Two Things: Women; and The Second Amendment

 1.  The anal-retentive, obsessive-compulsive, toxic males who hold a majority on the Supreme Court have prevailed.  They essentially have told women:  you do not have the freedom of control over your bodies.  We do.  I easily can imagine them thinking:  that's how it should be...because you still are second class citizens.  After all, "God" made us first; then "He" took one of our ribs and made you.  That should tell you your place in human society.  We males are the Masters of the Universe.  We are the Kings of Humanity.  You are in second place. [Aii-yii-yii!]

On a certain day yet to come this year, I'll be eighty years old.  I won't be eighty years & nine months old.  It is obvious that abortion should not be allowed (with some exceptions) after an embryo of undifferentiated cells grows and develops into a fetus, which occurs approximately eleven weeks after the last menstrual period.  While an embryo, the group of cells appears no differently than does a group of cells from any number of other animals at the same stage of development.  It's a blob of undifferentiated cells.  Yes, it has the potential of becoming a human life; but it's not yet such.

Here's a thought:  human sperm also have the potential (in certain circumstances) of developing into a fully formed human; perhaps the toxic males on the Court should work toward making it more difficult for men to obtain a vasectomy.  Or, how about making masturbation difficult, or maybe a crime.  Oh, those poor dead sperm.  Oh, you masturbating murderers of spermatozoa. 😊  After all, the Bible says not to "spill your seed upon the ground".  [Oh lawdy momma!]

Ridiculous, right?  It's also ridiculous for the High Court basically to say to women:  you have no Constitutional right to have control over your body; that's up to each individual State.  No it isn't.  It's a natural right, and thus a federal matter.

.......................

2.  The Second Amendment consists of one sentence.  The first half of that sentence clearly states the purpose of the amendment.  "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State...".   Our Founders did not trust standing armies, so they promulgated a civilian militia... a well regulated militia.  The amendment had a military purpose.  The right to a weapon was protected so that a person could serve in the military.  It wasn't meant for mentally ill people, or children, or those prone to unwarranted violence.  It wasn't meant to make it easy for people during peacetime to acquire a stockpile of a gazillion rifles and fifty gazillion rounds of ammo.  This is not rocket science; it's simply common sense.

.....................

Not only my opinion.  Take Care  

Why the 2nd Amendment ALLOWS GUN CONTROL

Preface
I'm not a Republican or a Democrat, but am a long-time gun owner.  I'm not an attorney, but have studied the Constitution since 1956...mostly informally.  "Studied" doesn't only mean I've read it over and over.  I've researched many constitutional court cases, read dozens and dozens of Supreme Court opinions, and those of lower courts as well.
...................................................
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
2nd Amendment to the Constitution
..............................................
It seems to me that any reading of the above with a view toward common sense leads to the following conclusions.
1.  The 2nd Amendment allows civilians to possess firearms in order to have a "well regulated Militia".  [Our Founders were wary of having a large standing army during peacetime.  They opted for a militia made up of everyday citizens/civilians, non-professional "soldiers".]
2.  Apparently, Americans who oppose gun control have chosen to ignore the phrase, well regulated.  So, too, have some Supreme Court Justices.
3.  Back in the 1700's, "Arms" possessed by militia men for the possible defense & "security of a free State" amounted to pistols and single-shot rifles.  Assault rifles, automatic weapons of any kind, hand-held rocket launchers, etc. did not exist.  It defies common sense that anyone would think any modern day weapons of war should fall under the 2nd Amendment.  Even if they did, those who had them would have to be well regulated to be in compliance with the Constitution.
......................................
Trump is correct when he states that the recent mass murders were undertaken by "mentally ill" people.  Duh.  Too bad he doesn't understand the effect of words such as "invasion", "invaders", etc. on those same people.  Or, maybe he does.  Too bad that Oligarchs like him don't see the connection between horrendous social ills (mass murders, opioid crisis, etc.) and the throwing under the bus of mental health treatment in the USA...which has been going on for decades.  Too bad, indeed.
......................................
Sidebar
Not many, but some gun owners have formed their own "militias".  They seem to believe that they're being patriotic, and are following the Constitution.  Nope.  The phrase well regulated in the 2nd Amendment does NOT mean self regulated.  It means regulated by the Government.  Hello.
..............................................
Not only my opinion.  Be Well

The Fake President Blunders On...and Other Disasters

In his search for only "Yes" men/women, Trump has reached a new height in the promotion of warmongering via his replacing of McMaster with the gruesome John Bolton.  Even a casual perusal of Bolton's history is enough to scare the bejesus out of you.  He must be the most uptight, anal-retentive, control freak in the whole country.  The man seems to love the idea of killing people, whether it's most everyone in North Korea...or Chelsea Manning.
....................................................
A few days ago, the Chinese launched their Yuan-denominated oil futures contracts in Shanghai.  China is the world's largest importer of crude oil.  This is the start of the decline of the PetroDollar.  Plus, the whole business will add greatly to the already edging-up, price inflation in the USA.

Add to the above the fact that hundreds of major stores are closing their doors for good here, unemployment is more than double what Trump's Executive Branch and the Corporate Media claim it is, income inequality has reached a record high, worker wages have increased so minimally that they still essentially are "flat", the Bond Market is collapsing, a Trade War is developing with China, and the Stock Market recently has experienced "corrections".  Does all this sound good to anyone?  I think not.

