HERITAGE FOUNDATION FINDS FOOTHOLD

The Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank that published the blueprint for the second Trump Administration with Project 2025, has an article on its website titled “The Essential Second Amendment.” It begins, “The right to keep and bear arms is premised on self-defense. A well-armed citizenry secures a free state by protecting the nation and its individuals from three distinct threats: tyranny, foreign invasion, and domestic dangers such as crime and civil unrest.”

Yet it is impossible to identify any premise of self-defense in the carnage that took place on Wednesday at Annunciation Catholic Church, in Minneapolis. This morning, while students were celebrating the first Mass of the school year, a shooter killed two children, ages eight and ten, and injured seventeen other people, fourteen of whom were children. It is impossible to claim guns as our guard against “domestic dangers” when firearms killed more children than any other cause—more than cancer, more than car crashes—for three years in a row. It is impossible to assert that guns keep us safe from “distinct threats” when we know that more kids are killed by guns in states that have the most permissive gun laws.
On steps of a building various figures stand and sit, looking distressed. One man sits on the steps with hands crossed at his chin. Some of the others are police officers.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey sits on the steps of the Annunciation Church’s school, in Minneapolis. Photograph by Abbie Parr / AP

The Heritage Foundation tells us that a “well-armed citizenry acts as a major check on the ability of would-be tyrants, enabling the people to forcibly resist oppression.” And yet we can guess what might happen if residents of Washington, D.C., watching federal troops descend on their city, threatened to take up arms against their oppressors. The right wing’s vision of the Second Amendment is premised on a fantasy of what Heritage calls “a truly free society.” That fantasy is evidently more valuable than life itself.

If parents in Minneapolis are inconsolable tonight, if parents across the country are afraid that their children’s school might be the next one—and there will be a next one, and a next one after that—that means our nation is working according to our current leaders’ wishes. They wrote it down. It’s how we know we’re truly free.

For more: revisit Malcolm Gladwell on how school shootings spread, and Matthew Hutson on whether threat assessment could prevent this kind of violence.

If you're going to copy and paste someone else's words without offering your own opinion on those words, at least include a link.

Want to repeal the 2nd Amendment? The Left would rather chip away at the Constitution instead.

homeagain wrote: The Heritage Foundation, the conservative think tank that published the blueprint for the second Trump Administration with Project 2025, has an article on its website titled “The Essential Second Amendment.” It begins, “The right to keep and bear arms is premised on self-defense. A well-armed citizenry secures a free state by protecting the nation and its individuals from three distinct threats: tyranny, foreign invasion, and domestic dangers such as crime and civil unrest.”

Yet it is impossible to identify any premise of self-defense in the carnage that took place on Wednesday at Annunciation Catholic Church, in Minneapolis. This morning, while students were celebrating the first Mass of the school year, a shooter killed two children, ages eight and ten, and injured seventeen other people, fourteen of whom were children. It is impossible to claim guns as our guard against “domestic dangers” when firearms killed more children than any other cause—more than cancer, more than car crashes—for three years in a row. It is impossible to assert that guns keep us safe from “distinct threats” when we know that more kids are killed by guns in states that have the most permissive gun laws.
On steps of a building various figures stand and sit, looking distressed. One man sits on the steps with hands crossed at his chin. Some of the others are police officers.

Minneapolis Mayor Jacob Frey sits on the steps of the Annunciation Church’s school, in Minneapolis. Photograph by Abbie Parr / AP

The Heritage Foundation tells us that a “well-armed citizenry acts as a major check on the ability of would-be tyrants, enabling the people to forcibly resist oppression.” And yet we can guess what might happen if residents of Washington, D.C., watching federal troops descend on their city, threatened to take up arms against their oppressors. The right wing’s vision of the Second Amendment is premised on a fantasy of what Heritage calls “a truly free society.” That fantasy is evidently more valuable than life itself.

If parents in Minneapolis are inconsolable tonight, if parents across the country are afraid that their children’s school might be the next one—and there will be a next one, and a next one after that—that means our nation is working according to our current leaders’ wishes. They wrote it down. It’s how we know we’re truly free.

For more: revisit Malcolm Gladwell on how school shootings spread, and Matthew Hutson on whether threat assessment could prevent this kind of violence.

SORRY SUB REG. i COPIED AND PASTED WHAT I COULD,REST WAS UNAVAILABLE,I WAS OUT THE DOOR,SO THE SOURCE WAS MISSING...I HAVE MANY SOURCES ON MY EMAIL I BELIEVE THI8 WAS WAPO OR MEDSPAGE, A MEDICAL WEBSITE......I BELIEVE IT JUST REPEATS WHAT I HAVE POSTED THESE MANY MONTHS.....HERITAGE FOUNDATION'S PLAN FOR THE POTUS IS
SOLIDLY IN PLACE.AND WE, AS A NATION, R GOING TO FIND OUT JUST HOW FUBARRRED IT WILL GET.

If there was enough support for the premise that the presence of troops in Washington, D.C. was oppressive of anything more than criminal activity, and if DC hadn't been actively oppressing the right of the people who live there to keep and bear arms with its laws, then the residents of DC, and in every town, city, and State in this Union, could take to arms in response to the alleged "oppressors".

Our founding document addresses this quite well, "Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security."

Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to William Smith, wrote, "The people can not be all, and always, well informed. The part which is wrong will be discontented in proportion to the importance of the facts they misconceive. If they remain quiet under such misconceptions it is a lethargy, the forerunner of death to the public liberty." Further along in the letter is the portion that all remember, "And what country can preserve it’s liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms. The remedy is to set them right as to facts, pardon and pacify them. What signify a few lives lost in a century or two? The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants. It is it’s natural manure."

Our revolutionary war was conducted with the support of about a third of the population . . . if there was that much support for the "tyrant", "oligarch", "oppressor" allegations, those who are currently in a state of discontent might stand a chance of armed resistance, but I'm guessing that the actual figure is a lot closer to maybe 3-5% than it is to 33% . . .

American voters last November rejected Biden/Harris in favor of Trump/Heritage.

It took Reagan a couple of years to fix Carter's Stagflation. It might take more than 8 months to see how these pro-tariff policies will remake the global economy.

ACTUALLY HE IS POLLING AT 38 PERCENT....AS WE MOVE FORWARD, WATCH THE NUMBERS...

Biden's approval rating was quite the opposite; he polled stronger with 49.6% approval coming in to office in 2021, before cascading down each year to the low 40.4% when he left in 2024. It averaged 43.2% approval overall for his term.

According to a recent Economist/YouGov poll ending Aug. 25, pollsters found a current 43% approval rating for Trump, compared to a 31% approval rating for one of the top possible democratic candidates of the 2028 presidential race — California's Gov. Gavin Newsom.

If Biden would have stayed in the race, would he have received more votes than Harris?

Trump's ratings are down nationally but his popularity with Republicans keeps rising.

They love to see crying Democrats in the street.

Republicans are gaining new voters and converts while the Democrats bleeding out. It doesn’t matter what Trump’s approval numbers are, as long as they are higher than that of the Democrat party, which is on par with Drag Queen Story Hour.