Americans, Isn't It Time You Relinquished Your Weapons.

Originally posted by Jeremiah65
reply to post by LeatherNLace

 

There is a reason that slavery was left in the Constitution when it was written. had they put emancipation in it at that time, many of the states would not have joined the union and we would not have defeated England...it was done with the idea "that it was a fight for another day"...our Founding fathers were obviously infinitely wiser and possessing more foresight than you can possibly imagine...or ever hope to possess.

The same argument can be made for the right to bear arms.

Yes...the Constitution is a not an infallible document, but it is a "living" document. It should be approached with great care and caution. It was made to be changed and added to but not without great effort and considration...and that is exactly how it should remain.

I totally agree; which is why I do not cavalierly remove the right to bear arms from such considerations. This issue should be discussed at some point during every congressional session; if only in passing.

I am not against doing things to get weapons out of the hands of morons and psychos...but you tell me how to do that without infringing on the rights of good, honest and innocent people that have a right to have them and I will listen

IDK....maybe you first start by outlawing ammo....then remove the right to bear arms from the "good, honest and innocent people"....then you create laws that imprison offenders for life....set up sting operations to catch those that don't comply...publicize the successes of those sting operations...etc...

Will it completely stop gun violence? NO. Is the inability of achieving zero gun violence reason to oppose such ideas? NO.

We, as American citizens, can never stop violence of any kind, but we can certainly make every effort to curb it.

It's not that violence in America can be completely prevented; rather, it's that we, as Americans, make it too easily achievable. Put up a few roadblocks and let's see how many drunks drive through them...

reply to post by Bodhi7

Well then it is nice to be part of the 1%, finally made it!! I for one will not be turning anything over to anyone. Things that I have lawfully purchased, and lawfully maintained are mine, by law. No doubt they will get them eventually. But would you want to be the first one through the door???

Originally posted by ALOSTSOUL
Now I know I'm not American and I know it's not my place to say what you should do but there has been 60 mass school shootings since the 1999 columbine shooting.

"Since the 1999 Columbine tragedy there have been sixty school shootings, double the rate seen in the previous decade. These school shootings have resulted in 181 deaths," said psychiatrist Dr Warren Steiner, of McGill University, Montreal.

www.telegraph.co.uk...

And now with the shooting at sandy hook the statistics rises to 61 shootings and (approx) 210 deaths 20 of which are young children.

Now I know your worried and I know its in the constitution to "bear arms" but surely enough is enough. We here in britain have done just fine with tight gun control. In fact I would go as far to say that it's one of the best things that's happened to Britain since the NHS.

How many more people must die because you are to proud to give up your pistols?

Remember if you relinquish your weapons so will the police (or most of).

Please America start thinking about gun control!

ALS

edit on 14-12-2012 by ALOSTSOUL because: (no reason given)

Police will not simply just give up their guns because the public does, that is ignorant. But as for the OP, I believe in gun control. I think there should be some way to ensure that mentally unstable people do not have access to guns.

If we are talking gun banning, which is different obviously then I think that the police should not have them either. If you have only the police and military having guns then it can easily lead to corruption and manipulation of the people. I don't want the people in power being the only one with guns, that is a recipe for disaster. That said I think there should be some controls or measures put in place to keep tragic things like what happened today from happening.

I however don't trust those in power to be the only ones having access to guns.

I live in australia.

Normal people do not have weapon access, generally. Ammo must be kept locked away from weapons for the few who own a license. (most licencees are farmowners). without a suitable hunting/pest property, its nigh on impossible to get a gun without joining a club and keeping the gun at said club...

All the police have guns,
All the organised criminals have guns
Psychos still get guns.

Not only are we powerless against people with guns, but we are also at the mercy of the authorities. The cops pull out their guns here and hands up is the only option you have, regardless of how fair a call was made. and of course there's always 2 cops to back each other up.

The OP is in serious denial.

With the things going on in the world how can anyone mention getting rid of guns. Governments are getting bold.

Seeing as you are from England I totally understand that your country controls every facet of your life and you are used to it. I meant the EU controls your life.

We do not want that kind of dictatorship. Your government gets away with anything because the people do not have the means to fight back even if they wanted to.

