GUN CONTROL/LAWS/2ND AMENDMENT Chat. Your thoughts?

GUN Control/Laws/2nd Amendment Chat reposted Add your Thoughts

Terry I’d like to know what people think regarding the 2nd constitutional amendment on the right to bear arms in the USA. Absolutely for or against, somewhere in between, and WHY. C’mon, what else is there to do on those 3 minutes of boredom when you check in, hoping for something to

Dan i would trade my gun for some betal nuts ANY day!

    •  

Wendy Is that the one about housing soldiers in a civilians home w/o their consent?? Or cruel and unusual punishment, because I’m all for that one. 😉

    •  

Terry Sommers no. citizens’ right to own and use weapons

    •  

Wendi Gregory Simmons I KNOW! It was a joke!!!

    •  

Terry Sommers i wasn’t sure. You are from oklahoma, ya know

    •  

Wendi Gregory Simmons But I’m the smartest damn okie ever!

    •  

Terry Sommers ahem*** “I’d like to know what people think regarding the 2nd constitutional amendment on the right to bear arms in the USA. Absolutely for or against, somewhere in between, and WHY. C’mon, what else is there to do on those 3 minutes of boredom when you check in, hoping for something to chew on?”

    •  

Dennis Dz I’m for it.

    •  

Dennis Dz Why? Because I think in a healthy society, guns are only useful tools. There are plenty of shootings b/c our society is sick. Taking away guns won’t change that at all.

    •  

Ada Clementy thats some bullpucky there Dennis Dz, taking away guns will stop shootings. Stop watching Faux News

    •  

Terry Sommers how do you qualify ‘bullpucky’?

    •  

Dennis Dz Sure, taking away guns might stop the gun violence, but it wouldn’t address the fundamental causes of gun violence.

Please stay away from the easy assumptions. You don’t know me at all.

    •  

Melanie Dawn Coldewey I think I’ve always felt this way. But even more so since having a child. I feel one should have the right to protect self, family and property. Guns are on this earth, like it or not, and in lieu of striking them all from this place I’d like to at least know I have a somewhat equal defense to malicious intentions.

    •  

Melanie Dawn Coldewey Though I also think people should have some sort of general psychological examination before legally obtaining any!

    •  

Terry Sommers and lately, the DHS has ordered about a BILLION rounds of hollowpoint ammunition. Hollowpoints are illegal for use in warfare according to the geneva convention, but apparently Homeland Security thinks it needs to be able to tear apart people from the inside.

    •  

Peter McAinsh I put mercury in my hollow point rounds and sealed it with beeswax. Not just acute lead poisoning but heavy metal too for those home invaders. When the bullet hits it opens like a cluster bomb. Fabntastic!

    •  

Terry Sommers unless you become the more likely statistic, which is that people are more likely to accidentally shoot themselves than shoot an actual person in self-defense.

    •  

Terry Sommers ‎, Peter McAinsh.

    •  

Ethan Kegley

The right to bear “arms” and protect one’s body and property from unlawful confiscation, harm and or death.

Until the constitution changes, then people do have the right to purchase, possess and use (lawfullly) those aforementioned arms.

What I do think is silly is for one person to own more than one gun. While I could see the argument for a rifle being different then a handgun, therefor one of each should be owned. This would be one for hunting, one for self defense. I don’t think people should be able to have more than one hand gun… possibly not more than one hand gun per house…

It sounds like I am arguing to uphold the second amendment. In fact, I think guns are, while fun, quite nasty things. It is true, society is sick, but do we need to make it easier for people to kill other people?

I think a comedian said it quite well. Yes, if that fellow had not had a gun he probably would have still tried to carry out an attack with some other weapons…. but you just cant kill as many people with a crossbow, swords, etc. than you can with a semi-automatic rifle or machine gun for that matter.

I do think that licensing should be much more strict, i think people should have to renew their license every year with a class and a demonstration of safety knowledge.

A gun is a tool of death, it can be used for little else.

    •  

Terry Sommers Timothy Mcveigh supposedly killed over 160 humans with a u-haul truck, diesel fuel, and agricultural fertilizer. That’s why I don’t have any fertilizer in my home – i let my snails turn my table scraps into nutrients for my planter beds.

    •  

Ethan Kegley Yeah, bombs are another matter, and poison gas could be another, or broken government policy that leads to starvation and disease. But I think we were talking about the second amendment to the constitution of the USA

    •  

Terry Sommers I’m getting ahead of myself.

