|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224
Dawg Talker
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224 |
Quote:
The citizens of the US have a right to keep and bear arms due to our constitution. This was added to the constitution because of the failure of our first government, and due to the british during the revolutionary war. The british saw to it that they'd remove guns from the homes of colonists, to keep the colonists from fighting them. The first government, the Confederate States of America, was removed by the citizenry for being ineffective.
We have a right to keep and bear arms so that if all other means fail, we citizens will be able to remove a failed government, or defend ourselves from an invading power (ie. failed government). As we had to fight oppressors for innitial control of our country, the guns we used became part of our country.
Ok i understand that. But this is regarding scenarios what, 300, 400 years ago?? Is this relevant in today's America?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 4,458 |
Yes, it will always be relevant.
I wish to wash my Irish wristwatch......
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,126
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 4,126 |
Quote:
s this relevant in today's America?
It very much is. See New Orleans in the days following Katrina. Remember all the looting that was going on? There certainly wasn't any police officers or other law enforcement there to protect the people. They had to defend themselves.
You can take away the 2nd amendment, it won't change anything. Those that want guns will find ways to get them. Which makes the 2nd amendment that much more important. So people can defend themselves.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224 |
Quote:
Actually, since we're on the topic, one of the guns that was used was a semi-automatic with an extended clip, a gun that was just recently legalized by the expiration of the 1994 assault weapons ban. What, legally, does a person need that gun for that a normal 9mm wouldn't do? Personally, guns like that seem to be more about the machismo factor than actual use, from anything that I have read on the topic.
I'd agree with that. I mean when people buy AK-47's, WTF are you gonna shoot with it? Makes zero sense to me.
General note here, the first part in solving a problem i guess is the realisation that you've actually got one.
I've asked a few questions in both threads which have pretty much gone un-answered which predominately relate to issues outside of gun control. I mean there are other issues here.
The pro-gun lobby have pretty much got the defences up straight away with the usual guns don't kill people stuff.....i mean, cheeseburgers....come on.
Point is this, guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people...and gift wrapping guns on the pre-requisite criteria of having a pulse is a bit of a no no from where i'm standing.
What measures have been implemented after each and every one of those school shootings i've listed in the last 10 years people???
This latest school massacre hasn't surprised me one bit.
And no, i'm not relishing the next cheeseburger/drunk driver debate the next time everyone expresses outrage in an exact carbon copy in say about 6 months time.  If you don't act, then, well..."you've made your bed....." you know the rest. 
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224 |
(Erik, Tyler, Squires....quick heads up! Wasn't taking jabs at the constitution....t'was a straight up question.  ) Quote:
Remember all the looting that was going on? There certainly wasn't any police officers or other law enforcement there to protect the people. They had to defend themselves.
It's situations like that which make you worry for the human race isn't it. I mean where is the Social and moral accountability of the species? What you're saying here is that humans revert to animals when you take away "the man" and the stick is gone which was all that kept you in line.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224 |
US media soul-searching over US shooting web page News of the Virginia Tech tragedy has dominated US media outlets and mainstream blogs, while student blogs and social networking websites gave information online as the drama unfolded. The New York Times calls for stronger controls over the weapons that caused the tragedy. "Yesterday's mass shooting at Virginia Tech - the worst in American history - is another horrifying reminder that some of the gravest dangers Americans face come from killers at home armed with guns that are frighteningly easy to obtain. "Not much is known about the gunman, who killed himself, or about his motives or how he got his weapons, so it is premature to draw too many lessons from this tragedy. But it seems a safe bet that in one way or another, this will turn out to be another instance in which an unstable or criminally minded individual had no trouble arming himself and harming defenceless people." But the Los Angeles Times sees the tragedy as an argument for relaunching the debate on gun ownership. "So the ghastly death toll - perhaps inflicted by one man with a pair of semiautomatic handguns - becomes an obvious argument