Google is acting up for me periodically, so this to JAB128:

Because I really wanted to respond to the concept of a comment I got on the South Carolina shooting near the baseball situation...

However, I don't know why, but Google's comments are a bit on the borked side, so I do apologize -- this is not, as some would suppose a "living rent-free in the head" motif, but I do have a response to this -- a counter-conspiracy point JAB128 brings up on the subject of guns:

"I don't know. Smells like another false flag to me to try to take people's guns. If the people don't have guns, they will be systematically taken out:

Innocents Betrayed - The History of Gun Control"

I have several problems with this stand, on a very real ground:

1) I believe that, if the people would be systematically taken out in that manner, that the only question of a systematic population reduction would be manner and timing, not that one would take place.

There are those who believe that the "clot shot" is part of the fake nature of the COVID-19 situation, for example -- and that the vaccines themselves are meant to take out a significant fraction of the population.  This is probably one of the reasons I believe the government is deliberately underreporting deaths by the virus by a factor, now, of about five.  With 40% of this country adamantly never getting vaccinated, etc. and so forth, admitting the true death toll of the virus itself would be used to further stoke the theory that the country is, in fact, doing that same "systematic take out", just under a different method.

2) I would think, at that point, you'd probably also be one of those who deny the existence of most school shootings, etc. and so forth -- as a function of taking guns.

If that's the case, then I would openly ask the following question:  Since you all-but-certainly believe that your guns are the centerpiece of and sole ability for the people's ability to have any rights at all (most of them, you do not have, but that's a separate post)...  (I've even read one ZeroHedge conservative commenter who believes the actual carrying of a loaded gun should be REQUIRED TO VOTE...)

Question:  Let's assume for a moment that you are one of those (I am not saying you are or aren't, I'm just wanting to put this out there as a 2nd Amendment consideration, because the courts erroneously declare the people to be a "well-regulated militia" under 2A...) who believe Disney to be pedophilic.

If that's the case, why is no one literally blowing Disney World and other Disney properties to shreds, under color of war and the authority granted by courts under 2A?  If you state, for example, that it's because you'd be thrown in prison for doing so, you can't be a "well-regulated militia", because, especially in right-wing America, it would be an easily-defensible military/militia action to "Save America", as Trump would want them to do?

Especially that we have, now, in Florida, a "Please Shoot And Kill Them" Sheriff (in short, save the county money in incarcerating robbers of your homes and just shoot them to kill), what defensible concept would you have in that degree of a red state not to obliterate Disney properties clear off the map and out of the state on grounds of support of pedophilia, and the color of the Second Amendment to take the action the Federal Government will not take because hair-sniffing, Pizzagate, Clinton, etc. and so forth??

There's a simple answer:  You aren't a militia, never should've been declared one, and the guns SHOULD BE TAKEN.  But you're scared of that, because (and there are many on the Left who agree this far) your gun is the sole power you have.  The power to kill is the centerpiece of all rights, in both conservative and "Gangsta" America.

Just a thought...