Yesterday’s gun incident at Harrisburg High School was the third school shooting in South Dakota history. (Read about the other two, in 1961 and 2013, here.) We will have a media frenzy, then get back to business as usual. I invite your comment with these brief observations:
- Assistant principal Ryan Rollinger tackled the gunchild and stopped the attack. I will not conclude that the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good tackler…
- …but the instinct to tackle is less likely to miss the target and hit bystanders than the instinct to draw and shoot.
- Lennox teacher Michael Larson learned from a police officer at a coincidentally timed in-service yesterday that trained police officers hit their target 20% of the time.
- Lockdown procedures strike me as a bit too paranoid. One kid brings a gun, harms one person, is immediately subdued, and we lock down an entire building for hours. One student on Reddit claims that even kids on a field trip out of town were placed on lockdown. Do we respond to every shooting with the same drastic detention of a mass of innocent citizens? I suspect lockdown drills may be nearly as terrorizing as arming teachers.
- A football player in my classroom yesterday said lockdown-schmockdown: if he heard shots, he said he’d run for the emergency exit twenty feet from our classroom door. Now I’m trying to image tackling a football player to get him to obey a lockdown order.
- Harrisburg students are back in class today, as they should be. When we change our routine, when we cower in fear, the bad guys win.
But if Barney Fife had been there he could have emptied his gun. Shot up a bunch of property and maybe killed the kid. A lot of people prefer that kind of drama to what actually happened. Barney Fife would have been a hero getting an award, and the school gunslinger folks would be saying it’s proof every school needs a gunslinger. They’ll find a way to make that argument anyway.
Yes, as shown in Harrisburg and on a French train, the tackle is preferred method. Ride to the sound of the guns. The bastards can’t get us all.
Yes, we should never seek counsel of our fears. Yet, it is wise to seek counsel of past experience. For example, a reasonable lockdown makes sense. Law enforcement rushes to the site of reported violence. The LEOs have incomplete information, incomplete descriptions, are over-loaded with adrenaline (and most with testosterone), are armed to the teeth, and everyone is a suspect until proven otherwise. It’s not surprising innocents fleeing the violence are too often shot. The lockdown goals should include: 1) a temporary freezing of movement for threat and non-threat situational awareness (translation: allow the LEOs to get a reality grip on their adrenaline, testosterone, and suspicions); 2) ensure the perps are in custody or gone; & 3) a quick return to normal routine (like after a fire drill, yet appropriate with the circumstances – if the chemistry room burned down or deaths ensued likely classes are canceled for the day).
The above does not imply we need fear the LEOs. Rather it shows we need to fear and respect the emotionally charged ambiguity the LEOs are thrust into – to re-establish justice and normalcy. Most of the time, as apparently in Harrisburg, that takes minutes or less; yet in hostage situations it may require days.
Don’t forget the 1991 incident at Stevens High School in Rapid City.
http://madvilletimes.com/2013/01/remember-donald-kurtz-dont-bring-guns-to-school/
Scroll down to Donald Pay’s comment. He describes it well.
WR, can we count it as a shooting if no one got shot?
CH,
This is something that I found on the internet with regard to the merit of lockdowns, it makes sense to me. One additional thing that isn’t mentioned is protection from running to greater danger (think co-conspirator sniper on the hill or second shooter or secondary bomb or secondary source of fire). You hear it from real cops or fire fighters all the time talking about what is unrealistic about cop and fire fighter shows. They don’t go in “guns blazing” without assessing or when there is uncontrolled chaos.
https://www.guideone.com/safetyresources/schools/docs/lockdown.pdf
A school lockdown can serve several functions during an emergency, including the following:

• Removing students and teachers from the threat;
• Isolating the dangerous situation from much of the school;
• Allowing for an accurate accounting of students within each room; and
• Depending on the situation, facilitating an organized evacuation away from the dangerous area.
I was questioning why they sent the students home after it was all over. I get that they were more than likely upset, but why not let them stay in school and talk to counselors right away, if they thought they needed it. Probably not going to get any work done, but at least they would be in school. I’ve never been in that situation, but I don’t think it would be that helpful to me to not be at school with other people who went thru it too.
CH,
I would count it as a shooting. Several rounds were discharged so the threat was certainly real. I seem to recall that the student was sent to a residential treatment program in Colorado, had problems with the program and eventually died in a shootout with the police in a southern state (Georgia?).
This event IMHO was handled properly. No one hurt. Suppose we had the same situation with armed staff responding. I would guess a much different outcome. Remember a shotgun is a very effective weapon at close range.
Until we implement common sense gun control in America, these incidences will continue to happen. I was not shocked or surprised one bit when I heard the news. And just days after a parent of a Columbine victim came to speak at a peace rally in Sioux Falls. Notice NO ONE in the MSM is talking about the irony of that visit.
At least 10 dead, 20 wounded in shooting at community college in Oregon.
Not South Dakota, too. ~ Littleton, CO
So the answer to a person who violates the magical gun free Zone is to insist on more gun free Zones? But if Liberals are against cops? And there the only ones you think should carry a gun? Who will you call when your magical gun free zones are exploited by bad people who don’t drink the Kool aid?
How many gun control advocates have signs in their yards advertising their property is a gun free Zone? How many gun control advocates call 411 instead of 911 when their lives are threatened?