for enhanced gun control. Or, conversely, for the right to bear arms because Virginia Tech is a 'gun-free zone', and the Virginia Legislature last year killed a bill that would have allowed students to carry guns on campus." The Washington Post also raises the question of whether the tragedy would have occurred if the state of Virginia had outlawed guns. "Should metal detectors be ubiquitous in American classrooms and dormitories? And why are gunmen so apt to carry out their lethal rampages at American schools?" It also asks whether the carnage could have been avoided: "More particularly, what more, if anything, could the authorities at Virginia Tech have done to prevent yesterday's carnage? "Were possible warning signs, such as bomb threats in the weeks before the incident, adequately investigated? "And between the first shootings around 0700, when two people were killed in a dormitory, and the second ones two hours later, when 31 died at a classroom building, did the city and campus police take all possible steps to lock down the university and scour it for the shooter?" The Huffington Post says the US has to be honest about what price it has to pay if gun ownership is to stay legal. "What I would like is for the gun-toting right wing to admit that there is a price we pay, that senseless accidental deaths and traumas are a national cost and that it's not so clear that it's worth it, but hey, we pay it anyway because so many guns are in the hands of so many people that there would never be any getting rid of them. "I would like the right wing to admit that guns are not 'good' and that the right to bear arms is not an absolute virtue and that the deaths in the US caused by guns are at least as problematic, philosophically, as abortion. But I'm not holding my breath." Email warnings A large part of the drama unfolded online, with blogs, social networking websites and instant messaging services spreading information about what was going on. Most students at Virginia Tech are thought to have first heard of the shootings through e-mails. One entitled "Please stay put", sent at 0950, said: "A gunman is loose on campus. Stay in buildings until further notice. Stay away from all windows." Another, entitled "All Classes Cancelled; Stay where you are" sent at 1016, said: "Virginia Tech has cancelled all classes. Those on campus are asked to remain where they are, lock their doors and stay away from windows. Persons off campus are asked not to come to campus." Students reported the news on local online student newspaper Planet Blacksburg, which has been posting regular updates during and since the shooting. Ruiqi Zhang, a computer engineering student, was in his class when the shooter turned up. "A student rushed in and told everybody to get down," he told Planet Blacksburg. "We put a table against the door and when the gunman tried to shoulder his way in and when he saw that he couldn't, he put two shots through the door. "It was the scariest moment of my life." Accounts of what happened were also posted on messaging services and networking websites such as Facebook, used by US students. Online updates There were also regular updates on Virginia Tech's student newspaper the Collegiate Times. One student, Erin Sheehan, who was in a German class, was one of only four of about two dozen people in the class to walk out of the room. The rest were dead or wounded, she told the newspaper. She said the gunman "was just a normal-looking kid, Asian, but he had on a Boy Scout-type outfit. He wore a tan button-up vest, and this black vest, maybe it was for ammo or something". One student describes his experience on his blog, Bryce's Journal, and included some video footage and pictures of what he could see from his dormitory. In one update entitled "Safe and rather scared" posted at 1048 on Monday, he writes: "My friends and I got out of class at about 9:50. Walked across campus. The wind blew with flurries about. Sirens were in the distance and I saw an undercover cop car go about 80 down one of the drives. That was odd. In front one of the dorms, West AJ, were several police cars, lights off and parked. We started talking about how there are always situations that cops rush across campus for and we never hear about. "Then several people walked by and told us there was a shooting and campus was closed. No-one is allowed to cross the drill field. Hmm. We went ahead to eat some food as cops were stationed in front, checking ID for everyone. "I walked with my friend to his dorm to get his stuff as an omniscient announcement echoed across campus: 'This is an emergency. This is an emergency. Take shelter indoors immediately. Stay away from windows and remain inside.' Another student had the following exchange on a messaging service with his brother: Sugad (1:08:03pm): "So he came into your class?" Trey (1:08:08pm): "Yeah." Trey (1:08:17pm): "I didnt think there was any way id live." Trey (1:08:52pm): "He finally left, me and the one other guy that wasn't shot ran to the door and held it shut." Trey (1:09:04pm): "And he tried to come back in and was shooting through the door." Sugad (1:09:27pm): "Holy (expletive.)" Sugad (1:09:48pm): "What kind of gun was it?" Trey (1:09:55pm): "Pistol."