People die in inner cities all the time and I would bet 99% of the guns are illegally owned.

Former Criminals cannot legally own guns in the U.S. yet a lot of the people who are involved in crimes in the inner-city are former criminals and should of never have been allowed a gun. Yet THEY have them. The criminals will always have guns. Always. Most of the killing in American inner cities are between criminals killing each other. Gun laws haven't stopped that. They haven't suddenly started to stab each other.

From personal experience:
1. In the northeast cities people do not generally own guns and home invasions are a norm, so common as to not be reported.
2. In the south, a lot of people own guns and home invasions are rare. If you hear of a robbery it will be at a bank, the bank will not shoot back. lol

All criminals want to be successful in their endeavors, they will ALWAYS choose the EASIEST target. This idiot today chose to kill kids and women. By taking away guns, you will make every person an easy target.

I used to feel the way you do, until I saw the other side. More guns actually reduce crime. You have to look at the LOCATIONS these killings are done. I can bet money that most of these killings in the U.S. are done in states that have strict gun laws so as to make only the criminals desire to own them.

I live in NJ and the gun laws here are onerous, yet my neighbor had a gun pointed at her face and her Mercedes Benz stolen. The person was obviously not a law abiding citizen. Criminals will always commit crimes and banning guns will not stop that.

I would note that this would rarely happen in the South. The person would have to be a really easy target for someone to even try to do something so bold. These heinous crimes happen in states that are liberal, and try to restrict guns.

Gun ownership is one of the main reasons America historically has had so few wars on its own soil. LOL They aren't successful because the ENTIRE nation forms an army. lol

Originally posted by RedmoonMWC
reply to post by LeatherNLace

 

"submit to the demands of the majority or prepare for the consequences"
excuse me?
The last time I checked this was a Constitutional Republic under the rule of law not a democracy where majority rules, And the law gives the people the Right to keep and bear arms. It isn't up for debate and it isn't changable by executive order.

You poor soul; everything is up for debate...go re-read the constitution.

P.S. I never mentioned executive order. However, the majority can sway the states on constitutional amendments.

reply to post by LeatherNLace


I'm not going to point mark argue with you.

I simply disagree with parts of your position. I see absolutely no reason to stop a law abiding citizen from being able to sport shoot or hunt. I used to do it all the time and it is a genuine skill, sport, pastime and an enjoyment to participate in. I ended up not having time and eventually sold my guns to a gun shop. But just because I no longer participate in a valid sport/past time, I see no reason to deny other people that freedom.

I can see some people's position on handguns and assault weapons...to a point. But I refuse to let the baby be thrown out with the bathwater and I refuse to let tragedy be another catalyst to get our rights raped...we did this once and we got the Patriot Act...wonderful. "Fool me once, shame on you" (and to say it correctly) fool me twice, shame on me." Won't give up rights in fear again.

Yes, I can agree as I stated in another post that a firearm should be no different than a car...another deadly missile...you should have to take classes and be licensed and certified to use it. That might get them out of the hands of the loony tunes and the psychos...but prob not the sociopaths...they are smart and clever and are expert manipulators...it will not stop them.

The mob does not rule here and it never should. I will not get into a debate over the validity of law and it's application to the many, the few and the one....and the absolute requirement for rights of the many, the few and the one...guaranteed by law. The mob must not ever rule.

"Republics decline into democracies and democracies degenerate into despotisms." - Aristotle

Pure democracy is a fallacy and a fantasy and is impossible...that is why they never last. Republics have lasted for centuries.

Sigmund Freud did some papers on it...he assured us that people are incapable of democracy....they are too violent and bloodthirsty and are driven by the mob...he used Nazi Germanies mob as an example of what happens when "the mob" rules...

reply to post by LeatherNLace


You sound remarkably like a disinfo agent, I sincerely hope you never have to live under the rules you advocate. I also hope you never come face to face with the knowlege that criminals do not obey the law and that your Taekwondo training won't help you against a criminal with a gun.

Originally posted by tkwasny


I don't have the actual court case(s) at my finger tips right now but the ammunition is regarded as a component of "arms". Just as it is also infrigement to prevent the manufacture of gun parts, the transportation of parts or ammo.

