Gun control

[Reeve of Shinra]

Good article showing the UK (despite its gun laws) leads the world in voilent crimes. Maybe they need more guns.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukn...73/UK-is-violent-crime-capital-of-Europe.html

 

[BGL]

Listed below are the percentage of murders (all, not just gun related) by population.
Several of these cities have very strict gun laws in place.

A strict gun law in a city is pointless. It's not an island. Even state laws don't help since guns are smuggled from the Wild West states where guns are sold out of car trunks by the hundreds by "legit" gun show dealers.

National policy is required and that has what has worked every where else and will work in the US.

 

[BGL]

Good article showing the UK (despite its gun laws) leads the world in voilent crimes.

Soccer fans brawling doesn't quite measure up to gun nut Mom and son killing 20 kindergarten kids for kicks.

 

[Reeve of Shinra]

Actually my request for an answer to this is entirely genuine. EQNoble tried to state that restricting guns would remove a part of his existance and upbringing, but still did not explain how it protects his freedoms.

If I cloned you, and gave 1 of you a gun, and one of you not. What would be the difference? Are you saying the one with a gun would be more "free" than the one without?

Slavik,

To answer this properly, I believe one would have to look at the 2nd amendment right to bear arms from a historical context.
1 - Why did the founding fathers feel so importantly about the right to keep and bears that they specifically listed it in the Bill of Rights?
2 - What is the America's cultural history around gun ownership that leads to some (not all) of the pro-gun ownership opinions today?

== 1 ==

This is a decent article describing the thoughts of the founding fathers (there are other more descriptive texts out there) but I like this one as it describes much of the historical context (taken from the English) that lead to the provision.

http://www.constitution.org/2ll/2ndschol/89vand.pdf

"English history made two things clear to the American revolutionaries: force of arms was the
only effective check on government, and standing armies threatened liberty. Recognition of these
premises meant that the force of arms necessary to check government had to be placed in the hands
of citizens."


== 2 ==

America's history is a funny one ... I am not sure if I can explain the nuances of the culture, I believe the vast majority of American's are somewhat ignorant of it themselves.

To keep this concise, America was built on the promise that everyone is equal and all are afforded the same promise of prosperity and protection against tyranny. The people who lived and fought for American independence felt beyond any shadow of a doubt that it is the responsibility of the people to remain every vigilant against tyranny and the encroachment of our rights. It's a covenant, or sacred right if you will, by the people and between the people. It's that sense of honor and integrity that is the backbone of the US armed forces and saw our men and women (both at home and abroad) through two world wars, and several international engagements.

I feel the problem is that our forefathers didn't envision a world where the people would fail to live up to this moral covenant. Just ask anyone about jury duty and 9 out of 10 people will tell you how they did everything they could to get out of it. Yes, jury duty is a chore -- and I respect those who cannot do it for an extended period of time for financial or familial reasons, but even if that's 4 out of those 9 - that is not the first and foremost reason for abandoning their obligation.

And that is not the only instance, but it is the least controversial and perhaps by being the simplest element, you will understand better the point I am raising.

 

[Reeve of Shinra]

A strict gun law in a city is pointless. It's not an island. Even state laws don't help since guns are smuggled from the Wild West states where guns are sold out of car trunks by the hundreds by "legit" gun show dealers.

National policy is required and that has what has worked every where else and will work in the US.

Did you read up about Project Gun Runner?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Project_Gunrunner

Project Gunrunner is an project of the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) intended to stem the flow of firearms into Mexico, in an attempt to deprive the Mexican drug cartels of weapons.[1]

The primary tactic of Project Gunrunner is interdiction of straw purchasers and unlicensed dealers to prevent legal guns from entering the black market; between 2005 and 2008, 650 such cases involving 1,400 offenders and 12,000 firearms were referred for prosecution.[2] However other tactics ("gunwalking" and "controlled delivery") have lead to controversy. In early 2011, the project became controversial when it was revealed that Operation Wide Receiver (2006-2007) and Operation Fast and Furious (2009-2010) had allowed guns to "walk" into the hands of Mexican drug cartels.[3][

And some of those guns killed innocent Americans not to mention hundreds of Mexicans.

You want a national gun policy where clearly the policies they have already implemented failed and lead to even more gun related deaths.

 

[Reeve of Shinra]

Soccer fans brawling doesn't quite measure up to gun nut Mom and son killing 20 kindergarten kids for kicks.

Nice troll, I will remember to copy and past the good parts so you don't skip by them again.