Lastly, compare “gun free” cities with strict gun laws in America to cities that respect citizens’ 2nd Amendment RIGHTS. Please, flee to Detroit, DC, Baltimore.. I’m SURE you will L-O-V-E their gun free cities.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yKmUd0zHW4w
Super Holbeck of HHS just said in a press conference he doesn’t want any other armed individuals in his schools accept the resource officer. He was very adamant about it. As he put it, you are not any more safe walking down the street then you are in a HS. Anybody can shoot you. The father of the son also told AP that his son has had a pistol for awhile and regularly target practices. He also said he completed a gun safety course. While I can understand allowing your children to go hunting, supervised with a parent and a shotgun, what parent in their right mind would allow their 16 year old a handgun? His father is divorced from his mother and Mason lives with her.
http://juanitajean.com/fun-with-guns-would-the-bad-guys-please-raise-their-hands-edition/
Here is your good guy with a gun,Disgusted. You should be after reading this.
I agree with Troy and John about the lock down being the right thing to do. I think you whiffed on that one Cory.
Rapid City Police Officer Matt Macrander shot and killed 46 year old Native American Patrick Lundstrom Tuesday night during a domestic dispute.
The recent rise in Rapid City murders are usually Native on Native and don’t involve guns.
The Lundstrom and Allan Locke were both killed by the Rapid City Police.
Sometimes I wonder if these murders were in retalliatin for the two officers killed a couple of years agao.
The 20% figure was explained and made a lot of sense. When you are training, you are able to be calm and relaxed. It makes targeting and decision making easy. When you are being shot at, the adrenaline will cause you to lose focus and aim will be off; especially if you are just trying to stay alive.
I am not opposed to an armed resource officer that goes through training, but as our trainer pointed out- unless you are a swat member or a member of a special forces unit, you probably could use more training. To say that 12 hours is enough training is bogus. It probably takes 12 hours a week to get proficient enough to handle it. The best way is to try and prevent it from happening in the first place. The second best way, if possible, is to act like the football player and get the hell away. If that is not possible, don’t be afraid to fight back.
I also disagree about the end of the class day. 1. The traumatic experience will make learning next to impossible. 2. While odds are low, there is always a chance that explosives were planted or other dangers and it is much easier to clear those dangers without students being there. 3. Give the school an opportunity to reset and reassess what to do next for the best of the students.
So? A law-abiding citizen should be disarmed and their 2nd Amendment Constitutional Right denied? But, a nonexistent Constitutional right to kill and unborn baby should be defended and made a cornerstone of political ideology?!
How’s that selling in SD?
I confess to having no solution to ending acts of domestic terror in schools and churches but coinciding with these murders is the Pabst Blue Ribbon Task Force looking at distance learning as a way to cut back on staffs while boosting salaries for teachers who would participate.
A foetus has no civil rights until the third trimester.
Does the Right want to end public education altogether then fund parochial and charter schools to become armed factories for engineers to build better weapons to sell to monarchies? Because that what i hear from militants like DD.
You what one of my biggest fears is? That a group who lost loved ones in Yemen or somewhere rolls a truck bomb into Rapid City Central after Ellsworth drone pilots wiped out a wedding party or a place of worship all while my home state is plundered for the 1%.
ok, those are two fears.
Larry Kurtz: the Liberal gift that just keeps on giving. Way to represent the Liberal Left, Larry..
DD, if you call a woman’s right to decide whether to allow anyone or anything to use her body “a nonexistent Constitutional right” then does this mean you disagree with the 1803 decision in Marbury v. Madison that our Supreme Court decides what the Constitution and laws of our land mean?
Isn’t a bit late to challenge that interpretation of our Constitution?
And given the fact that the Court has decided cases that you probably like, such as Citizens United, aren’t you being a bit selective and almost hypocritical in your argument? And since even the most conservative justices, such as Scalia, Thomas, Alito, Roberts and Kennedy all agree with the Marbury decision, aren’t you a bit of an outlier on this important legal principle?
I am a progressive Democrat, not a liberal and i plow the road.
BCB, So you continue to support the Democratic Party’s historic position that SCOTUS rulings on slavery were Constitutionally correct?!
I do NOT worship at the alter of SCOTUS, they have overstepped their Constitutional authority time and time again. They do not have the authority to legislate from the bench and I reject their repeated efforts to do so.
Still waiting for the explicit Constitutional rights (in the US Constitution) that you keep claiming. A link to that explicit section will suffice. While you are perusing it, cruise around to the 2nd Amendment that you liberals love to trample on.. then come back and lecture me again about supporting nonexistent Constitutional rights.
go for it, bat: i have chickens to feed.
So DD, do you agree with the SCOTUS Heller decision to ignore this part of the Second Amendment: “”A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State. . . . .”
It kind of looks like you really don’t like Article 3 of the Constitution. As for the SCOTUS decision in Dred Scott, are you aware that until the ratification of the 13th Amendment slaves were considered property? If the SCOTUS had ruled otherwise in Dred Scott, then the southern “states rights” folks would have gone ballistic just like the conservatives today who think the Constitution is a document that only supports their particular viewpoints on any issue.
When someone like the mid 19th century southerners wants their “property” protected they love the SCOTUS. But when the SCOTUS interprets the Constitution in a manner inconsistent with their personal ideology, they go crazy and call the Court illegitimate. This holds true today – compare Heller and Roe. Pick a lane.
So DD we should have more guns in school?