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,232
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,232 |
Here's some things to ponder Riddler........... There are 100,000,000 guns in our country that are in CIRCULATION NOW! A private individual does not need paperwork to sale a gun to another individual. These guns are all across our nation. Many in the hands of criminals. So how is making it harder for law abiding citizens to buy guns going to help this problem? This kid could have just as easily have bought these guns on the street in an illegal fashion had he so chosen to. So if criminals can get guns at the drop of the hat,all we would be doing is making it harder for law abiding citizens to buy guns for their homes and protection. The point is,with 100,000,000 guns in circulation,criminals can readily get guns illegaly. So all you would be doing is keeping guns out of the hands of those who have a right to guns and giving criminals a free pass to be the people in control of the weaponry. To give criminals the upper hand over law abidinf citizens. There is nothing productive or positive about that. And assult weapons? That's a pretty simple one. If you read our constitution,it plainly states that the citizens of the United States can and should be prepared for a foreign invasion or in the event a failed government tries to take over and void the constitution. Now how do you think that would be possible without assult rifles? How can we be prepared to fight a foreign enemy and live up to what I consider our "constitutional obligation" without the weaponry to accomplish that mission? I know I'm prepared in the event such a situation arises. It's quite a deterrant against foreign invasion as well. I mean who wants to invade a nation when its citizens have access to 100,000,000 guns? And yes,MANY states permit high powered rifles for hunting and I DO know people in Kentucky personaly who use SKS's to deer hunt and know a couple of people who have used them to elk hunt. So they can and are used for hunting. An SKS is VERY accurate to hunt with. I've done it myself. But that's the basic answer. We as a people,have the right,and I feel is our DUTY to be prepared to form militias to fend off foreign invasion and or a failed government. You can NOT do this without assult rifles. That would make it impossible,IMO for me to be prepared to perform my constitutional duty should the need arise for me to do so.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643
Hall of Famer
|
|
Hall of Famer
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 3,643 |
Quote:
Quote:
s this relevant in today's America?
It very much is. See New Orleans in the days following Katrina. Remember all the looting that was going on? There certainly wasn't any police officers or other law enforcement there to protect the people. They had to defend themselves.
You can take away the 2nd amendment, it won't change anything. Those that want guns will find ways to get them. Which makes the 2nd amendment that much more important. So people can defend themselves.
The police actually confiscated registered firearms after the hurricane. Many people could not defend themselves, or the property they had left.
http://www.givethemback.com/
I understand that this site is run by the NRA, and it is one sided. It is worth looking at though.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,961
Legend
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 42,961 |
Quote:
I'm saying the gun dealers could run a mental health background check before they sell a gun to anyone, if they had that sort of database in place.
More of the Big Brother is responsible type thinking,,, no offense Eve, but dang, do you really want the Government in your shorts any more than they already are? I certainly don't!
#GMSTRONG
“Everyone is entitled to his own opinion, but not to his own facts.”
Daniel Patrick Moynahan
"Alternative facts hurt us all. Think before you blindly believe."
Damanshot
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224 |
Quote:
There are 100,000,000 guns in our country that are in CIRCULATION NOW! A private individual does not need paperwork to sale a gun to another individual. These guns are all across our nation. Many in the hands of criminals.
So how is making it harder for law abiding citizens to buy guns going to help this problem? This kid could have just as easily have bought these guns on the street in an illegal fashion had he so chosen to.
This is like a shrug of the shoulders innit. "There's guns already in circulation, he would've got them anyway so no worries."
It's not about punishing law abiding individuals, it's about ensuring responsible, sane people are granted licenses. For me Pit, it's about reducing the odds. Yes there'll be wacko's who slip through but why make it easy for them?
I'm betting that you go through more rigourous testing to get a driver's license than you do a firearms license in some states.
If you change nothing Pit, then nothing changes. Like the previous article i posted says, this is the price that you have to pay, sadly......i've still read nothing about implemented changes after the scores of school shootings in the US over the last 10 years....were there any? Will you be shocked if this happens again? Do you think this is an anomaly?
Quote:
And assult weapons? That's a pretty simple one. If you read our constitution,it plainly states that the citizens of the United States can and should be prepared for a foreign invasion or in the event a failed government tries to take over and void the constitution.
Now how do you think that would be possible without assult rifles? How can we be prepared to fight a foreign enemy and live up to what I consider our "constitutional obligation" without the weaponry to accomplish that mission? I know I'm prepared in the event such a situation arises.
This is where i was going with my earlier question regarding the constitution and times changing....you stand alone as a World superpower. I'd be interested to know realistically exactly who you're at risk of invasion from?
OK now lets lighten the mood.....
Quote:
We as a people,have the right,and I feel is our DUTY to be prepared to form militias to fend off foreign invasion and or a failed government.
Should Bush be worried if he wandered into a certain neck of Ohio woods? 
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 750
All Pro
|
|
All Pro
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 750 |
Quote:
The pro-gun lobby have pretty much got the defences up straight away with the usual guns don't kill people stuff.....i mean, cheeseburgers....come on.
