152 replies to this topic

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

I must say, I've never understood this sacred principal about Gun ownership. Is it supposed to make America a safer place? Isn't it really based on paranoia? It seems to be saying that the basic founding principle of America is lack of trust, which seems curious in a country that always insists that its system of government is one that the rest of the World should follow; saying that "we insist to be allowed to carry Arms because we don't really trust our Govt". If you believe in Democracy, then surely the Govt. that's been elected by the People must be right.

oh, and incidentally, George III really was not a Despotic tyrant. the poor fellow didn't know what year it was most of the time.

[Babe Ruth]

747400, on 31 January 2012 - 04:11 PM, said:

I must say, I've never understood this sacred principal about Gun ownership. Is it supposed to make America a safer place? Isn't it really based on paranoia? It seems to be saying that the basic founding principle of America is lack of trust, which seems curious in a country that always insists that its system of government is one that the rest of the World should follow; saying that "we insist to be allowed to carry Arms because we don't really trust our Govt". If you believe in Democracy, then surely the Govt. that's been elected by the People must be right.

oh, and incidentally, George III really was not a Despotic tyrant. the poor fellow didn't know what year it was most of the time.

Funny, reading history books suggests that most colonists in 1770 disagreed with your analysis of George III/  

Back in the days before helicopter gunships and Predator drones, the armed citizenry was actually capable of overthrowing, violently, tyrants.

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

Babe Ruth, on 31 January 2012 - 09:55 PM, said:

Funny, reading history books suggests that most colonists in 1770 disagreed with your analysis of George III/  

Back in the days before helicopter gunships and Predator drones, the armed citizenry was actually capable of overthrowing, violently, tyrants.

yes, that's exactly my point. That was obvious rhetoric at the time, demonize your opponent as much as you possibly can, but people still seem to believe it now.

[preacherman76]

It makes me sad to see dumb foriegn people thinking they have somehow evolved cause thier government has taken all means of protection from them. Then think we in America should be happy to follow. It was only 70 years ago the Nazi's marched down your streets in victory, and you really see no reason to own a gun? Sad.

[Englishgent]

preacherman76, on 01 February 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

It makes me sad to see dumb foriegn people thinking they have somehow evolved cause thier government has taken all means of protection from them. Then think we in America should be happy to follow. It was only 70 years ago the Nazi's marched down your streets in victory, and you really see no reason to own a gun? Sad.

1. I am not a ''dumb foreigner''
2. The nazis didnt march down our streets
3. Yes, I see no reason to own a gun.
It is people like you who believe you have the right to carry guns, which makes the USA (maybe) one of the more dangerous places to live.  As you say......Sad

[preacherman76]

Worry about what goes on, on your side of the pond. The only dangerous places to live here are the places with the most gun restrictions. Criminals dont care about laws.

[Wyvernkeeper]

preacherman76, on 01 February 2012 - 12:34 PM, said:

It makes me sad to see dumb foriegn people thinking they have somehow evolved cause thier government has taken all means of protection from them.

At least this 'dumb foreign' person knows how to spell foreign!

preacherman76, on 01 February 2012 - 12:34 PM, said:

Worry about what goes on, on your side of the pond. The only dangerous places to live here are the places with the most gun restrictions. Criminals dont care about laws.

Yeah, but due to those laws, it is a lot harder for criminals in the UK to get hold of guns... Obviously they are about, but I don't live in fear that any person on the street might be carrying one...  Neither do we have the same issue with high school shootings, or children caught in crossfire deaths (although that is not entirely unknown here, it is not a common occurence)

The rate of death from firearms in the United States is eight times higher than that in its economic counterparts in other parts of the world.
Kellermann AL and Waeckerle JF. Preventing Firearm Injuries. Ann Emerg Med July 1998; 32:77-79.

The overall firearm-related death rate among U.S. children younger than 15 years of age is nearly 12 times higher than among children in 25 other industrialized countries combined.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 1997;46:101-105
http://www.americanb...er_nations.html

Americans need to realise that the constitution is not sacred...  Indeed, it grants a license for pro-gun nuts to excuse the periodic accidental death of children and innocents caught in crossfire in some vainglorious rhetoric about 'freedom,' (the other old American chestnut.)

Just because something is a founding document, does not mean it is sacred or might not need to occasionally be tweaked...  Isn't that what 'amendments' are for anyway?  It's all very well to talk about protecting yourself from mythical communists or the Queen of England or whatever, but how many high school kids still have to die before you perceive the problem?

Edited by Wyvernkeeper, 01 February 2012 - 12:54 PM.

[Englishgent]

Wyvernkeeper, on 01 February 2012 - 12:40 PM, said:

Yeah, but due to those laws, it is a lot harder for criminals in the UK to get hold of guns... Obviously they are about, but I don't live in fear that any person on the street might be carrying one...  Neither do we have the same issue with high school shootings, or children caught in crossfire deaths (although that is not entirely unknown here, it is not a common occurence)

The rate of death from firearms in the United States is eight times higher than that in its economic counterparts in other parts of the world.
Kellermann AL and Waeckerle JF. Preventing Firearm Injuries. Ann Emerg Med July 1998; 32:77-79.

The overall firearm-related death rate among U.S. children younger than 15 years of age is nearly 12 times higher than among children in 25 other industrialized countries combined.Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 1997;46:101-105
http://www.americanb...er_nations.html

Americans need to realise that the constitution is not sacred...  Indeed, it grants a license for pro-gun nuts to excuse the periodic accidental death of children and innocents caught in crossfire in some vainglorious rhetoric about 'freedom,' (the other old American chestnut.)