@Owen explain the liberal logic: Support and advocate the unwritten Constitutional right of a woman to kill her baby at all costs despite the fact that up to 70% of women undergo prenatal depression; however, militantly oppose a law-abiding citizen’s actual 2nd Amendment rights to be armed and which that law-abiding citizen could then defend the innocent lives of children in school.
Liberals screaming to respect a fictitious unwritten constitutional right to murder babies even as they scream to infringe on law-abiding citizen’s actual 2nd Amendment Constitutional rights..
And Democrats wonder why the average voter doesn’t get them.
P.S. BCB, etc.. Still waiting for that link to the explicit Constitutional right to murder a baby inuteri.
Since so many liberals believe it prudent to advertise that our schools are gun-free, How many gun control advocates have signs in their yards advertising their property is a gun free Zone? nobody in their right mind would do something stupid like that as it is almost a written invitation to be robbed. But it’s wise to put our children all in one spot with such a sign?!
Disgusting-do you work with/for James O’keefe or just use the convenient supplied talking points? http://www.beliefnet.com/columnists/watchwomanonthewall/2013/01/watch-hypocritical-anti-gun-journalists-squirm-over-gun-free-signs-in-their-yard.html
” up to 70% of women undergo prenatal depression”
That’s not true.
I wonder. Is DD really Sibson in disguise? All abortion all the time reminds me of Sibson.
@Deb I understand that pointing out that many women who are pregnant undergo some type of depression undermines your ideas that you are championing a woman’s right to kill their baby; however, the facts are that studys show that many women do http://m.huffpost.com/us/entry/1967991
And yes, women who have undergone abortions DO often regret it and many DO undergo depression and other mental health problems as a result of aborting their babies.
Hard to admit that you are doing them AND their babies a disservice.
The NRA National Convention and GOP National Convention are also Gun Free Zones…wonder what they are afraid of? Funny, but I never hear the 2nd Amendment zealots screaming about that.
Weird, you would think that all those good guys with guns would keep everyone safe.
Disgusted, if you are so opposed to abortion, I suggest you not have one.
Nobody is championing the right to kill babies except you goofballs with their mistaken beliefs that guns are the answer to all of societies ills. No one on here is pro abortion,unless it is you,Disgusted.
DD, since you will not engage on Article 3 (instead you dodge and try to deflect) you now seem to be simply trolling – I’m done. If you are interested in discussing the merits of the Marbury decision, I might get back in, but until then I feel I would only be talking to a noise machine.
But thanks for your arguments that gave me an opportunity to articulate a rational point of view in response explaining how our Constitution protects (rather than submits to the state) a woman’s right to decide who can use her body and when they can do so.
BCB, IOWA Mike, Deb, et al,
There’s a reason why you are so angry. Its a compensation issue. me? Calm as a cucumber, LMAO at some of the idiotic comments and knowing the general public sees the outrageous comments you make which further enforces their stereotypes of the Left. My calm demeanor? It comes from being in the right and holding the morale high ground. It is the same angry responses experienced when discussing God with people who claim not to believe in anything.
Getting angry because someone wont follow you down some idiotic rabbit hole BCB? Just plain desperation to change the subject of debate.
I do give you people credit, you are much more transparent than Obama’s administration turned out.. :-D
Peace out!
DD-you can’t spell moral high ground,let alone know WTF it means. You are a little pissant irritant,not as mean and irritable as you’d like to be,but keep at it.
Use of a firearm is not always the answer.
Training and teamwork is. Law enforcement working with schools, developing a plan, practicing that plan. Knowing what to do, and who is doing what.
Not every school needs an armed security guard, teacher or anyone else. That is up the local schools to decide for themselves.
IOWA Mike, you won the spelling debate with Autocorrect, congratulations! However, I continue to hold the MORAL high ground AND continue to win the debate on the 2nd Amendment AND prolife. As proof? Look at the last SD election results.
MC, I am concerned that you want to run as a Republican but seem to have a problem understanding that under the 2nd Amendment, a law-abiding citizen has a right to be armed wherever they go. I would encourage you to actually read the 2nd Amendment as well as SD’s Constitutional amendment on the right to be armed. If you can’t support them, then run as a Democrat.
DD, if you believe discussing Article 3 of the Constitution is “some idiotic rabbit hole,” this explains your confusion about how our system of government works.
As for being calm, I generally don’t see calm folks accusing people they don’t know anything about of being baby murderers, while at the same time extolling the virtues of unregulated gun ownership when that has recently resulted in the actual murders of 20 first graders:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sandy_Hook_Elementary_School_shooting
Pro-life indeed.
BCB, your obvious efforts to change the subject were telegraphed like one of the three stooges. But hey, I have 2 seconds to play your silly game.. Here it is https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articleiii please note that nothing in there gives them the ability to legislate from the bench. Legislative powers were all vested in Congress which was made the strongest of the three by the Founding Fathers as it was supposed to be the voice of the people: Read that here: https://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/articlei
I’ll play your other silly game.. Never called anyone a “baby killer.” But since you owned up to it. What is it that you call someone that kills a baby? Baby killer fits by the very definition of the act in question.
You DON’T want to play the let’s look at the political leanings of all the killers in American history game, vast majority had LEFT leaning and many were the hard core Left of your beliefs.