You obviously don't get the point, that these tragedies are caused by lack of responsibility. People pull the trigger, people drive drunk, people eat to many foods that are bad for them. When people were repsonsible for their actions things weren't this bad. I'm not old enough to remember the days when people didn't lock the doors at night, but I am old enough to remember better days than these. I know those days were better because people were held responsible when they messed up. Thats the problem, not holding people responsible for their actions. Patting yourself on the back after a tougher law is passed makes things worse.
Go Irish!
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
just clicking...
I'm not a gun owner, I never really believed I needed one. A real man doesn't need a gun to solve his problems. But it seems that a good portion of society doesn't feel that way.
I have considered buying one recently as it seems more and more that criminals will revert to killing more often. Will it make "me" fell safer, I don't think so. But if ever faced with an armed intruder in my house, I would like an even playing field.
Gun control doesn't work, as others have said it just takes the guns out of the hands of law abiding citizens. House locks are meant to keep honest people out, crooks get around them.
As Soup said, our society has become a bunch of pansies, that cater to kids, and fail to teach them respect. Too many parents aren't there for their kids to teach them love and respect, and law makers have taken away the ability for other authority figures to press punishment.
I have a friend who got weekends for 2 months in jail and community service for beating up a 17 year old, because he was a minor my friend for sentenced. It was irrelevant that the 17 year old was bullying an elementary school student and when my friend intervened the 17 yo told him to F-off and pushed him, when my friend approached him closer and grabbed his arm, the kid hauled off and hit him. So my friend reaction was to hit him back, and then restrained him while he called the police on his cell.
BTW my friend is like 5'11" 180, the 17 year old was about 6'0" 250
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224 |
Oh i got the point just fine....just thought it was a meteoric reach. Quote:
Patting yourself on the back after a tougher law is passed makes things worse.
Well let's have a look then shall we. After the Port Arthur slayings (35 ish dead?) Australia rushed in new tougher laws...now for the back slapping:
web page
Decline in gun deaths doubled since Australia destroyed 700,000 firearms
14 December 2006
The risk of dying by gunshot has halved since Australia destroyed 700,000 privately owned firearms, according to a new study published today in the international research journal, Injury Prevention.
"Not only were Australia's post-Port Arthur gun laws followed by a decade in which the crime they were designed to reduce hasn't happened again, but we also saw a life-saving bonus: the decline in overall gun deaths accelerated to twice the rate seen before the new gun laws," says study lead author, Professor Simon Chapman.
"From 1996 to 2003, the total number of gun deaths each year fell from 521 to 289, suggesting that the removal of more than 700,000 guns was associated with a faster declining rate of gun suicide and gun homicide," said Adjunct Associate Professor Philip Alpers, also from the School of Public Health at the University of Sydney. "This was a milestone public health and safety issue, driven by an overwhelming swing in public opinion, and promptly delivered by governments."
After 112 people were shot dead in 11 mass shootings* in a decade, Australia collected and destroyed categories of firearms designed to kill many people quickly. In his immediate reaction to the Port Arthur massacre, Prime Minister John Howard said of semi-automatic rifles and shotguns: "There is no legitimate interest served in my view by the free availability in this country of weapons of this kind… That is why we have proposed a comprehensive package of reforms designed to implement tougher, more effective and uniform gun laws."
As study co-author Philip Alpers points out: "The new legislation's first declared aim was to reduce the risk of similar gun massacres. In the 10½ years since the gun buy-back announcement, no mass shootings have occurred in Australia."
"On top of that, and despite the new gun laws not being designed to reduce gun suicide, domestic shootings, and the much less common 'stranger danger' individual gun homicides, firearm fatalities in the three largest categories - total firearm deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides - all at least doubled their previous rates of decline following the revised firearm legislation."
While the rates per 100,000 of total firearm deaths, firearm suicides and firearm homicides were already reducing by an average of 3 per cent each year until 1996, these average rates of decline doubled to 6 per centeach year (total gun death), and more than doubled to 7.4 per cent(gun suicide) and 7.5 per centeach year (gun homicide) following the introduction of new gun laws.
By 2002/03, Australia's rate of 0.27 firearm-related homicides per 100,000 population had dropped to one-fifteenth that of the United States.
The authors conclude that "The Australian example provides evidence that removing large numbers of firearms from a community can be associated with a sudden and on-going decline in mass shootings, and accelerating declines in total firearm-related deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides."