Keep in mind that the Great Depression of the 1930's (which lasted about ten years) was not so named until halfway through it.  For quite awhile, everyone thought it was a temporary, soon-to-end glitch of some sort.
..........................................................
Porter Stansberry, who owns Stansberry Research (a financial analysis publishing company with almost 500 employees), claims that wages are no longer connected to productivity in the USA.  According to him, that's the main reason for the gross "income inequality" in this country.  Stansberry is controversial, and I don't know if he's an expert in the financial field or not; however, on this particular point, I believe he's correct.  Worker productivity has increased quite a bit in the last three to four decades, but wages barely have kept up with price inflation.  People essentially are being forced to work harder, sometimes at two different jobs, but they aren't being properly rewarded for it.  I suspect that's one of the main reasons (perhaps the main reason) for much of the discontent in this great Land.  The upper 10% of The People own 75% of the wealth here.  Go figure.
....................................................
Zuckerberg's supposed concern about Facebook users' privacy is laughable.  The whole Facebook set-up is designed to harvest and sell your private information.  At least, that seems to be the case.  Delete Facebook.  Be aware, though, it will take weeks to get yourself off that site...literally, weeks.
....................................................
Why is Equifax still in business?  After their unmitigated disaster involving millions & millions of SS numbers, plus the theft of their own employees' tax info, they should have been boycotted by everyone.  Those of you who check people's credit, don't use Equifax.  There's no law that says you must.  Those of you who are subject to credit checks, tell the entity doing the checking that nothing of yours should be sent to that company.  Why should you risk the theft of your identity?  Do you have any idea how long it takes to straighten out a mess such as that?  Never mind the cost.
......................................................
The Second Amendment nowhere guarantees that citizens can possess any type of firearm they so desire with only minimal regulations informing that scenario.  The purpose of the Amendment was to allow citizens to "keep & bear Arms" in order for the country to have a "WELL REGULATED militia".  That's a direct quote:  "...well regulated...".

These slaughters in schools (and elsewhere) have to end.  A citizen not in the military should be banned from possessing a weapon of war...and that includes assault rifles.  You don't need one of those to go deer hunting or target shooting.  Assault rifles are for killing people.

To be clear, I'm an owner of a firearm...but it's not a weapon of war.
.......................................................
Not only my opinion.  Be Well

Rifle Bump Stocks - A No-Brainer, Gun Rights, ISIS, & More

Any hesitation about ​banning ​"bump stocks" for rifles is ridiculous...they never should have been allowed in the 1st place.  Why not allow grenade launchers?  They are "firearms", after all.  [The Constitution says "Arms".]  How about what used to be called bazookas?...another "firearm".  I'm not for banning all firearms, but WEAPONS OF WAR never should be allowed in the hands of civilians.  That includes automatic weapons, or any device that makes any gun into one.

​[​I don't think even semi-automatic weapons should be allowed.]  I was a hunter back when, and enjoyed it greatly; but to allow civilians ​to have any semblance of an automatic weapon or other weapon of war is nuts.

The 2nd Amendment allows civilians to possess firearms in order to have a "well regulated Militia"...the Founders were averse to having a large standing army.  In fact, when the Treaty ending the Revolutionary War was signed in 1783, shortly thereafter the peacetime Army was reduced to about 700 men (from 17,000).  The Bill of Rights in the Constitution wasn't written until 1789, when it was approved by Congress...but wasn't ratified by all the States until 1791.  Point being:  it was almost 20 years after the 1st Continental Congress was formed in 1774 before the 2nd Amendment came into full force and being, and it's sole purpose was to guarantee a well regulated militia.  Again, "well regulated"...a direct quote.

People who believe civilians (because of the 2nd Amendment) are allowed to have any kind of gun in the world with virtually no regulations should keep the above history in mind.  The 2nd Amendment says no such thing.  It never did.

To those who still believe that "gun rights" protect us from an errant gov't, consider the following.  If some sort of brutal dictatorship were to engineer a coup here, and it had the backing of our Armed Forces, you'd best forget about trying to resist with your collection of firearms in your gun cabinet.  In this day & age---with satellite surveillance, weaponized drones, other advanced weaponry, intelligence capability, psyops, communications monitoring, etc., etc.---any such resistance would be totally squashed...probably in less than a month.  Instead of getting into gun battles with you, the Powers would offer ten million dollars (or whatever) to anyone who would rat out your location, and then bomb you into the next dimension.  The days of Fidel Castro type revolutions or Red Dawn movie scenarios no longer are possible.  Look at the ISIS-types---they've been trying for almost 1400 years to become rulers by force; they've failed***.  Nutjobs always are capable of causing chaos, but they won't ever permanently take over anything by force anymore...especially in this modern era.  The Powers-That-Be won't allow it.

***I don't consider the Ottoman Empire to have been "ISIS-types".  In the areas where they ruled, they were tolerant of other religions.  Eventually, they came to adopt Western world ways.  Islamophobes usually ignore this part of History.

Not only my opinion.  Be Well