Guns

[Filuwaúrdjan]

Bowling for Columbine has some interesting ideas on why America is so violent.
Moore thinks that the big problem is fear.

[dazzleman]

Moore is a nut, but that's a whole different discussion.

I think the US is as violent as it is for a number of reasons, and that guns are more the result of this than the cause.

I believe that punishment deters crime, or at the very least, keeps them off the streets for a long time.  Gun control, on the other hand, has never kept, and will never keep, a criminal from getting a gun.

In the US, gun control at this point is like closing the barn door after the horse has left.  There are already so many guns floating around that they can never be controlled.  We can only set severe penalties for their improper use.

I find it interesting that many gun control advocates are also advocates of the "rights" of criminals, and have done all in their power to undermine effective law enforcement and punishment for crime.  They often see criminals as victims of "society."  So if these people want to know why we have so much violence, they may start by looking in the mirror.

[Gustaf]

Moore is a nut, but that's a whole different discussion.

I think the US is as violent as it is for a number of reasons, and that guns are more the result of this than the cause.

I believe that punishment deters crime, or at the very least, keeps them off the streets for a long time.  Gun control, on the other hand, has never kept, and will never keep, a criminal from getting a gun.

In the US, gun control at this point is like closing the barn door after the horse has left.  There are already so many guns floating around that they can never be controlled.  We can only set severe penalties for their improper use.

I find it interesting that many gun control advocates are also advocates of the "rights" of criminals, and have done all in their power to undermine effective law enforcement and punishment for crime.  They often see criminals as victims of "society."  So if these people want to know why we have so much violence, they may start by looking in the mirror.

Some good points there, but I still think a lot of crimes are committed by people who are not full-time criminals. Also, these crimes are the ones to usually strike at innocents, where as hits, gang-violence and so on, usually affect other criminals.

I do not advocate the rights of criminals, at least not in the sense you are referring to, but I would still want at least moderate gun control.

[Filuwaúrdjan]

I think the US is as violent as it is for a number of reasons, and that guns are more the result of this than the cause.

That was actually Moore's point

[Nym90]

I don't see any reason why a gun needs to be legal if it has no legitimate purpose other than for killing.
Gun safety locks and a waiting period to undergo a thorough background check are common-sense proposals that will only deter people from getting and using a gun who shouldn't be getting and using one in the first place. They are no real burden to those who have a legitimate need and purpose for a gun.

[CHRISTOPHER MICHAE]

Why couldn't NEW guns have a tracking device built in whereby once fired, a global positioning system within  the various regions of the country, would be alerted that that particular firearm had discharged and where it was discharged. This would make it harder for murderers/gangs/mafia to cover their crimes.

[© tweed]

Why couldn't NEW guns have a tracking device built in whereby once fired, a global positioning system within  the various regions of the country, would be alerted that that particular firearm had discharged and where it was discharged. This would make it harder for murderers/gangs/mafia to cover their crimes.

That is a very costly and dreamy plan, if you know what I mean.

[CHRISTOPHER MICHAE]

Why couldn't NEW guns have a tracking device built in whereby once fired, a global positioning system within  the various regions of the country, would be alerted that that particular firearm had discharged and where it was discharged. This would make it harder for murderers/gangs/mafia to cover their crimes.

That is a very costly and dreamy plan, if you know what I mean.

True enough. But I am a Dreamer. However, what's more costly in the long run? What matters more? Initial costs or long-term gain.

[© tweed]

Why couldn't NEW guns have a tracking device built in whereby once fired, a global positioning system within  the various regions of the country, would be alerted that that particular firearm had discharged and where it was discharged. This would make it harder for murderers/gangs/mafia to cover their crimes.

That is a very costly and dreamy plan, if you know what I mean.

True enough. But I am a Dreamer. However, what's more costly in the long run? What matters more? Initial costs or long-term gain.

Initial costs.

[bejkuy]

<<<I don't see any reason why a gun needs to be legal if it has no legitimate purpose other than for killing.>>>>

As the bumper sticker says, "The second amendment ain't about duck hunting."

[Nym90]

No, the 2nd amendment says that the right to bear arms of a WELL-REGULATED militia shall not be infringed.

It is obviously not unconstitutional to ban some weapons, such as nuclear bombs, Sherman tanks, AK-47s, Uzis, etc. So clearly, there is no absolute right to arms.

[Nym90]

As for your proposal, CM, I would not feel comfortable having the government have that much knowledge of what its citizens are doing. Not to mention that the GPS chip that was implanted in the gun could be disabled and removed without a tremendous degree of difficulty for someone who knew what they were doing.

[Gustaf]

No, the 2nd amendment says that the right to bear arms of a WELL-REGULATED militia shall not be infringed.