Here is a collection of cold, hard, facts about gun violence in the US. It’s from several sources and compiled by the Washington Post:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/06/18/11-essential-facts-about-guns-and-mass-shootings-in-the-united-states/?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_p1most
DD,
Okay, I’ll bite:
“It is emphatically the province and duty of the Judicial Department to say what the law is. Those who apply the rule to particular cases must, of necessity, expound and interpret that rule. If two laws conflict with each other, the Courts must decide on the operation of each. [p178]
So, if a law be in opposition to the Constitution, if both the law and the Constitution apply to a particular case, so that the Court must either decide that case conformably to the law, disregarding the Constitution, or conformably to the Constitution, disregarding the law, the Court must determine which of these conflicting rules governs the case. This is of the very essence of judicial duty.”
Marbury v. Madison, 5 U.S. 137, 177-78 (1803)
https://www.law.cornell.edu/supremecourt/text/5/137
And I am sure that as this relates to setting aside a state’s gun laws as in the Heller decision, you agree that the Court properly interpreted the Constitution to protect the right of ammosexuals to own and carry guns.
But if the Court decides a constitutional issue that you disagree with then, such as setting aside state abortion prohibitions in Roe v. Wade, you declare it to be without Constitutional authority to decide the issue, right?
Pick a lane pal.
“me? Calm as a cucumber, LMAO”
Are cucumbers calm as they laugh their as*es off, DD?
You seem to be unhinged. Grounds for a stop and frisk if you’re in public.
DD, you might want to review your comments at 2015-10-01 at 20:40 and 20:41 before making the incorrect claim that you “Never called anyone a “baby killer.” At 20:40 you stated: “Liberals screaming to respect a fictitious unwritten constitutional right to murder babies . . . .” That sounds a lot like calling liberals baby murderers.
Deb, thanks for that link – it adds to the factual information relative to the issue. Here is another link that suggests mass shootings are much more prevalent than we might realize:
http://shootingtracker.com/wiki/Main_Page
If you count the wounded among victims, rather than just the dead, we apparently have experienced more than one mass shooting a day:
“. . . the total of mass shootings this year — incidents where four or more people are killed or injured by gunfire — to 294.
There have been only 274 days this year. . . .”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonkblog/wp/2015/10/01/2015-274-days-294-mass-shootings-hundreds-dead/?wpmm=1&wpisrc=nl_p1most
You know that Americans were willing to repeal the 18th Amendment when we saw the problems it caused in America – why not repeal the 2nd Amendment?
I believe whole heartily in the entire Second Amendment. Not only do we have the right to keep and bear arms, we have the responsibility to defend ourselves, our neighbors, towns, state and nation.
Unlike other countries, military service is not compulsory. That does not relief anyone of their duty. Having a professional police force and a strong standing military, does not mean we can shirk our responsibility.
At one point I would have liked to have seen every person over the age of 16, non-felon, be required to own and maintain a long gun, with appropriate ammunition. Not a hand gun and not a firearm with a shorten barrel, rather a rifle. I would have also liked to have seen open carry not only legal but encouraged.
However, we have to realize the threat to our country is no longer from an army marching across our lands. The threat to our country is now economic, political, and electronic. None of these threats require the use of a firearm, rather the mind and hearts of those who truly embrace the idea of the United States Constitution. We no longer face a treat from external forces, we still face the treat of violence from within.
With all of that, IMHO, there are places and events that carrying a firearm should not allowed. Not every situation requires a Rambo approach. We don’t always need to in with all guns blazing every time there is an incident.
The key to dealing with these situations is identify the possible threats, then the appropriate agencies work to develop a plan to deal with the various situations. Then practice the plans, train, train, and train some more.
The School Sentinel (teacher/gunslinger) law is designed to give the school the option to have some teachers trained and armed to deal with armed attack on the school. Not every school needs to arm their teachers or other staff, however, every teacher, every staff member, every administrator should be trained in how to deal with these threats.
@DD; Does this mean I’m still a Republican?
Pick a lane, Clark.
America is indeed under attack: from Republicans. South Dakota’s GOP delegation wants to take guns from people with mental illnesses: that is a majority of the state’s population.
It’s time the “gun huggers” admit that their 2nd. amendment position is killing people. A collective self-esteem so low that it requires a .45 caliber penis extension just to feel like a “real man” is fueling mass murders at an alarming rate.
http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/the-second-amendment-is-a-gun-control-amendment
According to the many violent episodes by those on the Left (see above), it would appear that it would be proper to outlaw any of those on the Left from possessing a firearm. Oh wait? Most of these crimes occur already in the Left’s magical “gun free zones.”
@MC Its sounds like your going to fit right in with the double talking moderates that are already there. Please make sure you answer any gun rights questionnaires in that fashion, that you support someone’s 2nd Amendment BUT think it is totally okay to disarm them whenever you think they shouldn’t have those 2nd Amendment rights. Please post here all the circumstances when you and the Left’s “Gun Free Zones” have magically protected people.
The 2nd amendment and pro-life(oxymoron) weren’t on last year’s election ballots in SoDak. What was obvious was the overwhelming gerrymandered benefits nutjobs have in all South Dakota elections which gives them victories no matter how many less total votes they may receive. Killing others isn’t a normal pro-life activity,but with derangement syndrome wingnuts are known to have,I can see where you can delude yourself.
Imagine a world where Socialists were successful in banning guns and makes vast areas “gun free zones:” http://www.holocaustchronicle.org/holocaustappendices.html
@MC I’ll pass on the mushy moderates and the liberal Left deciding when it is safe for law-abiding citizens to exercise our 2nd Amendment RIGHT..