*International definitions of "mass shooting" and "mass homicide" range from 3 to 5 victims killed. To exclude most spousal and family violence killings, a "mass shooting" is defined here as one in which five or more victims are shot dead in proximate events.
Quote:
driven by an overwhelming swing in public opinion
There's a clue......you get the outrage and the sympathy every couple of months but hey.....stick to your guns right?
Quote:
In the 10½ years since the gun buy-back announcement, no mass shootings have occurred in Australia."
Hear that bro? Thats the sound of back slapping....
Quote:
By 2002/03, Australia's rate of 0.27 firearm-related homicides per 100,000 population had dropped to one-fifteenth that of the United States.
Now if there was something to be pondered, this would be it. I think the risk of yet another mass homicide is more likely than the US getting invaded...but hey, that's just me.
Quote:
"The Australian example provides evidence that removing large numbers of firearms from a community can be associated with a sudden and on-going decline in mass shootings, and accelerating declines in total firearm-related deaths, firearm homicides and firearm suicides."
No squit Sherlock....who'da thunk. 
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,232
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,232 |
Quote:
This is like a shrug of the shoulders innit. "There's guns already in circulation, he would've got them anyway so no worries."
It's not about punishing law abiding individuals, it's about ensuring responsible, sane people are granted licenses. For me Pit, it's about reducing the odds. Yes there'll be wacko's who slip through but why make it easy for them?
You just don't understand. It's not "cracks" I'm talking about. Here in the states,we have Newsparer magazine formats that are circulated saling used products. Cars,furniture,appliances and yes,guns. No paperwork involved. And even under your scenario,just look at all the dominos that would have to be in a row for that to work. The mentaly ill person would have to have been diagnosed with a mental disorder and a part of his medical record. He would have to be attempting to buy his or her gun from a licensed dealer.And if you have been diagnosed by a doctor with a mental disorder,you're not going to attempt to buy from a gun dealer anyway. So what's the point?
There are trade shows and gun sales everywhere. And when the person saling a gun is "not a gun dealer" he is not required to fill out paperwork. Come Saturday,I can go to a private gun sale,with NO ID,and FILL a vehicle with firearms! Cash and carry,no paperwork.I can look in the local "Trading Post" and find ads saling guns. Go buy them cash and carry from private citizens,with no paperwork.
Now there's 100,000,000 of those out there. Those are the facts in the U.S. I myself used to buy,trade and swap around with firearms as a hobby. I've probably owned close to a thousand firearms in my life. I made good money trading and saling guns. But the point is,those aren't "cracks". ANYBODY can buy firearms without paperwork here in the states! The ONLY time people go through the legal process,is when purchasing them from a gun dealer. So criminals getting firearms is EASY,not a "crack".
Quote:
I'm betting that you go through more rigourous testing to get a driver's license than you do a firearms license in some states.
To buy one,or to carry one? No,you can get a drivers license with a felony record,not a firearm,provided you buy it from a gun dealer.
Quote:
If you change nothing Pit, then nothing changes. Like the previous article i posted says, this is the price that you have to pay, sadly......i've still read nothing about implemented changes after the scores of school shootings in the US over the last 10 years....were there any? Will you be shocked if this happens again? Do you think this is an anomaly?
What I think is your ideas will change nothing. When I can read an ad,or go to a private gun owner ANY TIME and purchase a firearm without paperwork,no laws set in place will effect me. When I can go to LOTS of sources and places and buy a gun without paperwork,since after all there are 100,000,000 of them out there,your idea of further gun legislation is a moot point for a wacko wanting a gun. You're only making it more of a hassle for law abiding citizens which further enables the criminals.
I see this as NOT an isolated incident. But unless you can get ALL the guns in circulation,out of circulation,further regulation has no bearing on that situation.
Quote:
This is where i was going with my earlier question regarding the constitution and times changing....you stand alone as a World superpower. I'd be interested to know realistically exactly who you're at risk of invasion from?
I don't know Riddler. Had on off duty police officer been in that class,or a law abiding citizen carrying a firearm in the V.Tech situation,there may be 32 more people alive today.
And in case you haven't noticed,a lot of the world hates the U.S. If our citizens WEREN'T armed,we never would have become a superpower. We would still be uinder British rule.
You never know what the future holds Riddler and are worlds are very different. I'm not giving up my guns. And I,like ANYONE can buy one without paperwork ANY TIME I want to. And yes,our citizens being armed may have prevented MANY nations from attacking our nation in the past.
