The God Damned Gun Control Thread

[(SWGO)Kren]

I don't live in the US or understand all the nuances associated with firearms across there however I do have a few thoughts on the subject.

From Thomas Jefferson all those years ago:

"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."

But the use of muskets and such like in the Revolutionary War is quite different from what is available now such as:

http://www.dallasguns.com/guns_online/?cat=8

That was the first site I came across.

So would it be prudent to regulate the type of weapons sold as a starting point. Are military type weapons needed to protect you? How many weapons does it take to feel safe?

Some of you have talked about invasion but that is not going to happen and if it did the allies of the US would be there to stand with you. Do you really think that if the US becomes weak due to a massive natural disaster (Yellowstone eruption as an example) the allies would stand by without helping out?

We in the UK had the right to bear arms from the English Bill of Rights 1689 that stated "Subjects which are Protestants may have Arms for their Defense". In 1903 there was greater control brought in for firearms some 200 years or so after the above had been passed. A change in the law was made and that as they say is history. I am not saying there is no gun violence over here but the amount of firearms in circulation per person is regulated and we don't have weapons generally. Do I feel safe? Yes I do but perhaps if things were not regulated and guns were available for everyday use my thoughts might be different.

So going back to 'the right to bear arms' to defend yourselves is part of the US constitution but it is from an age gone by. Most people who I know think of bearing arms is associated with the military which going back to Thomas Jefferson's statement is perhaps what was meant: militia or irregular army that consisted of civilians to bear arms.

Fear, protection and financial elements seem to be the crux of the issues in hand in America today relating firearms and gun control. It appears that you as citizens want to protect yourselves and subsequently fear that without weapons you cannot attain this. With the 2nd amendment it gives you the freedom to exercise the right to bear arms. If gun control is introduced how many people would be out of pocket for the firearms they have purchased if they were forced/requested to hand these in and what would this do for the gun industry nationally?

From the outside looking in the US is at peace and not at war (except war on terror), there is no impending invasion so regulating and or reducing the arms available per person/family could be a first step in gun control. Taking the first steps and making this happen is what will be difficult. There is no easy/quick solution and if the US went down this route I have no doubt it would be painful.

Based upon the US history however the strongest weapon is the will of the people to change things for the better.

Kren

[WD-40]

First off Kren, my use of the US being attacked and overwhelmed by invaders was meant as a 'Hypothetical'. Just one of many possibilities that the future may hold...just a remote 'possibility', thats all. I, too, think it unlikely, but I used it as a 'Hypothesis' to get at what the Forefathers were 'possibly' thinking. I only argued it more, not just for the sake of arguing a point, but because Crater's Liberal views were too tempting to pass up.

Jefferson also said 'a little rebellion now and then is a good thing' , or something like that. Not that I'd want that, but keeping the 'People' empowered, keeps the 'Government' in-check. Take their guns away, they are less empowered, because as it is, we have a President who believes (he said this) that the Constitution is outdated. He has abused Executive Powers left and right, and really does not care what the People think...just what he thinks is what's important to Obama. He's been aiming his middle finger at his Congressional Opponents since he took office.

[Darth Crater]

The Constitution is outdated. It was literally written in a time when wars were fought with musket blocks and horse-drawn cannons. That's why it's designed to be amended - to remove bad or irrelevant laws and add new ones. And in the age of tanks, air support, and over-the-horizon warfare, civilians with rifles are irrelevant.

I do agree with you that the Executive branch has taken a bit too much power recently. Though given the amount of unfounded accusations surrounding it, I'm justified in pointing out that Congress Republicans have openly stated that their goal was not to help the country but to make Obama a "one-term president".

MD - I'm probably going to regret asking this, but who do you think is "invading" us?

[haasd0gg]

There is absolutely no reason to take away a persons right to defend his home and family. Do any of you folks arguing for gun control realize that laws only apply to law abiding citizens? The criminals do now and still would have firearms. Disarming the rest just turns us all into targets.
Making comparisons of U.S. firearm laws to European nations is like saying "the golf ball fits in the cup, the basketball would fit".

[mrjamwin]

There is absolutely no reason to take away a persons right to defend his home and family. Do any of you folks arguing for gun control realize that laws only apply to law abiding citizens? The criminals do now and still would have firearms. Disarming the rest just turns us all into targets.
Making comparisons of U.S. firearm laws to European nations is like saying "the golf ball fits in the cup, the basketball would fit".