From the article:
The UK had a greater number of murders in 2007 than any other EU country – 927 – and at a relative rate higher than most western European neighbours, including France, Germany, Italy and Spain.

 

[Carlos]

Killer bullets??? Whoa! Do you know anything at all about ballistics and/or firearms?

Did you or do you even know Hollow Points exists? Hollow Points are essentially... "Killer Bullets." One shot to the head, you're dead. One shot to one of your arteries, you're about as good as #@^&ing dead because you'll bleed out 10x quicker than the other kind of bodily harm. Those bullets explode at exit wound.

I don't care if it's .22 short, 5.56x45 NATO or .460 Weatherby they're all potential killers especially at close range. You want to ban 50 and 100 round drum magazines? Fine by me, but please don't spout silly crap about "killer bullets"... All bullets are potential killers, that's their purpose.

Some bullets don't really kill you until the second or third shot. Or if the said bullet hits one of your arteries, your heart, or your head. End of story.

Unless you're talking about a .50 Caliber Sniper Rifle. That will kill you instantly. Forget the size of the bullet, talk about power.

 

[Lawrence]

Owning a gun does not protect or guarantee freedom, however; take away the right to protect yourself and your family and you are no longer free.

 

[BGL]

The UK had a greater number of murders in 2007 than any other EU country – 927 – and at a relative rate higher than most western European neighbours, including France, Germany, Italy and Spain.

1. Guns are the issue.
2. UK murder rate is irrelevant other than those caused by guns.
3. UK gun death rate is .05 per 100,000 vs. US 10 per 100,000.

UK gun law works great as does Germany's, France's, Italy's, Spain's. All your examples disprove your point and all demonstrate the good gun laws work to greatly reduce gun death rate.

 

[BGL]

Owning a gun does not protect or guarantee freedom, however; take away the right to protect yourself and your family and you are no longer free.

You will protect your family from gun violence by not having guns in the house. 95% of gun deaths are the gun owner, family and close acquaintances. Ms. Lanza being perfect example. Killed by son who then kills many others. Her guns did not protect her at all but caused her death.

 

[BGL]

Slavik,

To answer this properly, I believe one would have to look at the 2nd amendment right to bear arms from a historical context.
1 - Why did the founding fathers feel so importantly about the right to keep and bears that they specifically listed it in the Bill of Rights?
2 - What is the America's cultural history around gun ownership that leads to some (not all) of the pro-gun ownership opinions today?

1. 2nd amendment is about US militia not personal gun ownership.
2. There is no cultural history of gun ownership in US. Gun ownership was not common up to US Civil War. Gun ownership was promoted after civil war by gun industry to fill market void left by end of war. The "culture of the gun" is a post Civil War marketing campaign by NRA and gun lobby formed after Civil War to sell guns.

 

[Cal]

Owning a gun does not protect or guarantee freedom, however; take away the right to protect yourself and your family and you are no longer free.

Could not have said it better

 

[Trip]

Did you or do you even know Hollow Points exists? Hollow Points are essentially... "Killer Bullets." One shot to the head, you're dead. One shot to one of your arteries, you're about as good as #@^&ing dead because you'll bleed out 10x quicker than the other kind of bodily harm. Those bullets explode at exit wound.

Some bullets don't really kill you until the second or third shot. Or if the said bullet hits one of your arteries, your heart, or your head. End of story.

Unless you're talking about a .50 Caliber Sniper Rifle. That will kill you instantly. Forget the size of the bullet, talk about power.

This is not call of duty. You do not recover 10 seconds later after being shot. It does not matter the size of bullet, the power, or velocity behind it. If you are shot by a bullet, you will bleed. When you bleed, your blood pressure will drop, your heart will pound. You will go into shock. If you do not get medical attention, you will die. Hollow point, 50 Cal. It could be a french tickler bullet, it still do not matter. You will die. In my place of employment one of my roles is providing first response medical care. Luckily, gun shot wounds are nil. However, I have seen people scared. Scared there might not be a tomorrow for them. If you want to be on the delivering end of that message, remember it's people we are talking about. Life simply does not have a reset button.
Any gun can and will kill. I will not debate the time of a person's suffering may change. I am in favor for more gun regulations / restrictions. It is not because of the smoke and mirror games both sides play. It is because I simply do not like the way I feel when I read about people dying before they should. Who knows, it is possible one of these children from the latest headlines might have found the cure for cancer if was given the opportunity to live.

 

[jasetaro]

And that is what American's are doing, defending ourselves from the out of control murdering gun nuts who kill 30,000 people a year and injure another 100,000.

The other developed nations have shown us the way on how to effectively defend ourselves from guns with many successful programs in all the developed nations.