@IOWA Mike, please tell us more about SD elections from your perch so far away.. The same scenario plays out across SD in nearly every election. 2nd Amendment and abortion stances are 2 of the major criteria in SD elections. But you keep telling yourself that voter registration numbers continue to go South for Democrats because of Gerrymandering.. Its not the Left’s position on issues. But riddle me this IOWA, how do the Democrats go from controlling Congress AND the White House to this http://www.politifact.com/punditfact/statements/2015/jan/25/cokie-roberts/have-democrats-lost-900-seats-state-legislatures-o/ Did they Gerrymander themselves in every state?
Whiff perhaps, but I’m still uneasy about the whole lockdown concept. Here in Aberdeen, I learned that every room is now equipped with a five-gallon bucket and a roll of toilet paper, apparently inspired by a lockdown last year in Brookings that lasted for hours and left little kids trapped in the classrooms unable to go to the bathroom.
I hear in Oregon that students had their phones confiscated as police escorted them off campus. Explain to me again the public interest in seizing innocent bystanders’ property?
Or go back to the community-wide lockdown in Boston when police were pursuing the marathon bombers.
Dangerous and provocative as these school shootings and other instances of violence may be, my Libertarian instincts still jump at this choice of iron security over liberty. Are lockdowns (or even drug dog searches, when kids are essentially put in lockdown) really worth it?
But how can there be an overlap between people who will accept lockdowns and the Patriot Act police state but won’t accept gun control… or turning the mirror, how can there be people who dislike lockdowns but support stronger gun restrictions?
DD, your sense of history seems to be in the fact-free zone. After losing WW I Germany passed strict guns laws to avoid rebellion in its weakened state. By 1938, however, Nazis liberalized gun laws so that most everyone, except Jews, could own a gun:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_legislation_in_Germany
Meanwhile, perhaps you can imagine a world where reasonable regulations and a buyback program virtually stopped mass murders.
http://www.slate.com/blogs/crime/2012/12/16/gun_control_after_connecticut_shooting_could_australia_s_laws_provide_a.html
you’re right DD. abortion is an issue in South Dakota and the voters have spoken.
http://www.thenation.com/article/democracy-worked-sd-abortion-vote/
@Owen Remind me again, how many Democrats are there in the SD legislature that support abortion? Yes, Mr. Reitzel.. the voters have spoken. Remind me also, haven’t the laws restricting abortion since then increased about 10 fold? And haven’t voters elected more and more pro-life candidates? So, this appears to be a case of winning a small skirmish and losing the battle. But you keep telling yourself that you are “winning” by advocating for the killing of innocent babies in the womb.
@BCB Do you really want to play? Claiming Socialist Germany was a great example of gun rights?! Remember, the Nazis were inspired by Leftists’ ideas on eugenics, you know Margeret Sanger and her evil ilk. But the Left in USA has “evolved” from its racist past, right? Yet they still celebrate Sanger, and they still support aborting millions of minority babies every year.. Remind us all how great the ultimate Left government of Communism has benefited mankind. Remind us all of the deaths that can be attributed there.
PP did 337k abortions in 2014. Quite a far cry from millions,ain’t it Disgusting? Over Dramatize much?
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2015/jan/1/planned-parenthood-327k-abortions-fiscal-2014/
DD=LIAR! You need some Ex’Lax.You are full of made up shit. I never once claimed Dem registration numbers had anything to do with gerrymandering. And since we were discussing Dakota why bring in national stats. Stick to the assignment,tool.
DD, I made no claim about Germany being a great example of gun rights, I merely pointed out another fabrication of your fact-free thinking.
Meanwhile, since you seem to like to identify specific language in the Constitution to support your positions, here’s a question for you.
We know that the US Constitution was enacted to restrict the power of the federal government, but not the states. Since the 2nd Amendment applies only to the federal government, where in the Constitution does it say that a state cannot restrict or even prohibit an individual from owning or possessing a gun? What explicit Constitutional provision can you identify that would apply the 2nd Amendment’s restrictions to our states?
Mike, so far DD’s modus operandi seems to be: Make a false statement of fact and when called on it, change the subject.
Well DD gerrymandering has something to it and if abortion played a major factor then these statewide votes they’d pass.
I’m pro-choice not pro-abortion but having a bunch of old white guys telling women what to do with their bodies is BS.
the hypocrisy here is Republicans like you DD fight like hell for unborn and then once they are born you want to cut welfare programs that help these same people.
Melvin … Since choice is your issue, it’s foremost in your calculation of why Republicans dominate Sodak politics. That, however may well be a false assumption. My research and gut feeling (through interaction with people in the state, personally) is that more citizens are indifferent or repulsed by politics in South Dakota than in most states. Certainly less engaged … especially the young people. I assert that Republicans dominate because voters follow their parents voting pattern to a very high degree in Sodak. If the biggest political decision a voter ever makes is to just “go to the polls” and because of lack of research and personal opinion, they simply vote the way their parents did then women’s right to choose or redistricting or disenfranchisement aren’t obstacles in developing our “New Democratic Base”. That’s a longwinded way of saying, abortion isn’t the wedge issue that gets conservatives off their butts and into the booth. For us, it’s a matter of waiting out the demise of the angry, old, white, male conservative base and engaging our youth in what politics (done correctly and fairly) can really do to help them. Maybe some will even stick around and raise the NexGen of Dakota liberals. PS … Mail in ballots would be a great issue for petitions.
Is Stace Nelson still alive?
Okay, who believes that Disgusting Dakota/Melvin is either Sibson at his demented best, or channeling Sibson? Raise your hands.
