted 30 March 2018, 1:48 p.m. Suggest removal

fred_mertz (Brock Masters) says...

Yes Steve, a minority of the population are responsible for the majority of the violence in the country. And yes, I classify people as subhuman when they murder men, women and children without remorse. I classify them as subhuman when they destroy and trash their own neighborhoods. Yes, I classify them as subhuman when businesses can only operate in their neighborhoods from behind bulletproof glass. Yes, you are subhuman if your actions necessitate the police accompanying fire fighters into your neighborhood to put out fires.

I think Nikolas Cruz, Dylan Roof, KKK members and others like them are subhuman. I think people who post wiping their butts with the American flag are subhuman.

On Opinion: Gun rights and common sense

Posted 30 March 2018, 12:51 p.m. Suggest removal

Full LJWorld.com site