The words "well regulated" in the constitution (look up the word regulation) means well trained in the use. This implies that not only should every citizen possess a firearm, but it is the responsibility of the govt. to train them all in their use.

For now....Reply Fail!

Find the court case and then argue the point....don't prop up your argument with "fictitious" Supreme Court rulings. Solidify your facts with concrete proof; otherwise, go crouch in the shadows with the gun clingers.

Originally posted by RedmoonMWC
reply to post by LeatherNLace

 

You sound remarkably like a disinfo agent, I sincerely hope you never have to live under the rules you advocate. I also hope you never come face to face with the knowlege that criminals do not obey the law and that your Taekwondo training won't help you against a criminal with a gun.

Defeatist.

Disinfo agent....I like the sound of that....is it a paying job?

I completely hope to live under the rules I advocate...AND you shall comply as well; or else.....we are watching you.

reply to post by Logos23


The gunman in 1996 had legal guns, but he could have easily used a knife or ax or chainsaw. This lunatic today could have easily used a knife. Your country blamed all guns for the crime and banned them for EVERYONE, which is crazy. Your country should have blamed the criminal and moved on.

Also, America is diverse. I live in an inner city which has a lot more gun deaths, because the criminals are killing each other and occasionally killing on citizens. The numbers of deaths and injuries should document that. There are also gang related killings among so many other types.

These kinds of events are still very rare, strange how so many have happened in one year though. Hmmm...

Originally posted by cartesia
I live in australia.

Normal people do not have weapon access, generally. Ammo must be kept locked away from weapons for the few who own a license. (most licencees are farmowners). without a suitable hunting/pest property, its nigh on impossible to get a gun without joining a club and keeping the gun at said club...

All the police have guns,
All the organised criminals have guns
Psychos still get guns.

Not only are we powerless against people with guns, but we are also at the mercy of the authorities. The cops pull out their guns here and hands up is the only option you have, regardless of how fair a call was made. and of course there's always 2 cops to back each other up.

It is stuff like this I think that worries a lot of people. When only those in power and the criminals have the weapons the rest of us are screwed. Not that I don't think there should be stricter laws in place and that not just any ol Tom, Dick, or Harry should be able to have a gun. When those in power are the only ones armed then you have no way to protect yourself from corruption.

Gun control - yes
Banning or giving up weapons - HELL NO.

Do you seriously think that banning anything makes it disappear? Do you think criminals, or tyrants care about gun laws? Does a perp who is breaking into your home care?

Making firearms illegal for a law abiding citizen would make them defenseless to the criminals, and the crazies.

The issue is NOT taking or limiting guns for the average citizen, the issue is how to identify the mentally unhinged and get them off the streets - its people control as it were, not inamimate object control as some would have you believe.

I think today every existing law on the books was broken, from form 4473 questions, to legal age restrictions, to possession by someone under care of mental health system, to being in possesion when under influence of certain medications. (some speculation but bet it bears out) basically under law these weapons were stolen as were those by recent mall shooter.

Point is all the laws on the books about the "object" will not prevent someone bound and determined to do something like todays shooting. Never has never will but politicians keep pushing more rules they know don't work and plea bargain away those that do for sentence reduction and lessor pleas from criminals.

Instead of trying to abridge a constitutional right held by all citizens for very good reason maybe its time to spend resources on removing from society those criminals who absolutely abused their rights for a long time and finding ways to identify those who are a danger to normal society and either institutionalizing them or at a minimum make something like the "no fly" list for the unbalanced regarding gunownership.

I am a big fan of laws with sunset provisions especially when dealing with folks freedoms, that includes gun owners as well as those judged not capable by criminal action or mental capacity - should be no extensions allowed and renewal only upon newly completed legislation each time sunset provision kicks in. I think this would allow electorate to have a say in how things are decided by virtue of their votes for congressional representatives.

Hopefully something like that would help address abuses that are inherent like certain groups declared unstable or some such crap as went on in Germany, Soviet Russia or China declaring political opposition mentally unstable.

As a thirty plus year gun owner I do not want my rights abridged for some nutters actions because of kneejerk reactions which really do nothing to get to root of the problem.

The problem is identify these nutters and actually doing something about it.