Seriously, this reminds me so much of Sibson. Folks like BCB, Mike and Leslie make reasonable discussions, raising good points. Then here comes Disgusting/Melvin/Sibson going off on something that was not said.
Hang on to your hats folks! Here comes more name calling from D/M/S!
bcb,you are 100% correct.Disgusting might very well could be Sibby or a clone of Sibby.
Let’s put our cards on the table and watch some college football, Melvin.
IN CONCLUSION … Our liberal ladies choose to raise children under conditions most conducive to their success. That includes how many and when to have babies. Your conservative ladies have children when they get pregnant, no matter what environment the child will be raised in. That’s why children with liberal parents are decidedly smarter. (mic drop) ?
Um, Mike? Read that comment from {BCB?} whom you are agreeing with again – carefully.
Porter: You win the Internet today!!! Hahahahahahahaha!
Deb,the last half of my comment was meant for you,Dear. I forgot to give you the credit you so richly deserve for putting your ideas in my head. I was in a hurry? The dog ate my homework? Little Johnny pulled down his pants and did the Hula?
mike and Deb, be careful – you might be inadvertently insulting Sibby!
Oh. Well thank you Mike. And BCB, as to who would be more insulted? Sibson goes more for the religious angle, while Disgusting is all political all the time.
I’d call it a dead heat.
Oh, and they both respond to things that were never said. What am I missing BCB and Mike?
These a things that are typical wingnut tactics.
A dead heat for dead last.
I believe you and bcb have it pretty well covered,Ms Deb. Just watch out for the victim tsunami which is prolly on its way. If you aren’t dazzled by wingnut brilliance,they cloud up and scream they are victims of us heartless Libs.
As long as Democrats allow the SDGOP to draw us into meaningless and unwinnable debates about the 2nd Amendment and abortion issues, we miss the opportunity to discuss the real issues of the state.
We know what the issues are; 40 years of republican domination, 40 years of republicans raising fees and taxes, and of course the biggest issue of all, the crony capitalism corruption that has enriched the SDGOP.
EB-5 and the state department of education are just the tip of the corruption, it is likely that we can find theft and fraud in every department and level of state government.
Federal grants, as we have seen, are ripe for the picking. Bloated salaries and questionable reimbursements, no bid contracts, and these private/state partnerships are the norm.
The SDGOP has to do whatever is necessary to stay in power, to lose that power and control is to surrender state checking accounts, contracts, etc. to Democrats that will be in a position to do something about it.
Abortion and the 2nd Amendment have little or no affect on my life or the lives of many South Dakotans, yet Democrats allow Republicans to drive the political debate with what are basically non-issues.
Come on Disgusted Dakotan, let’s debate some real issues in South Dakota.
Very good points Roger. Thank you for refocusing the discussion.
I can understand your confusion Cory. How can those who support the Second Amendment and promote open carry support law enforcement lock downs in times of crisis, and those who support strict gun control oppose lock downs.
Those who support the Second Amendment generally support the law and law enforcement. Those that carry concealed, do so legally. They fill out the forms, pay the fee, and wait.. They understand the reason behind the law, and they know how to get the law changed
Those who support strict gun control, seem to oppose law enforcement and many of their actions. If they want to carry a handgun concealed they don’t bother with the paperwork, or the fee, and they don’t wait. They don’t respect our laws, or how to have them changed. They believe the government is corrupt, and is out to get them.
Granted I may be over generalizing, but I hope this helps
BCB, Interesting you don’t deny the connection between Democrats 1900’s eugenics, Nazi’s eugenics, and the current support of abortion inherited from Margeret Sanger’s championing of it to control “immigrants” and minorities. Remind me again how Republicans are racists and dislike minorities, lets keep it simple and have you provide actual historic examples of supporting slavery, Jim Crow laws, founding of the KKK, etc, etc, etc.. Hard to do when all of that is historically documented Democratic Party domain.
All, show me in voter registration numbers where all the racists (read majority of the Democratic Party) left the Democratic Party and became Republicans and all the freedom loving Republicans left the GOP to join the Democratic Party. When did you Democrats supposedly devolve to become Republicans and when did Republicans “evolve” to take over the Democratic Party.
So? No one posting pictures of marching in parades across SD supporting abortion (“pro-choice?”). Hmmmm, if you are in the right on the issue, and it is “winning” for Democrats? why aren’t you proudly carrying banners and yard signs for those stalwart supporters of eugenics. Are you ashamed of Margeret Sanger and the ugly past of eugenics?
A humble conservative flummoxing so many enlightened liberals. Say it isn’t so. Quick, personal attacks! Change the subject! Anything!
By a raise of hands, lets see how many people are working hard to move to liberal areas of the USA like Baltimore, Detroit, Chicago.. If liberalism is the answer, why haven’t you rushed to liberal heaven?
Sanger championed (and coined the words) birth control. The 1927 Scotus (8 wingnuts and 1 Dem,1 Dem dissented) affirmed forced sterilization(eugenics) in Buck v Bell.
More racist code words,DD? Baltimore and Detroit weren’t enough to pop your rocks?
DD, now you are just acting like a silly troll. You know as well as anyone that no responsible and rational person in either party today advocates eugenics. As mike demonstrated, one of the last arguments for eugenics was in the 1927 Buck v. Bell case. While the Republican justices upheld a state sterilization law as a method of eugenics, it would be silly to argue that eugenics is a current Republican objective.