    •  

Terry Sommers tho i was commenting on your comment about finding another way to kill people without guns

    •  

Ethan Kegley true, and I agree with you. There are numerous ways to dispatch a soul from its mortal coil. Sorry, I was just taking your lead in reminding us what we are discussing.

    •  

Ethan Kegley Let’s look at it from this perspective. Whole industries exist because of the second amendment… are there other amendments to the constitution that have created whole industries built up around the continuation of that “right” though I would call it a responsibility (when it comes to treating the gun carefully to the nth degree)

    •  

Boston Paul

Gun Laws are awesome… the government takes the guns away….

No guns!

Except for the Criminals…

I can see it now:

GUNS LAWS ENACTED. THIS IS AN AMNESTY. CITIZENS TURN IN YOUR GUNS.

Mafia Boss: Oh No! I have to turn my gun in! The Government says so!

Street Thug: This is Terrible! We’re not allowed to have guns, we have to hand them over to the authorities! I’ll get right on that!

Gang Member: Shit Man, I just bought this Mofo Glock from Billy BagPipes yesterday… government says I need to turn this shit in because of some amnesty thing. I’m on it!

Serial Killer: Looks like I’m going to have to change how I kill. I must turn my gun in. Maybe I can just bludgeon them to death with the leg broken off a piano bench now.

Crooked Evil Cop: I get to keep mine!

Law Abiding Gun Owning Citizen: Well I guess our streets will be safer now from the Mafia, Street Thugs, Gang Members and Serial Killers, because we ALL have to turn our guns in.

God Bless Amerika!

(Lucky there was no gun control in 1776, eh, would have been tough kicking England’s ass with Bows/Arrows, sticks and stones)

Gun Laws only affect those that can legally own guns.

Here are some Quotes and Historical facts on Governments that control guns for y’all:

* “The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to posses arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by doing so.” -Adolph Hitler 1938

*The 1938 Nazi law barred Jews from businesses involving firearms. On November 10. 1938 — one day after the Nazi party terror squads (the SS) savaged thousands of Jews, synagogues and Jewish businesses throughout Germany — new regulations under the Weapons Law specifically barred Jews from owning any weapons, even clubs or knives.

*After the Christian Tutsis had been disarmed by governmental decree in the early 1990s, Hutu-led military forces began to systematically massacre the defenseless Christians.

“One of the ordinary modes, by which tyrants accomplish their purposes without resistance, is, by disarming the people, and making it an offense to keep arms.”
— Constitutional scholar Joseph Story, 1840

    •  

Terry Sommers anyone willing to spar with Paul?

    •  

Terry Sommers http://www.ratical.org/co-globalize/BillOfRights.html#1

US Constitution–Bill of Rights–The First Ten Amendments

www.ratical.org

The following is a transcription of the first 10 amendments to the United States

Constitution. Called the “Bill of Rights”, these amendments were ratified on December 15, 1791. Each amendment’s title is linked to a set of detailed annotations presented on the Findlaw website.

    •  

Boston Paul Noah Webster, 1787:

“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops.”

    •  

Ethan Kegley

according to wiki:

There were 52,447 deliberate and 23,237 accidental non-fatal gunshot injuries in the United States during 2000.[4] The majority of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides,[5] with 17,352 (55.6%) of the tota

l 31,224 firearm-related deaths in 2007 due to suicide, while 12,632 (40.5%) were homicide deaths.[6] In 2009, according to the UNODC, 60% of all homicides in the United States were perpetrated using a firearm.[7]

30 percent non fatal injuries are accidental and more than 50 percent of gunshot deaths are suicide

I agree with paul, we cant just say we are going to take the guns away and expect violence to go down… but it does seem that the Gun is the weapon of choice in most things death related.

    •  

Terry Sommers convenient packaging, la

    •  

Ethan Kegley and isnt that what the gun really is, but a more convenient way to kill something?

    •  

Terry Sommers c’mon!!! someone take on Paul’s arguments!!! Aren’t there any verbose gun banners out there?

    •  

Ethan Kegley I thought I kind of did a little

    •  

Terry Sommers I’m saving my comments for last, but so far Paul’s statement seems the most convincing. What ever happened to death star Adam?