And our nation won't be "The Lone Superpower" forever and I,like many,are prepared to defend our nation.
Unfortunately,many in Europe can't say the same. Protection for OUR nation is in every town,every village and inside many American homes. We are prepared for anything.
Just how easy would it be to take over Great Britain if a foreign country could topple their military? How much of a battle could their citizens wage to protect their homeland? That's NOT gonna happen in the U.S.A.!!!
Quote:
OK now lets lighten the mood.....
Quote:
We as a people,have the right,and I feel is our DUTY to be prepared to form militias to fend off foreign invasion and or a failed government.
Should Bush be worried if he wandered into a certain neck of Ohio woods?
NOPE! Because I'm a very patriotic American. While I disagree with him on most issues and think he'a a pi$$ poor president,I believe in democracy and I have a vote. He was democraticly elected and is our president. Thank God his "reign" is almost over,but I would be the guy that shot the guy trying to asassinate our president,NOT the guy eyeing him down the barrel.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,671
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 1,671 |
Some say we need tougher,more restrictive laws limiting gun possession. Some even believe that we need a new law which better reflects the needs of modern society in this age of out of control behavior.
While many of these folks are well meaning and truly patriotic folks who want a more peaceful America...we can't change human nature.
For better or for worse most Americans believe in the sanctity of individualism and self protection/family safety above everything else. This feeling is validated by an older law which overrules all newer ones..........................
that law is the 1790 version of the Constitution of the United States inclusive of the Second Amendment.
Debate all you choose to the greater law of the Ten Commandments which admonishes to "love your neighbor" and also "do not kill" but the Ten Commandments and the Constitution are not a suicide pact by any means.
Protect yourself and family and if you violate any law in possession of a firearm receive 10 additional years in prison for it.
The American people will never knowingly adopt Socialism. But under the name of 'liberalism' they will adopt every fragment of the Socialist program, .
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224 |
Quote:
Here in the states,we have Newsparer magazine formats that are circulated saling used products. Cars,furniture,appliances and yes,guns. No paperwork involved.
Quote:
There are trade shows and gun sales everywhere. And when the person saling a gun is "not a gun dealer" he is not required to fill out paperwork. Come Saturday,I can go to a private gun sale,with NO ID,and FILL a vehicle with firearms! Cash and carry,no paperwork.I can look in the local "Trading Post" and find ads saling guns. Go buy them cash and carry from private citizens,with no paperwork.
Well obviously that industry would have to be regulated also, not just the registered dealers. If that practice was to be outlawed then i'm sure the 100,000,000 number would see significant decline.
Quote:
Had on off duty police officer been in that class,or a law abiding citizen carrying a firearm in the V.Tech situation,there may be 32 more people alive today.
If this guy couldn't buy a gun for squit that might be the case also.
Quote:
And in case you haven't noticed,a lot of the world hates the U.S. If our citizens WEREN'T armed,we never would have become a superpower. We would still be uinder British rule.
I consider you all British anyways....you just lost your way a while back. *ducks*
p.s - wasn't George Washington Welsh? Knew i liked him.
Quote:
Just how easy would it be to take over Great Britain if a foreign country could topple their military? How much of a battle could their citizens wage to protect their homeland? That's NOT gonna happen in the U.S.A.!!!
Wars are fought very, very differently these days Pit. An invasion force would be very unlikely to reach the shores....besides, all the boys are in Iraq. 
And anywho, you'd bail us out anyway. 
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224 |
The constitution would need to be re-written. Has that happened before or would it be sacriligous? I mean this was written around about the time slavery was cool right? I'm still not convinced of relevance in 2007 re: invasion and all that jazz...... 
