USA/Guns Redux

[skank-la]

So now we have the Gabrielle Gifford event. A 22 year old loner legally buys semi automatic gun & clips (that were made illegal by Clinton but nobody here had the political nerve(read Bush admin) to reinstate the ban when it expired) & shoot a sitting US Representative in the head & suceeds in killing her top aide, A sitting Federal Judge, several 70+ year old bystanders & irony or all ironies a 9 year old girl born on 9/11. If not for quick action by wounded bystanders the guy would have loaded another clip & kept going

Last week in LA two 16 year old black high school students were executed by firearms by some Latino classmates for the crime of not being the same race as the shooters as they walked home from school. A 32 old mother was killed as she loaded her children in the car after a picnic in the park because she was in the line of fire between gangbangers. On & on & on -these are daily occurences here in the ole US of A

Last year there were approximately 40,000 deaths by firearms in the USA- subtract out the 16,000 by suicide you get 24,000 citizens killed by firearms. If Muslim terrorists killed 24,000 Americans in 1 year you can bet we would be nuking some spot on the earth.

T2K'ers will soon jump in the thread to defend ad nauseum their right to bear arms but the plain facts are simple.

Any Singapore politicians gunned down going about their daily business, any high school kids or picnicing mothers shot as well? We all know the answer.

Mexico is a failed state now - a narco terrorist free for all killing zone fueled by weapons from the USA. No one dares goes to Mexico now, even Mexican Amercians have given up their annual treks to visit relatives on the old country.

This country needs some kind of gun control -its out of control here

[Fat Bob]

Aside from the Beeb reporting that the US Rep is still in a critical condition, then yes, some sort of gun control is required.You shouldn't be able to get a gun as easily as you can get a can of beans.

According to Wiki, the majority of homicides in the US are gun-related.

Illegal guns would still play a part in the US's crime rates, but the 6 plus one serious injury above would probably have been prevented, along with some of the other massacres in recent years.

Though I think people should have some freedoms, giving them the freedom to buy something that is designed purely to injure and maim something with few checks is not a good one.

[Morrolan]

the 'rugged individualists' will never give up their guns.

and as long as even a Supreme Court judge (Scalia) maintains that the Constitution and its amendments should only be seen in the light of the time when it was written, the US will continue to live in the time of the wild west and think they are either Pat Garrett or Billy the Kid.

[T2K]

I can't even be bothered to type the whole thing again, see previous posts. We disagree on most points and that isn't going to change.

Here's the best I can muster at this point:

1. Anyone that will commit murder will also be willing to buy guns illegally
2. There are maybe 300,000,000 guns in circulation in the US, a huge source for illegal purchases which isn't going away
3. This most recent nutjob should have been on the denied list for firearms purchases. Having said that, see #1 above...
4. Guns have been available in the US (much more so than today, you could order them by mail) for our entire history. What's different now?
5. Other countries with high rates of gun ownership (Israel, Finland, Norway, Switzerland, etc) have much, much lower murder rates.
What's different?
6. The Columbine school murders took place during the Clinton gun and magazine ban

I can't understand why no one seems to care that we have more and more people willing to commit murder today in the US, and why that's the case, and instead focus on the tools they use, which have been commonly available for many decades. My dad told me that M1 Carbines (semi-auto rifles from WWII with 15 or 30 round magazines) were $15 each at the local hardware store in the 1950's or 1960's. There was no background check back then at all, nothing. Why did an orgy of gun killing not result? Really, think about it.

The root cause of murder is murderers. Not the tools they use. This guy could have plowed a car into the Congresswoman's group (they were outside in a parking lot) and accomplished the same or more mayhem. It's been done before. I worry about people, not guns.

[T2K]

the 'rugged individualists' will never give up their guns.

and as long as even a Supreme Court judge (Scalia) maintains that the Constitution and its amendments should only be seen in the light of the time when it was written, the US will continue to live in the time of the wild west and think they are either Pat Garrett or Billy the Kid.

Moro - the Supreme court has changed, does change and will continue to change the application of Constitutional law through interpretations and rulings, but it has to be based on the times. The majority of the US population values the 2nd Amendment and it's protection of our right to be armed.

So, rest easy, foreigners can all smugly, and accurately, say "they're getting what they deserve". It's not the "fault" of the Supreme Court, it's the "fault" of the American people.

[BoD]

OK, so its not that there are more guns, but rather that there are more nutters. Is there a reason for this? I am sure there are many theories as to the cause and to possible solutions. In the meantime, there surely comes a point when the American people should take a step back from simply quoting the constitution and agree to give up some of their freedom to bear arms because (for whatever reason) there is an ever increasing segment of the population that cannot be trusted with such a freedom. It's the same the world over. If a freedom or a priviledge is abused by a small minority, then it is taken away from all until such time that the minority can prove that they are responsible enough

[T2K]

I come to the complete opposite conclusion, BoD. If there are more and more people willing to commit murder, then obviously there are more and more people willing to disregard any existing or new gun laws (and we have LOTS already). Thus, the need for the vast majority of the population (who are, obviously, law-abiding and sane) to have a legal means to protect themselves is even more important. Note that guns are also frequently used to legally prevent crimes and save the lives of law abiding citizens in the US. These are not international news stories though.

Note - I've not actually looked at any stats. Perhaps murder rates are going up or down in the US? I don't really know.

[Lili Von Shtupp]

The difference between the 1950s and now is that in the 1950s the US was on the top of its game. Now it's a country on the decline. People are unsure of the future, feeling powerless, and getting scared. Fox has tapped into that fear and they feed it, and that's how they've become so powerful. Nobody knows who to trust, and the situation is ripe for extremism and paranoia. And these people have guns. And cars. And instructions on the net how to make an explosive device. etc.