It is obviously not unconstitutional to ban some weapons, such as nuclear bombs, Sherman tanks, AK-47s, Uzis, etc. So clearly, there is no absolute right to arms.

Shouldn't it be other way round? Hunting rifles aren't necessary for a militia, but they could probably have good use of Uzis or Sherman tanks...

[Nym90]

Lol, good point Gustaf.

[jravnsbo]

The history of the 2d amendment clearly defends the right to bear arms by an individual citizen as a check on a powerful central government thereby allowing the people to defend themselves against oppression.

Next, rights to own sawed offed shot guns and machine guns have been regulated and approved byt eh supreme court.

No, the 2nd amendment says that the right to bear arms of a WELL-REGULATED militia shall not be infringed.

It is obviously not unconstitutional to ban some weapons, such as nuclear bombs, Sherman tanks, AK-47s, Uzis, etc. So clearly, there is no absolute right to arms.

[Gustaf]

The history of the 2d amendment clearly defends the right to bear arms by an individual citizen as a check on a powerful central government thereby allowing the people to defend themselves against oppression.

Next, rights to own sawed offed shot guns and machine guns have been regulated and approved byt eh supreme court.

No, the 2nd amendment says that the right to bear arms of a WELL-REGULATED militia shall not be infringed.

It is obviously not unconstitutional to ban some weapons, such as nuclear bombs, Sherman tanks, AK-47s, Uzis, etc. So clearly, there is no absolute right to arms.

Yep, that's the purpose, and to me it seems slightly out of date, but thta's just me. If it were to work, people would need tanks and stuf, otherwise they could never rise up against the federal government...

[CHRISTOPHER MICHAE]

As for your proposal, CM, I would not feel comfortable having the government have that much knowledge of what its citizens are doing. Not to mention that the GPS chip that was implanted in the gun could be disabled and removed without a tremendous degree of difficulty for someone who knew what they were doing.

No Nym90, it would not be easy to remove the chip if it was implanted within the stock of the gun. And by the way, What Nym90 fails to understand is that our Big Brother already know what we are doing at all times, so why not allow my proposal? It would be much harder for criminals to use firearms to carry out their horrendous crimes. It would be difficult to rob a bank at knifepoint. Also, a potential murder victim could get away or put up a fight if no firearm were involved.

[© tweed]

CM's plan is very, very, very unrealistic and costly.

[jravnsbo]

Prayers go out to "The Nug" as he was hurt by a chain saw today and needed 40 stitches.  A great outdoorsman and activist!

"Cat Scratch Fever"

[NHPolitico]

Prayers go out to "The Nug" as he was hurt by a chain saw today and needed 40 stitches.  A great outdoorsman and activist!

"Cat Scratch Fever"

The guy who'll be governor of Michigan in 2007?

 : )

[CHRISTOPHER MICHAE]

Prayers go out to "The Nug" as he was hurt by a chain saw today and needed 40 stitches.  A great outdoorsman and activist!

"Cat Scratch Fever"

Perhaps

The guy who'll be governor of Michigan in 2007?

 : )

[jravnsbo]

Yep that's him, hopefully!

Prayers go out to "The Nug" as he was hurt by a chain saw today and needed 40 stitches.  A great outdoorsman and activist!

"Cat Scratch Fever"

The guy who'll be governor of Michigan in 2007?

 : )

[jravnsbo]

After ten long years, the State of Ohio has finally passed a Right to Carry bill. On Thursday, January 8th, Governor Taft signed into law legislation that will allow law-abiding Ohioan’s the right to carry firearms for personal protection. Ohio now becomes the 37th state which to enact such a law.

[CHRISTOPHER MICHAE]

After ten long years, the State of Ohio has finally passed a Right to Carry bill. On Thursday, January 8th, Governor Taft signed into law legislation that will allow law-abiding Ohioan’s the right to carry firearms for personal protection. Ohio now becomes the 37th state which to enact such a law.

Is he a descendant of President Taft?

[jravnsbo]

Yes grandson I believe, maybe great grandson.

I believe it was President Taft, son was a US Senator and this one is governor, all of Ohio.  The senator would most likely have been President if not for Ike or at aleast nominee.

Always thought we have 3 major families in politics today.  Tafts of Ohio, Kennedys and Bushes--roosevelts were inteh day with 2 Presidents.

After ten long years, the State of Ohio has finally passed a Right to Carry bill. On Thursday, January 8th, Governor Taft signed into law legislation that will allow law-abiding Ohioan’s the right to carry firearms for personal protection. Ohio now becomes the 37th state which to enact such a law.

Is he a descendant of President Taft?