And just because the Republican majority struck down state abortion restrictions in Roe v. Wade doesn’t mean Republicans are pro-abortion. It simply means that they decided that we all have a Constitutionally guaranteed right of privacy that protects women when they make the most intimate and personal decisions about their reproductive lives.
And just because these Republican justices relied upon the 14th amendment, which was pushed through by Republicans, to find a right of privacy for all women in their procreation decisions doesn’t mean these Republican abused the Constitution or legislated from the bench, or were pro-abortion.
Say what you want about the history of the Republican party, but the truth is they accomplished great things and committed horrible atrocities, just as all humans throughout history have done. Your silly attempts to paint today’s Democrats with pre-civil rights era racist views is factually inaccurate as are most of your other rants.
MC, I don’t think that helped. Are you trying to say that people who favor gun control actually disrespect law and police and carry weapons illegally?
(And DD can’t be Sibby: DD hasn’t mentioned Masons or New Age Theocrats yet.)
http://www.potowmack.org/enffable.html How the NRA has relentless worked over the years to obstruct law enforcement agencies from enforcing gun laws.
You’re right Cory. Disgusting is missing those buzz words. He has his own favorites.
This is the source of a perfect plan for dealing with shooters and abortion: (It’s truly genius!)
http://juanitajean.com/for-those-of-you-not-on-facebook-or-twitter/#comments
It’s perfectly fair. Treat people planning to buy a gun the same way women considering abortion are treated. Go to the link to understand what that really means. It’s truly genius.
It isn’t liberalism that honkies flee. It is the minorities themselves that wingnuts are averse to. It is called white flight.
DD-where were you and your concerns when Orange County,California filed for bankruptcy? Orange Co,California is the wingnut capitol of California.
The Right to Own a Gun is a centerpiece of what it means to be an American!
The Right of a Woman to Control Her Body is a centerpiece of what it means to be an American!
Here’s what I’m talking about:
http://www.examiner.com/article/what-if-gun-laws-were-like-abortion-laws
@BCB You Democrats celebrate Margeret Sanger and have the gall to claim “no party advocates eugenics?” You flippantly claim Republicans hate minorities and the poor and then whine when I point out the LONG history of DOCUMENTED Democratic historic abuses of blacks and minorities and the institutional lack thereof by the GOP!? No, BCB, unlike you, I don’t turn a blind eye to those evils that are inexplicably linked to the DNC of today.
On, and BTB BCB.. Eugenics is alive and well in the Democratic Party http://zombietime.com/john_holdren/ The proabortion position was started from it and was Planned Parenthood started to perpetuate the killing of babies of minorities that Democrats didn’t want.
Wing nuts are fighting against you racists who are pushing to abort minority babies while you goose step along in the same steps of racism you have been marching to for centuries. Keep spouting idiotic nonsense, the facts as we both know them are that you belong to the historic party of racism.
@Deb Point to me in history where a racist holding the corpse of a murdered minority baby, aborted by a Democratic white doctor, seized the freedoms America was founded on. Cheering for the right to murder minority and the poor’s babies is keeping with the DNC’s racist past. Margeret Sanger, Adolph Hitler, and John Holdren would be proud of you.
Disgusting,the place for you and other lily white whiners is the North Pole. For around 8-9 months of the year everything is wingnut lily white,including bears,foxes and whales.
@BCB You are projecting again.. FYI, the mass exodus of 1960’s racist Democrats to the GOP? Never happened https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Southern_Democrats#Losing_the_south
http://www.al.com/opinion/index.ssf/2015/09/alabama_sends_message_we_are_t.html
DD-Lily white wingnut austerity has pretty much bankrupted lily white Aladamnbama.The same has happened in lily white Kansas. Ditto lily white Wisconsin and South Dakota isn’t far behind. Pat Powers yourself on the back,Ace.
DD, again with the hyperbole. Why haven’t you responded to my question about where in the federal Constitution does it say that a State, rather than the federal government, may not regulate gun possession and ownership? Is that an example of judicial legislation that you oppose?
And you might want to review the links you post. Comments made by one individual in in a book in the 1970’s do not provide any meaningful evidence about current eugenics policies or attitudes. Likewise, your Wiki link on the Southern Strategy supports my earlier comments:
“In 1980, the Southern Strategy would see fruition when Ronald Reagan announced that he supported states rights and that welfare abuse justified the need for it.[7] Lee Atwater, who served Reagan’s chief strategist in the Southern states, claimed that by 1968, a vast majority of southern whites had learned to accept that racial slurs like “nigger” were very offensive and that mentioning “states rights” and reasons for its justification had now become the best way to use the politically valuable race card and appeal to southern white voters.[8] Later Republican candidates were accused of using racial appeals similar to Reagan. For example, George H.W. Bush faced accusations of racism with the Willie Horton ads, while Newt Gingrich faced similar criticism in 2012 by calling Barack Obama a food-stamp president.”
DD, we both know that a significant number of Southern (and other) voters are racist. As best I can tell, Republicans, not Democrats, went after their vote by using Atwater’s “dog whistle” language to appeal to those with racist attitudes and by encouraging silly voter ID laws in an effort to make it more difficult for minorities to vote because they believed minority voters would otherwise vote for Democrats.
http://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2014/07/14/331298996/why-did-black-voters-flee-the-republican-party-in-the-1960s
DD, I see you again misrepresented the content of the book Holden co-authored. These repeated misrepresentations of facts undermine your persuasiveness and I suspect violate the rules of debate – Cory?