    •  

Ethan Kegley What about Japan as an example, low levels of gun violence

    •  

Terry Sommers and low levels of guns, but by our standards, a high level of kiddie porn

    •  

Terry Sommers i don’t wanna compare the usa with japan, two totally different cultures

    •  

Boston Paul

Dennis Dz: Sure, taking away guns might stop the gun violence, but it wouldn’t address the fundamental causes of gun violence.

I wish I could highlight the last 10 words of this sentence.

Fundamental Causes.


Why are schools in many US cities more violent than most other so called ‘First World’ countries?

What are the fundamental causes of any kind of violence in the first place?

Prescription Drugs for children who are ‘hyper-active’ …

… shite diets (parents giving junk food to kids before the age of 5 – IMO child abuse).

Child having a bad day, as we all do, and parents/teachers sending the kid to a shrink to ‘work it all out’…. perhaps doing more harm than good… (?)…. complex much?

The Media glorifying guns, a life of crime?

The Media Branding the Youth – where kids beat up or even kill for not just money, but slave labor made Nike shoes.

What is it about American ‘culture’ that breeds violence especially violence with guns?

Dennis DZ hit the nail on the head… Fundamental Causes.

The problem is not going to be solved with gun laws per se. The problem with violence in the US has been festering since World War II (ish) ….or perhaps the Industrial Revolution? Maybe since 1776?

Why is it that there are lower crime/violent rates than the US around the world?

Other countries, like those in the UK, don’t have many guns, other countries like Switzerland, males over 20 years old all keep a gun. In Switzerland then, there is a gun for every household…

Read about it here:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics_in_Switzerland

Picked this up on-line:

The Swiss:

“Whatever the effect of Swiss guns abroad, they are not even a trivial crime problem domestically. Despite all the guns, the murder rate is a small fraction of the American rate, and is less than the rate in Canada or England, which strictly control guns, or in Japan, which virtually prohibits them. The gun crime rate is so low that statistics are not even kept.

The suicide rate, though, is almost double the American rate. Guns are used in about one-fifth of all Swiss suicides compared to three-fifths of American and one-third of Canadian suicides.

It is not Switzerland’s cultural makeup, or its gun policies per se, that explain that low crime rate. Rather, it is the emphasis on community duty, of which gun ownership is the most important part, that best explains low crime rate.”

Your thoughts?

Gun politics in Switzerland – Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

en.wikipedia.org

Gun politics in Switzerland are unique in Europe. Switzerland does not have a standing army, instead opting for a peoples Militia to defend their country. The vast majority of men between the ages of 20 and 30 are conscripted into the militia and undergo military training, including weapons training…

 

    •  

Boston PaulTaking my gun away because I might shoot someone is like cutting my tongue out because I might yell `Fire!’ in a crowded theater.”
— Peter Venetoklis

    •  

Boston Paul Some other interesting Tidbits:

If strict gun control could actually disarm that criminal element in America, there might be an argument for gun control. But as Josh Sugarmann, former communications director for the National Coalition to Ban Handguns (NCBH), wrote in The Washington Monthly: “handgun controls do little to stop criminals from obtaining handguns.”

Sugarmann and NCBH favour gun control not to disarm criminals, but because they believe that non-criminal Americans cannot be trusted with handguns. The coalition’s political affairs director, Eric Ellman, has said that “the majority of gun owners are not responsible.” Yet a look at the facts shows that more than 99% of American citizens who are not professional felons are just as suited for gun ownership as any Swiss militiaman.

Ordinary American citizens use guns competently. Every 48 seconds, someone uses a handgun to defend himself against a crime (according to Florida State University’s Gary Kleck, using data collected by liberal pollster Peter Hart in a poll paid for by the anti-gun lobby).

Regular American citizens do not shoot each other in moments of passion; the vast majority of such shootings are perpetrated by thugs with a record of violence and substance abuse.

And contrary to the claims of the anti-gun lobby, Americans are not so careless that they cannot be trusted with potentially dangerous objects like guns. Gun accidents account for less than 2% of the nation’s 92,000 accidental deaths annually.

***Suicides have little to do with gun availability. Japan has no guns, while Switzerland is deluged with every gun in the book, and both nations have the same suicide rate.

Of course the more that U.S. governments can do to make gun use in America even more responsible, the better. Switzerland shows how successful governments can be in promoting responsible gun use.