Haas, you're bringing logic and facts to this discussion which liberal people who can't understand facts or logic continue to agrue the subject by using only their emotions and saying "that's not fair" You should know better by now! Crater will still continue with his emotional [female dog] and bring little or nothing to this discussion.

[haasd0gg]

[CommanderOtto]

I thought the following information very interesting:

In Japan guns are practically banned (with a few exceptions). The percentage of people killed in Japan by a gun is 0%. That's a fact, not something i'm making up lol.

Let me quote Newsweek about this country:

Firearms are essentially banned in Japan. The only guns permitted are shotguns, air guns and guns used in competition or for research. Even owning those requires a rigorous background check,, a battery of mental and physical tests and annual government inspections.

about Norway:

Applicants for gun ownership need to be at least 18, specify a "valid reason" for buying a gun and obtain a government license. Norwegian police officers rarely carry guns. The country has considered strengthening gun laws in the wake of a 2011 mass shooting.

EDIT: I will also add Australia because it is a culture that resembles the U.S in many ways. Percentage of people killed by guns in Australia is 0.1%. Quote from Newsweek:

After the port Arthur rampage in 1996, the government tightened gun control. Automatic and semiautomatic weapons are virtually prohibited and licensing and ownership rules are stiff. Gun owners are required to demonstrate a "genuine need" for weapons.

and I before someone says we can't compare the U.S with these countries.... that doesn't mean the U.S can't change. Their policies could be adopted here to make citizens safer. And plus, the U.S, Japan and Norway are all first world. The difference is more cultural than anything else. but that's just my opinion... I just want to point out what other countries do. What the japanese have done is a major advancement for quality of life. You don't have to be afraid of guns! Wow I wish that could happen in latin america... it sounds so impossible but the Japanese did it!!

and sigh, i'm not naive or unrealistic for saying this (in case someone is thinking that)... the japanese and europeans did it. So are they unrealistic?

[Darth Crater]

There is absolutely no reason to take away a persons right to defend his home and family. Do any of you folks arguing for gun control realize that laws only apply to law abiding citizens? The criminals do now and still would have firearms. Disarming the rest just turns us all into targets.
Making comparisons of U.S. firearm laws to European nations is like saying "the golf ball fits in the cup, the basketball would fit".

Haas, you're bringing logic and facts to this discussion which liberal people who can't understand facts or logic continue to agrue the subject by using only their emotions and saying "that's not fair" You should know better by now! Crater will still continue with his emotional [female dog] and bring little or nothing to this discussion.

... Feel free to point out anywhere I've called something "unfair," or anywhere I've made an appeal to emotion. The only versions of such I've seen are people claiming it would be unfair to take their guns, and letting their emotions get in the way of a realistic outlook on home invasions and insurrections...

Anyway, as I've said - while I'm not against tightening gun restrictions, I don't believe they'll make much difference on their own. Particularly not with said emotions getting in the way.

-snip image-

Association fallacy. Hitler's government is not an argument against guns, it is an argument against putting a bad government into power.

[THEWULFMAN]

And you know how relevant that is Otto? It isn't. You're not the first to bring up Japan as an example of an ideal nation in terms of gun control/crime/etc. You won't be the last.

This is the USA. Not Japan. We enjoy a lot more liberties then Japan does, and enjoy a more relaxed culture. Japan also has the 6th highest suicide rate in the world. USA is 34th.

We have guns here. We've had guns. We will always have guns. Making then illegal changes nothing, other than increasing the number of people in jail.

[CommanderOtto]

And you know how relevant that is Otto? It isn't. You're not the first to bring up Japan as an example of an ideal nation in terms of gun control/crime/etc. You won't be the last.

This is the USA. Not Japan. We enjoy a lot more liberties then Japan does, and enjoy a more relaxed culture. Japan also has the 6th highest suicide rate in the world. USA is 34th.

We have guns here. We've had guns. We will always have guns. Making then illegal changes nothing, other than increasing the number of people in jail.

dude, how is not relevant. You are talking about guns. And what does suicide have to do with it?

but just to be fair with everyone, I will point out that switzerland is also safe and almost everyone there has a gun. However, I would still prefer a place with no guns. It is also important to add that they don't have an army so that is why they permit everyone to own guns. That is a real case where a militia would be created, but the U.S already has an army so....

I also thought the following was interesting for all to see (regarding australia):

A study co-authored by Simon Chapman argued that reduction in firearm numbers had prevented mass shootings because in the 18 years prior to the Port Arthur massacre there were 13 mass shootings and in the decade since 1996 there have been none.[39]

- from wikipedia "Gun Politics in Australia"

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