IMHO at this point, new gun control measures are like closing the barn door after the horses have run out. To debate the right to bear arms is purely a theoretical exercise in futility anymore.

[T2K]

Lili - can't disagre with you except that I would replace "Fox" with "sensational and extreme TV, internet and radio news". There is nutjob shit from all directions all over the place in the US.

But yes, it's societal for sure.

[Lili Von Shtupp]

T2K, I stand by my singling out of Fox. They've earned it.

We may agree that the problem is societal, however, the core difference between your view and mine is that you believe the 2nd amendment has merit.

[T2K]

Indeed, I believe the entire "Bill of Rights" has merit. Though I admit as a kid I thought having soldiers quartered in our home would have been super cool, so the 3rd Amendment seemed kind of pesky.

The process to amend the Constitution does exist. However, I think a Constituional Convention would be more appropriate at this point in US history. It does need an overhaul and moderization.

[Fat Bob]

OK, so there's an increased amount of nutters.

And yes, restricting the sale of guns now will not mean a stop to the availability of guns in the short term.

However, the idea that changing society to stop the nutters from wanting to commit crimes is also not a short-term fix.

I think tackling this problem at one end is not enough. You need to tackle it from several sides, and one of those is reducing the availability of guns.

As for illegal guns: I doubt very much that Mr Nutter can just walk down the road and pick one up from the corner. If he can, then there's your societal problem. Get the law enforcement to do their jobs on the sale of illegal guns.

It is a choice, the UK made these choices 20 years ago after Dunblane and Hungerford. Guns are still available in the UK, however, you've got to prove that you need them. And "just because a 200 year old document says so" is not a good enough need.

200 years ago slavery was allowed. So that means it should still be allowed? No. I bet there's a few other laws from 200 years ago that have since been repealed. Why can't this one?

[T2K]

FB - The Constitution can be amended, as it was to outlaw slavery with the 13th Amendment in 1865. Until then, it's the law of the land. Any discussion of dramatic legal steps like the UK took is irrelevant in our system (we're citizens, you're subjects, it's different) as long as the 2nd Amendment stands.

As I've said on here before, I think a Constituional Convention is needed to address several anachronisms and vague areas in the Constitution. Without getting into all the details, for this to happen it would have to have a lot of support.

[Joseph27]

30 round clip on his glock - nice gun to fire but why does any home need a gun with a 30 round clip... thats crazy. I've been a shooting a few times recently and I understand the love of guns, but I also recognise that when I go shooting there are so many rules involved in the handling and storage of any weapon.

Still we can write what we want, you could scream and shout but nothing will change - its a sad reality but gun violence isnt going away and as the US govt keeps starving the country of funds whilst they spend the grandkids money on propping up Iraq and Afghanistan, I wouldnt want to give up my weapons either. Don't know what 2020 looks like but I am sure I wouldn't mind a firearm by my side just in case

[sundaymorningstaple]

- its a sad reality but gun violence isnt going away and as the US govt keeps starving the country funds whilst they spend the grandkids money on propping up Iraq and Afghanistan, I wouldnt want to give up my weapons either. Don't know what 2020 looks like but I am sure I wouldn't mind a firearm by my side just in case

Couldn't have said it better myself.

[Mr Oz]

This is the stuff that gets nutters like me foaming at the mouth

TUCSON, Ariz. - Authorities say they are not convinced one person was behind a shooting rampage at a town hall-style event Saturday in Tucson, Arizona where Congresswoman Gabrielle Giffords was the target.
Second shooter being sought by police

http://www.examiner.com/people-the-news ... ews-report

So what is the angle of the media what is the problem? Guns???? No Freedom speech palin inciting violence. WTF What is the solution to fix the problem? Limit Freedom of speech to prevent incitement of violence. WHAT!

create/exploit Problem incite reaction (moment of silence what crap!) formulate and push intended solution

The US is at war with itself. Guns are the ONLY thing that will save you. either pointed at each other or pointed at the government. The first is of cause preferred by the powers that be.

[Fat Bob]

There's a nutter that shouldn't be allowed a gun!

[Mr Oz]

There's a nutter that shouldn't be allowed a gun!

Your a big enough target I don't even have to aim

[Tas]

friend posted this link - thought it was a bit of an odd one, glock gun sales going up:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/01/1 ... 07517.html

[cromasaig]

If I were living in a place that was so unsafe I felt I needed a gun to protect my family, I would move.

[Joseph27]

If I were living in a place that was so unsafe I felt I needed a gun to protect my family, I would move.

Hence the reason I live in Singapore and go shooting when I travel

[Fat Bob]

$500 for a glock? Cool.

[Joseph27]

$500 is great value for such a high powered weapon... In Indo if you want to own a gun you are looking at literally thousands of dollars and thats just in bribes to the relevant authorities to let you own it. In Singapore you need to keep it at a club - though its still worth it, its such a great feeling to hold a powerful weapon and discharge it - apparantly Cambodia has a shooting range where you can fire machine guns, they sell beer and the girls are topless... I don't know if someone was just teasing when they told me that but I've been planning a 'work trip' there since.

[Tas]

mmm so a little bit of exploitation is ok then eh?

[baloo]

In the Cambodian gun ranges you can also pay to have them bring in a live cow while you're holding a machine gun. Live chickens are available as well.

I don't really find anything exciting about military rifles or pistols. Shotguns and game hunting (quail, duck & rabbit) is something I've done a lot of and enjoy.