According to jpgs of the actual language used in the 1977 book provided by your link, the book did not advocate any the policies you claim. Rather, it attempted to discuss what sort of public policies might be permitted under the Constitution in the hypothetical event of “a population crisis [that] became sufficiently serious to endanger society.”
What sort of remedial policies do you think our Constitution might permit the feds or states to adopt if there was “a population crisis [that] became sufficiently serious to endanger society?”
@BCB The smell of rank desperation is ripe in the air.
You have centuries of horrific documented oppressive racism by the Democratic Party ranging from slavery to lynching’s of blacks, that you blithely attempt to brush aside by claiming Republicans inherited centuries of racist Democrats circa 1980? Because some Southerners started rejecting the ever increasing liberalism of the DNC?
So you’re not a racist despite supporting Planned Parenthood, which was found by Margeret Sanger a supporter of the eugenics movement which German Socialists adopted in their Nazi rampage against humanity? And whose explicit stated purpose was to commit abortions to get rid of minorities. Such efforts are so successful now a days, that 4X as many minority babies are killed as any other, despite being in the minority!
So you don’t support eugenics? But you celebrate Margeret Sanger who advocated eugenics, and you support Planned Parenthood which she founded to advance her racist ideas to get rid of minorities, AND you support abortion which minority babies are the major victims of that horror? But I’m racist because you believe I’m a Republican and you believe that a handful of former racist Democrats left the DNC circa 1980 and converted every member of the Party of Lincoln to racism?
Riiiiggghhhht…..
https://saynsumthn.wordpress.com/2013/09/04/republicans-who-supported-eugenics-thru-planned-parenthood/ Goldwater,Tricky Dick,George hitler Weasel Bush and many,many more.
bcb-according to Disgusting is it ok if I call you Desperado?
Let’s just take a big firehose hose to DD’s mess here on this post, and see if we can bring a little sanity into what has become a fairly vile argument …one that he seems hell bent on perpetuating all evidence to the contrary:
http://www.trustblackwomen.org/2011-05-10-03-28-12/publications-a-articles/african-americans-and-abortion-articles/26-margaret-sanger-and-the-african-american-community-
Yeah that’s better. This place looks cleaner already.
DD, whenever I ask you a reasonable question, you seem to dodge and weave, start throwing out insults and derogatory names, and try to change the subject. Why not just answer the question and try to stay focused on discussing the issues rather than name calling and throwing insults?
Your obsession with Margret Sanger is interesting. You might consider reviewing my comments as I don’t recall bringing her up or making any statements about her, negative or positive, nor celebrating her in any way.
As for supporting Planned Parenthood, I certainly do support their activities, including the 3% of their services that assist women in obtaining safe abortion services.
http://www.npr.org/sections/itsallpolitics/2015/08/05/429641062/fact-check-how-does-planned-parenthood-spend-that-government-money
What part of the 97% of their services to women, other than abortions, do you content support your conspiracy theory that PP is engaged in eugenics?
Bill and mike – thanks for the links! They further demonstrate that DD’s statements on this thread have little or no relationship to facts or reality.
Bwahahahahahahahaha! So?! When Democrats celebrate Margeret Sanger and have centuries of history of oppressing minorities, and pushing abortion to help her reach her goals to get rid of them? You’re not racist for supporting Planned Parenthood’s eugenic goals? But! Sketchy claims that past Republicans supported Planned Parenthood LIKE YOU? Makes the rest of militant pro-life Republicans racists?!
What kind of convoluted, projecting, “logic” is that?
Just a couple of things to add, the current leader of the republican party, Donald Trump is an avowed racist and woman hater, there is no denying that.
His base of about 25% of voters obviously support that position and the GOP is seriously afraid to call him out for his hatred because they agree with him.
As I read Disgusted’s rants, cognitive dissonance comes to mind, a perfect example in fact.
DD, perhaps you could find some peace if you actually read the article Bill linked about Sanger. The article was apparently written by a black woman who actually researched Sanger’s life and statements. It identifies the members of the black community that supported Sanger’s work, including Rev. King.
And I don’t think I ever called you a racist. If I did, and if you are not a racist, then I sincerely apologize. But I did acknowledge that both you and I know that there are a significant number of racists living in the USA today, mostly in the South I suspect, and that the Republican party, rather than the Democrats, has developed a strategy to get these racists under the Republican tent.
But, your silly non-responsive comments make it appear that you are much more interested in repeating false statements and trolling. Am I reading you correctly?
is dd a south dakotan and likes to use big boys’/girls’ blogger catcalls like BBBBWWWWWAAAAAAHHHHHHHH and rrrrrrrriiiiiggggggghhhhhhtttttttt like the professional demonizers do? how annoying to reasonable communication, though i don’t doubt his/her sincerity regarding hating dems, gunz and anti-abortion?
Nixon,Ike,T Roosevelt,Goldwater,Hitler Weasel Bush makes it 5 wingnut supporters of eugenics against your 1,who turns out wasn’t a big supporter of eugenics,per se.
Excellent read,Bill Fleming.
Margaret Sanger? Is that what the kid who shot Principal Lein was mad about?
On lockdowns, I find this sensitive October 2014 essay from a pre-K teacher in Virginia. Her closing sentences capture my fear:
Think about what we teach kids, raising them in constant fear of violent death.
Launa Hall WAPO 10.28.14-good quote cory. thank you