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/buyb...1455665717.htmlBuyback has no effect on murder rate Matthew Moore October 24, 2006 HALF a billion dollars spent buying back hundreds of thousands of guns after the Port Arthur massacre had no effect on the homicide rate, says a study published in an influential British journal. The report by two Australian academics, published in the British Journal of Criminology, said statistics gathered in the decade since Port Arthur showed gun deaths had been declining well before 1996 and the buyback of more than 600,000 mainly semi-automatic rifles and pump-action shotguns had made no difference in the rate of decline. The only area where the package of Commonwealth and State laws, known as the National Firearms Agreement (NFA) may have had some impact was on the rate of suicide, but the study said the evidence was not clear and any reductions attributable to the new gun rules were slight. "Homicide patterns (firearm and non-firearm) were not influenced by the NFA, the conclusion being that the gun buyback and restrictive legislative changes had no influence on firearm homicide in Australia," the study says. In his first year in office, the Prime Minister, John Howard, forced through some of the world's toughest gun laws, including the national buyback scheme, after Martin Bryant used semi-automatic rifles to shoot dead 35 people at Port Arthur. Although furious licensed gun-owners said the laws would have no impact because criminals would not hand in their guns, Mr Howard and others predicted the removal of so many guns from the community, and new laws making it harder to buy and keep guns, would lead to a reduction in all types of gun-related deaths. One of the authors of the study, Jeanine Baker, said she knew in 1996 it would be impossible for years to know whether the Prime Minister or the shooters were right. "I have been collecting data since 1996 … The decision was we would wait for a decade and then evaluate," she said. The findings were clear, she said: "The policy has made no difference. There was a trend of declining deaths that has continued." Dr Baker and her co-author, Samara McPhedran, declared their membership of gun groups in the article, something Dr Baker said they had done deliberately to make clear "who we are" and head off any possible criticism that they had hidden relevant details. The significance of the article was not who had written it but the fact it had been published in a respected journal after the regular rigorous process of being peer reviewed, she said. Politicians had assumed tighter gun laws would cut off the supply of guns to would-be criminals and that homicide rates would fall as a result, the study said. But more than 90 per cent of firearms used to commit homicide were not registered, their users were not licensed and they had been unaffected by the firearms agreement. Dr Baker said many more lives would have been saved had the Government spent the $500 million on mental health or other programs rather than on destroying semi-automatic weapons. She believed semi-automatic rifles should be available to shooters, although with tight restrictions such as those in place in New Zealand. The director of the NSW Bureau of Crime Statistics, Dr Don Weatherburn, said he was not surprised by the study. He said it showed "politicians would be well advised to claim success of their policies after they were evaluated, not before".
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 848
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 848 |
Quote:
I have a friend who got weekends for 2 months in jail and community service for beating up a 17 year old, because he was a minor my friend for sentenced. It was irrelevant that the 17 year old was bullying an elementary school student and when my friend intervened the 17 yo told him to F-off and pushed him, when my friend approached him closer and grabbed his arm, the kid hauled off and hit him. So my friend reaction was to hit him back, and then restrained him while he called the police on his cell.
BTW my friend is like 5'11" 180, the 17 year old was about 6'0" 250
Read and re-read and re-read again the above story by FloridaiFan. This is the problem, plain as day. Until society realizes the above story is what's wrong with this country, no law will have an effect on what happened in Columbine, VT or otherwise. None, zero, zilch. Re-read this story 5000 times if that's what it takes to get it through your head.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,232
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,232 |
Quote:
And anywho, you'd bail us out anyway.
So critisize our society for our violence,then expect us to be violent to save your asses?
Isn't that a bit of a contradiction?
Besides,I know you mean well,but do you have any idea of the logistics involved in trying to regulate millions of private citizens on the guns already in circulation in this country? You know exactly what I'm saying..........
And you need only look to the "war on drugs" to see just how innaffective that would be. You can get drugs anywhere too. And they're illegal as hell. Point being,with 100,000,000 guns in circulation,you can't and won't stop criminals and wackos from getting guns anymore than you can stop me from buying weed. Legislation would be like putiing a band aid on a severed limb. It won't stop the bleediong.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224 |
Interesting but where are the stats? Quote:
Dr Baker and her co-author, Samara McPhedran, declared their membership of gun groups in the article, something Dr Baker said they had done deliberately to make clear "who we are" and head off any possible criticism that they had hidden relevant details.
Ok, gun lobbyists......you'll notice this is an older article than the one i posted.
The article i posted did state there was a decline already but:
Quote:
The findings were clear, she said: "The policy has made no difference. There was a trend of declining deaths that has continued."
halved over 10 years?! The rate was declining at such a rate before the buy-back?
Quote:
But more than 90 per cent of firearms used to commit homicide were not registered, their users were not licensed and they had been unaffected by the firearms agreement.
Of course.....registered guns are damned easy to trace. Nothing new with that snippet, it would've been the case before the buy back but they left that bit out eh?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224 |
Quote:
So critisize our society for our violence,then expect us to be violent to save your asses?
Isn't that a bit of a contradiction?
Nope. Soldiers are meant to have guns, but Joe Blow arguing with his neighbour over the dogs barking is a different matter.