Just because something is a founding document, does not mean it is sacred or might not need to occasionally be tweaked...  Isn't that what 'amendments' are for anyway?

   Nice statistics. But it wont deter the likes of preacherman

[Colonel Rhuairidh]

preacherman76, on 01 February 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

It makes me sad to see dumb foriegn people thinking they have somehow evolved cause thier government has taken all means of protection from them. Then think we in America should be happy to follow. It was only 70 years ago the Nazi's marched down your streets in victory, and you really see no reason to own a gun? Sad.

Well, whether or not the population of, say, France did or didn't have the right own a gun (and i don't know whether they did or not) it wouldn't have made much difference against the Luftwaffe and the Panzer divisions, and the kind of thing that people who go on about 1776 all the time like to envisage, the population resisting Foreign oppressors, did actually happen in the form of the Resistance.

[Wyvernkeeper]

Englishgent, on 01 February 2012 - 12:52 PM, said:

   Nice statistics. But it wont deter the likes of preacherman

Yup, the death of children is nothing to somebody with the certainty of knowing that they couldn't possibly have got this one wrong....

America's relationship with firearms should be regarded as a national embarassment, somehow however - it ended up as a source of pride....

Any psychologists in the house care to explain that one?

Edited by Wyvernkeeper, 01 February 2012 - 01:00 PM.

[preacherman76]

Englishgent, on 01 February 2012 - 12:52 PM, said:

   Nice statistics. But it wont deter the likes of preacherman

Of course not. Most deaths in America from fire arms are from gangs, criminals, who dont own thier guns legaly. Take away guns from the average lawful citizan, and it will be lambs to the slaughter. On a person level, you take away my guns, and you take away part of my livelyhood. I hunt for over half the meat my family eats per year. For me, the right to own a gun, goes hand in hand with my right to live and provide.

Besides, its not like everything is ****s and giggles over your way. Murders/gangs just use different weapons.

[preacherman76]

Wyvernkeeper, on 01 February 2012 - 12:59 PM, said:

Yup, the death of children is nothing to somebody with the certainty of knowing that they couldn't possibly have got this one wrong....

America's relationship with firearms should be regarded as a national embarassment, somehow however - it ended up as a source of pride....

Any psychologists in the house care to explain that one?

Im for the full conviction of anyone who cant use a fire arm responcibly. Along with perminitly revoking thier right to own a gun. But chances are they lost that right long ago, and are operating fire arms illegaly.

[preacherman76]

747400, on 01 February 2012 - 12:53 PM, said:

Well, whether or not the population of, say, France did or didn't have the right own a gun (and i don't know whether they did or not) it wouldn't have made much difference against the Luftwaffe and the Panzer divisions, and the kind of thing that people who go on about 1776 all the time like to envisage, the population resisting Foreign oppressors, did actually happen in the form of the Resistance.

Maybe, maybe not. Least they could have had the choice to go out on thier own terms. Especialy the Jews among them, who were carted off to death camps.

[Wyvernkeeper]

preacherman76, on 01 February 2012 - 01:15 PM, said:

Im for the full conviction of anyone who cant use a fire arm responcibly. Along with perminitly revoking thier right to own a gun. But chances are they lost that right long ago, and are operating fire arms illegaly.

You miss the point, the problem is the proliferation of firearms on the street and the availability of even 'legal' firearms (which can still kill btw) to the irresponsible and murderous people in society.

Although I don't like the man, I would consider Dick Cheney a 'responsible' gun owner, yet even he managed to blast his mate in the face during a hunting trip....

preacherman76, on 01 February 2012 - 01:18 PM, said:

Maybe, maybe not. Least they could have had the choice to go out on thier own terms. Especialy the Jews among them, who were carted off to death camps.

Riiiiiiiiight.... So in your mind the Holocaust could have been prevented if 1930's German Jews were armed.... In that case I'd imagine Hitler would have rescinded their right to arms along with the rest of the measures he took against them when enacting the Nuremberg Laws....

Don't bring the Holocaust into this, it is utterly irrelevent and just makes you look more dramatic and irrational.  I could argue equally pointlessly that the right to bare arms in the US did nothing to prevent 9/11.. True, but an utterly fallacious argument.

Edited by Wyvernkeeper, 01 February 2012 - 02:47 PM.

[lightly]

747400, on 31 January 2012 - 04:11 PM, said:

I must say, I've never understood this sacred principal about Gun ownership. Is it supposed to make America a safer place? Isn't it really based on paranoia? It seems to be saying that the basic founding principle of America is lack of trust, which seems curious in a country that always insists that its system of government is one that the rest of the World should follow; saying that "we insist to be allowed to carry Arms because we don't really trust our Govt". If you believe in Democracy, then surely the Govt. that's been elected by the People must be right.

oh, and incidentally, George III really was not a Despotic tyrant. the poor fellow didn't know what year it was most of the time.

  When i read the part i've selected above..   I thought.. well Yes,  that's why we needed a constitution... to remind and legally state that all men are created equal.  You can't base a system of government on 'Trust'.

   The Preamble states that a constitution was needed to secure the Blessings of Liberty, ..  not,  trust that our liberty will be secure.

The first two Constitutional amendments further demonstrate that our rights must be stated .. not trusted.

We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Amendment 1 - Freedom of Religion, Press, Expression

Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.


Amendment 2 - Right to Bear Arms

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.

*

Edited by lightly, 01 February 2012 - 04:04 PM.