Secondarily those majority of citizens who are law adiding should have every right to bear arms freely in protection of life, liberty and freedom as our ancesters intended. It was never the hunting or sporting clause and for very valid reasoning.

"Shall not be infringed" is the way it should be for anybody who is law abiding, meaning not criminal nor under mental health care. I think in a true debate we could all decide what level of "mental healthcare" constitutes reason to question ones gun rights - always with review and sunsetting of course.

Right now I am viewing todays events with an opinion of a systematic failure of the mental health system along with benign neglect of our governments responsibility - it s a political failure in most ways I can think of - that failure is offering over 20,000 bandaids rather than dealing with the root problem.

I feel my rights are in jeopardy because of this failure and the P.C. culture that keeps promoting failed policy over concrete action.

And yes I do feel its an agenda.

Relinquish our guns so that someone could use a knife to kill school children instead (even more painful and traumatic) like the guy in China did today?

reply to post by LeatherNLace


Unlike you, I am well aware that I am on a government list somewhere, but if you think that our gun laws are up for debate you might want to look again it was already settled by the Supeme Court.

Besides our government is wholly owned by big business and believe me the arms industry is a very big business.

You might also want to check out this thread

also for your edification

Originally posted by MidnightTide
Gun control - yes
Banning or giving up weapons - HELL NO.

Do you seriously think that banning anything makes it disappear?

Of course not, but we are not thinking "in the now"....we are thinking generations ahead. Much like this "fiscal cliff"; it's not about TODAY; rather it is about future generations.

"A Stitch in Time May save nine."

Do you think criminals, or tyrants care about gun laws? Does a perp who is breaking into your home care?.

Of course they don't care....and they will continue to commit gun wielding crimes; however, as we remove guns from the population and simultaneously outlaw bullets, those crimes will diminish....eventually leading to a nearly gun free society for our grandchildren.

I'd much rather dodge 100 swings of a knife as opposed to attempting to duck 100 bullets.

The correct title for this post should read "America.. isn't it time to put God back in our schools!" This is sad to say the least... but Where we refuse to put God... Evil will reign... Without light there will be darkness.... you people need to wake up!

ALS, Having lived in England for a few years I can understand why you may think you are safer without guns.
But oddly enough I found that to be the opposite case.
Pretty much everyone I talked to while living there had been a victim of crime at some point. Be it muggings, purse snatching, rape, burglary, assault, or even squatters.
I even had my own motorcycle stolen. Fortunately they couldn't start it so they didn't get far.
One night I caught two guys walking down the street randomly trying to open car doors and apartment doors just to see if they could find one unlocked.
Overall all I felt less safe in London that I did in Los Angles or Shanghai.

In American yes there is violence but it seems to be random and less personal.
In London it felt like low level thuggery all the time.
Maybe it because we have more space but as a rule your not going to run into trouble here unless your in the wrong area or it is truly just random.

Over here there is a common tactic of "home invasions" where four or more criminals will literary storm a house.
I know of two people that have defended their homes from a home invasion by shooting the intruders.
If they did not have that ability I probably would have been attending their funerals.

One thing to also keep in mind is we are a much larger country. I live in a very rural area. If I called the police right now it would take them 20 to 30 minutes just to get out here. I have no desire to see if I can hold off an a criminal invading my home with a kitchen knife while being put on hold with the police department.

For me it boils down to a matter of personal responsibility. I cannot hand off the responsibility of defending my loved ones from harm to a distant and unresponsive government organization.

Originally posted by RedmoonMWC
reply to post by LeatherNLace

 

Unlike you, I am well aware that I am on a government list somewhere, but if you think that our gun laws are up for debate you might want to look again it was already settled by the Supeme Court.

Besides our government is wholly owned by big business and believe me the arms industry is a very big business.

Bravo for accepting, and even championing, big business.

In regards to the Supreme Court decision you linked...

The 5 to 4 decision does not strike down any gun-control laws, nor does it elaborate on what kind of laws would offend the Constitution.

WOW....5 to 4 decision....sounds solid there hotrod...before Obama is out of office, I wouldn't be so confident that the previous decision stands. In fact, I deliberately voted for Obama so that he could appoint liberal judges to negate 50+ years of conservative Supreme Court failure.