First of all as we've already established only about one third of those deaths are the result of violent crime. The remaining two thirds are the result of suicides or accidents. We can argue until are keyboards melt about whether or not firearm related suicides are preventable, but I don't think the 'no guns, no suicide' argument holds water... if some is genuinely wants to kill themselves they're going to find a way to to do it regardless of whether or not they have access to a firearm. The firearm related accidents are theoretically preventable, assuming you can get every human being to act responsibly, and we both know that's never going to happen.

Finally the Second Amendment very clear on one very important point:

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.​

Regardless of whether you like or not the American people have a Constitutionally protected right to own firearms. The courts have held that the government can can place reasonable restrictions on the ownership of a firearm, but they can not be denied the right to own firearms.

Whether you like it or not firearms are not going away.

 

[Digital Doctor]

Whether you like it or firearms are not going away.

Some are.

 

[jasetaro]

Did you or do you even know Hollow Points exists? Hollow Points are essentially... "Killer Bullets." One shot to the head, you're dead. One shot to one of your arteries, you're about as good as #@^&ing dead because you'll bleed out 10x quicker than the other kind of bodily harm. Those bullets explode at exit wound.

Some bullets don't really kill you until the second or third shot. Or if the said bullet hits one of your arteries, your heart, or your head. End of story.

Unless you're talking about a .50 Caliber Sniper Rifle. That will kill you instantly. Forget the size of the bullet, talk about power.

ROFLMFAO!


Yes, actually, I am familiar with hollow-point bullets... first of all hollow-point do not explode, they expand or "mushroom" which creates a larger wound canal. Second while they are theoretically more effective at transferring their energy to the target, and can cause greater tissue damage than conventional ammunition; they are not necessarily any deadlier than conventional ammunition.

Every bullet wound causes trauma and is potentially fatal, especially at close range.

 

[jasetaro]

Some are.

Maybe, maybe not. Democrats may get a ban on so-called assault weapons through the Senate, since they have a majority there, but it's an open question as to whether they can get one through the Republican controlled House of Representatives.

 

[Vicki]

I found it very disgusting to see you gun enthusiasts(and NRA) so fiecefully fight for your right of continuously owning guns in the U.S. over so many innocent kids' dead bodies!

If guns are eliminated by law in the U.S., you don't need guns to protect yourself or your family.

Of course, there will still be a few extremely evil guys able to get to guns and harm people each year, but at least the annual gun-related death rate in the U.S. would not be in the 30k, it will be in the 100s at most - not from imagination, that is based on all sorts of stats from other developed countries with much stricter gun laws. Each of you could help save thousands of lives annually, and help save tens of thousands of happy families' lives each year, and help prevent tens of thousands people suffering PDSD each year because of the loss of their beloved ones.

If guns are eliminated by law in the U.S., you don't need guns to protect yourself or your family.


For self-protection at home, right, you don't have guns, but you have other objects to utilize(baseball bats etc.) and you could take taekwondo, karate classes to further prepare yourself for fighting evil/crazy guys equipped with knives etc...

There are about 1/4 of adult U.S. population have some sort of mental health problems, and, someone else in this forum also mentioned the low moral standards nowadays in this country is also part of the causes for the horrific tragedies happened in the past few years in the U.S.... You don't want these people be able to purchase guns. You don't want these people be able to obtain guns because of your negligence-if not you, it will be someone else who are responsible gun owners but make mistakes occasionally. People make mistakes. Everyone makes mistakes... Plus, careless people are everywhere, they may not be friends of yours, but they do exist everywhere...

If you can't part with your GUNs simply because that is your hobby, then change your hobby. Change your hobby for preventing another Sandy Hook tragedy or another Colorado movie theatre tragedy happens. Change your hobby for the sake of this country's kids' safety! Change your hobby to save innocent kids and adults' lives!

This is something you can do, if you want to. If you don't want to, then you really belong to the most disgusting set of humans with most selfish souls. I don't assume anyone wants an absosulte free country. An absolute free country is an absolute wild country. I think that's the price you have to pay to stay civilized.

 

[Digital Doctor]

Maybe, maybe not. Democrats may get a ban on so-called assault weapons through the Senate, since they have a majority there, but it's an open question as to whether they can get one through the Republican controlled House of Representatives.

Heh.
Are you a betting man ?

 

[Digital Doctor]

I found it very disgusting to see you gun enthusiasts(and NRA)

The NRA is back-pedalling huge !
They know what's coming.
They'll just try to limit the damage ... which is unlikely to work particularly well.