Quote:
Besides,I know you mean well,but do you have any idea of the logistics involved in trying to regulate millions of private citizens on the guns already in circulation in this country? You know exactly what I'm saying..........
No one said it would be easy Pit....stop being defeatist. 
Quote:
And you need only look to the "war on drugs" to see just how innaffective that would be. You can get drugs anywhere too. And they're illegal as hell.
By that rationale, why not make all drugs legal....as people are going to use and get them anyway?
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,367 |
Quote:
By that rationale, why not make all drugs legal....as people are going to use and get them anyway?
Absolutely.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 848
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Oct 2006
Posts: 848 |
Quote:
By that rationale, why not make all drugs legal....as people are going to use and get them anyway?
Because then our own government couldn't sell them for as much as they do. Personally, I think we should have our own Amsterdam. Let people get as baked as they want, they OD, that's their problem. Put them all in one place without the use of vehicles and tax the hell out of the drugs.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Truth is, this country has alot of issues right now , Illegal immigrants, poverty, the justice system, drugs, crime in general. Gun control is far from the top of the list as I see it. there are much more pressing needs. Besides, if Canada decides to invade, all our armed forces are in some desert in the Middle East, so we need guns to fight them back across the border. 
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224 |
Quote:
Absolutely.
Uh-oh......i've done it now....
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,232
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 75,232 |
Quote:
Quote:
By that rationale, why not make all drugs legal....as people are going to use and get them anyway?
Absolutely.
Intoducing for The Cleveland Browns, Quarterback Deshawn "The Predator" Watson. He will also be the one to choose your next head coach.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365 |
Quote:
Decline in gun deaths doubled since Australia destroyed 700,000 firearms
Increase in other types of murder triple since Australia destroyed 700,000 firearms
Well not really, BUT how can you include the decline in firearm deaths, without also listing the increase in other forms of death? How many more people were stabbed, beaten, run over, blown up? How many people still killed themselves buy means other than a gun shot ? To be fair all the info should be discussed.
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224 |
Good point...well presented....i have no idea.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224 |
Some interesting figures on this page from the 90's showed that more than half of all armed robberies were carried out with a knife as the weapon of choice....maybe that had something to do with the buy-back policy...i don't know. web page If that is the case gm, pick your poison...face a knife, machete, fists and feet....or high powered semi-automatic weapons.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365 |
I'll take the semi-automatic. At least if its some huge guy, the odds will be 50/50 if I have one also Now if it's fists and feet, and the guys 6"5 270 pounds I don't have a chance in hell 
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224 |
I thought you might have picked "poison"....or death by cheeseburger.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803 |
Well I'm 6'1 almost 280 and I think you at, what are you now 70? can kick my butt. 
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 2,667 |
I thought I was wrong once....but I was mistaken...
What's the use of wearing your lucky rocketship underpants if nobody wants to see them????
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 27,365 |
70  You sweet talker you
I AM ALWAYS RIGHT... except when I am wrong.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803 |
I don't know gun laws well at all. I don't own one and never will. I do not want to see them banned but I think we could probably make improvements to disqualify some people from owning them. I know it is illegal for felons to own guns and I think there should be a way to sto people who are known to be mentally unstable who have shown tendancies towards violence to be excluded also.
I know about waiting periods also but that doesn't mean the police do the backround checks. There should be more pressure to have these done properly.
I do believe in conseal carry laws as long as the permit owners have to pass a comprehensive course.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224
Dawg Talker
|
|
Dawg Talker
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 1,224 |
Very good post "P"...that would've taken me at least 2 seperate topics and 80 posts to convey....oh wait. I don't disagree with a single word.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Who here believes that if this kid didn't get the guns from that store, none of this would have happened?
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 11,803 |
I didn't know he bought these guns at a store. I do know here in Youngstown it is not that hard to get one off the street if you know where to look. I have a feeling it is a little harder in Blacksburg.
#gmstrong
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015
Legend
|
|
Legend
Joined: Sep 2006
Posts: 15,015 |
Quote:
I didn't know he bought these guns at a store. I do know here in Youngstown it is not that hard to get one off the street if you know where to look. I have a feeling it is a little harder in Blacksburg.
Yeah they found the receipt in his backpack.
He was an engineering student, he could have easily made a bomb and blown up half the campus.
We don't have to agree with each other, to respect each others opinion.
|
|
|
DawgTalkers.net
Forums DawgTalk Tailgate Forum Gun Control ??
|
|