Elementary schools in America should have gun safety classes which teach children never to touch a gun unless a parent is present, and they should be taught to tell an adult if they see an unattended gun. The NRA actively promotes this idea, and the National Association of Chiefs of Police endorses it. But Handgun Control opposes this reasonable, sensible safety measure. Has HCI gone off the deep end?

High schools and colleges wishing to offer target shooting as a sport should be allowed to do so. Unlike football or swimming, scholastic target shooting has never resulted in a fatality. The anti-gun groups oppose the sensible step of allowing the schools to offer students the safest sport ever invented. Have they gone off the deep end’? Finally, local governments should enact reasonable zoning laws, which allow the construction of indoor shooting ranges (properly ventilated and sound insulated) in urban areas. In some cases, governments should subsidise the building of ranges. At target ranges, Americans can take lessons in gun responsibility, and practice safe gun handling skills. As you might expect, the anti-gunners oppose this simple safety measure too. They’ve gone off the deep end.

What have we learned from Switzerland?’ Guns in themselves are not a cause of gun crime; if they were, everyone in Switzerland would long ago have been shot in a domestic quarrel.

Cultural conditions, not gun laws, are the most important factors in a nation’s crime rate. Young adults in Washington, D.C., are subject to strict gun control, but no social control, and they commit a staggering amount of armed crime. Young adults in Zurich are subject to minimal gun control, but strict social control, and they commit almost no crime.

What America can learn from Switzerland is that the best way to reduce gun misuse is to promote responsible gun ownership. While America cannot adopt the Swiss model, America can foster responsible gun ownership along more individualistic, American lines. Firearms safety classes in elementary schools, optional marksmanship classes in high schools and colleges, and the widespread availability of adult safety training at licensed shooting ranges are some of the ways that America can make its tradition of responsible gun use even stronger.

End Chat (for now!)

 

 

Published in: on August 18, 2012 at 8:41 PM  Comments (11)  
Tags: , , ,

The URI to TrackBack this entry is: https://bostonpaul.wordpress.com/2012/08/18/gun-controllaws2nd-amendment-chat-your-thoughts/trackback/

RSS feed for comments on this post.

11 CommentsLeave a comment

  1. FOR

  2. Going by the rambling discussion from elsewhere posted here as a story, it seems this is one thing you and I disagree on, Boston Paul. Although, I agree to a certain extent about the issue being about more than just the right to own a hunk of metal designed to kill people.

    I think the 2nd Amendment was meant to be a defence mechanism against foreign invasion or corrupted government destroying a fledgling democracy. But that was centuries before tanks, nuclear bombs, drones and all kinds of firepower became commonplace. No invading force could possibly take America without eradicating it in the process. And despite the best efforts of the laughable movie Red Dawn, not even vast numbers of the best armed citizens could hold off any state army for long. The 2nd Amendment ceased to be plausible once armies advanced beyond rifles and and cannons.

    The problem is that it stopped being relevant and, instead of fading into history, it morphed into a general legitimization of using violence. The gun has become an extension of a certain type of masculinity, a primitive, macho, simplistic, knee-jerk, reactionary way of thinking. The 2nd Amendment has become so holy, it might as well be the 2nd Commandment.

    In the process, it has validated every jackass’ desire to build his own armoury in order to defend himself against his paranoid delusions that somebody is out to kill him at any given moment. It’s this paranoia that fuels America’s internal arms race.

    Yeah, I agree with you that it’s more the thought process than the weapon. However, weapons bans are still justified by the sheer level of carnage. A deranged lunatic, or criminal, with a military assault weapon and 200,300,500 round gun clips results in a fuck of a lot more carnage than that same person armed with a baseball bat or a knife.

    And if everybody had this kind of weaponry on hand, once any shooting started, would it ever stop? Considering how much damage one person can do today and the fact we, as a society, have not evolved one iota since the 2nd Amendment was created, I think gun control is a must.

  3. Everytime there’s some mental case out there killing a lot of people, he has 7 guns, hundreds of rounds of ammo…in his car! and even a few grenades. Clearly obsessed with killing. If the govt is licensing gun ownership why don’t they know if some guy owns 7? No red flags at the license office when a guy buys more than 2?
    Handguns are for law enforcement, and rifles are for sport. Seven handguns is crazy, and seven rifles is crazy. It is NOT a right in a safe society. A safe society doesn’t allow gun ownership to the same extent USA does.
    I am not sure of the numbers, but there are more guns in the USA than people. Over 400,000,000 guns….what for?

  4. A hand gun has one purpose…to kill another human. I do not think they should be legal unless you are trained and responsible for the safety of someone like a politician. Rifles can not be concealed, are usually used for hunting, and can also be used to defend yourself. However, do I really want to kill a person who wants to steal my TV? The 2nd ammendment is out-dated, and arguing that you need a gun because other people have guns is really stupid. I want one person on this thread to tell me about the last time they needed a gun to defend home and family? We live in peaceful times and places people! We only need guns if other people have them!
    If you buy a handgun then you are making the decision to kill another human. I don’t have the lifestyle where I will need to do that ever. Instead of buying a gun, why not change your lifestyle?

    • Unfortunately, I live in a city (San Antonio, Tx) where that lifestyle is unavoidable, apparently, by many. Every morning I watch the depressing local news stations where not a day goes by it seems that I’m not hearing about break-ins, robberies and violence. Most, achieved by the hands of a gun-bearer. No, I have not, thankfully, ever been in a situation where I needed one. But, I would sure sleep more soundly knowing that, if ever I came across said situation, I would be able to protect my loved ones.

      • Maybe.

        I see the reasoning. However, the reality is that guns always favour the aggressor and the person most experienced in their use. Guns always favour the attacking criminal. The only advantage a homeowner has is knowledge of their surroundings. Take away that homefield advantage and the only edge you have is the fact that most criminals are high and/or stupid as fuck.

        So, unless you regularly simulate killing another person and are always prepared to do so, guns provide a largely false sense of security, especially outside the home.

        If watching the news has got you that scared about getting shot at any moment, I recommend moving or just turning off the news, The media has successfully scared everyone shitless about crime, despite the fact overall crime rates have been dropping most places for decades. Sadly, crime has become the format through which most stories are told, ratings are generated and corporate profits are made. Don’t let perception distort reality, or you may become a victim without ever being victimized.

        Or buy a bullet proof vest. It actually provides protection irregardless of your skills or preparation. Yet people see that option as “crazy”. I wonder why that’s crazier than walking around with a gun.

  5. Let’s get serious. When our founding fathers created the 2nd Amendment they were referring to a handheld pistol that took some time to load with gun powder. Nowhere in their deepest, wildest imaginations did they think in 2012 lunatics with automatic arsenols of weaponry would be walking around shooting innocent people. It’s really time to do some amending and if gun owners want to keep referring to the 2nd amendment than they should be allowed a pouch of gun powder and a 15 lb pistol.

    • yes yes yes

    • And they were also talking about arms for the purposes of forming militias. The main purpose of the 2 amendment was to ensure that, if the British decided they wanted to come back in a few years and give a 100% effort the next time, the comparatively disorganized states would have militias to call up, or serve as guerrilla groups after a successful invasion.

      There was also a consideration that the fledgling American government could get hijacked before its democracy grew roots and the militias could act as insurance against that.

      Both purposes are completely irrelevant in this day & age. The British are never going to invade because they became friends. And, despite the fact American democracy actually has been hijacked, no militia could take on the US government for more than 15 minutes.

    • Then so should the government & police..
      Guns were ment as a last defence from a tyranical government.
      Also,The President took an oath when he was elected
      (To protect the Constitution against ALL enemeys.Same as I did
      when I joined the service.
      I think it a moral issue.Deal with the idiots not the guns.

      • Idiots are a lot harder to deal with than guns. Idiots with guns are virtually impossible to deal with. Idiots have poor reasoning skills and an idiot with a gun doesn’t have to reason at all. That’s why these idiots must never get guns in the first place. The VERY least -and I mean VERY least- America must do is ensure criminals and idiots can’t buy guns. However, background checks mean nothing as long as the gunshow loophole exists.

        As for protection against tyrannical government…as I said in a comment above, if every single gun owner in America tried to take on America’s tyrannical government, they would probably last about 15 minutes.

        Given the level of domestic spying (tyranny anyone?) most militias would be infiltrated and/or drone striked (it’s “legal”) during their first meeting. Those that survived would find themselves firing AR15s at tanks, helicopter gunships and stealth bombers. Using violence against the #1 purveyor of violence in the world, the US government, is pure suicide.

        The original meaning of the 2nd Amendment is as relevant today as an amendment regarding the use of hats with buckles, the wooden barrel making industry, or the prosecution of witches.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: