The 2nd Amendment and criminals.

[RayManKiller3]

The Founding fathers couldn't envision a nationally distributed newspaper like USA Today, news magazines like Time, US News, & Newsweek, couldn't envision the telegram, phone, radio, texting, much less the Internet. Does that mean only local papers are free of political censorship under the 1st?

Your counter is just plain off imo.

The press can be restricted for national security reasons. The fact that the founding fathers couldn't see a flaw in an armed populace against its own countrymen shows lack of mind. I don't blame them too much, just frustrated that you guys are into extreme freedom, which is unhealthy for a nation or anyone in general.

If you give your child freedom to do whatever he wants then once you see his behavior has gone bad and restrict some freedom, will he not rebel even if it was for his own good?

The point is, one must realize when an ideal become extreme and fix the problem. In this case the 2nd amendment (probably being because it was the second amendment ever wrote) have a negative impact on the minds of Americans who believe they need firearms to protect themselves.

 

[George]

When Jefferson was Gov. of Virginia he signed a Law requiring travelers between cities to be armed with 2 pistols. The FF knew about crime.

 

[5.56X45mm]

I am tired of beating a dead horse. The majority here know where I stand with the 2nd Amendment and the government. I am of the mind for smaller government and more personal responsibilty.

Good day folks.

'Nuff said.....

5.56x45mm

 

[MontyB]

Your counter is just plain off imo.

The press can be restricted for national security reasons. The fact that the founding fathers couldn't see a flaw in an armed populace against its own countrymen shows lack of mind. I don't blame them too much, just frustrated that you guys are into extreme freedom, which is unhealthy for a nation or anyone in general.

If you give your child freedom to do whatever he wants then once you see his behavior has gone bad and restrict some freedom, will he not rebel even if it was for his own good?

The point is, one must realize when an ideal become extreme and fix the problem. In this case the 2nd amendment (probably being because it was the second amendment ever wrote) have a negative impact on the minds of Americans who believe they need firearms to protect themselves.

I don't agree, when the constitution was written the legislation made good sense and was perfectly logical because they lived in a world where you did need firearms for security, food etc. however in todays world it is archaic legislation that is probably responsible for a sizable proportion of the thousands killed each year.

When Jefferson was Gov. of Virginia he signed a Law requiring travelers between cities to be armed with 2 pistols. The FF knew about crime.

This is a good example of why laws become redundant, why two pistols well probably because they were only single shot, do you think it would have been two pistols had 6 shots been available, in todays world of the 70mph highway do you think he would have even needed the law?

The reality is that the world has moved on from the days of the Founding Fathers and while I have no doubt what they did was perfect for 18th Century America it is for the most part redundant today.

 

[Yossarian]

I am tired of beating a dead horse. The majority here know where I stand with the 2nd Amendment and the government. I am of the mind for smaller government and more personal responsibilty.

Good day folks.

'Nuff said.....

5.56x45mm

I'm about to throw in the towel here as well

As for the anti freedom of personal ownership of firearms fans, look at the mid 90s assault weapon ban, look at the extended clip ban that went with it, including the extended magazine products produced by Glock...

What did they do in the U.S. market then? Buy back old barely used in some cases pistols and magazine from U.S. law enforcement customers and re sell them on the still legal used market for extended handgun mags.

The law has expired and did so in 2004...

Also, in the 90s a lobbiest group attempted to convince arms companies who sold in the U.S. to agree to a heavy regulation package and abide by the agreed terms.

Glock backed out, and left only S&W on the deal, and only S&W went on to abide by the regulations. And it nearly drove the domestic manufacure out of business. And even then the appointed plan fell through.

Lastly, when the ban on assualt weapons and high capacity firearms went into effect under the Clinton administration, Glock, just to name an example, had sales go through the roof on legal sales under the used market, which the ban did not cover.

It's seems to me legal restriction on legal gun sales, seems to have the oppisite effect, in fact the demand for Glock handguns went through roof when the ban went into effect, why?

"The government says its a killing machine....I wanna see one up close and buy one." And boy did they.

Btw violent crime in the U.S. has been on a major decline since the mid 1980s...right around the time the Glock series hand gun and extended mags, much like the one used in Tuscon, went on the market.

I say hardware hardware hardware, stop throwing posters up for the ban of all firearms posters and look at what your dealing with.

The hardest thing is not to ban something complety, thats the easy way out, but the hardest thing is to properly regulate, show some adult accountablity, which I believe gun salesmen should be held up for, and do a little paperwork.

Stop selling to bad people, and decrease the chances of guns ending up in the wrong hands.We will never prevent gun crime, ban or not, but slowing the trend even further would prove a very viable agurement for both sides on the issue.

An issue I do feel if banned would violate directly the U.S. Constitution and more directly the Bill Of Rights.

Somthing I will oppose completly. If you change that, does it stop with firearms? And how far can that go?

That said, good night all, and let freedom ring,

one legal shell casing not used for a criminal act at a time.

Thanks, Yo

 

[senojekips]

It's seems to me legal restriction on legal gun sales, seems to have the oppisite effect, in fact the demand for Glock handguns went through roof when the ban went into effect, why?

Maybe because it was only a restriction?

So what now,... are you arguing in favour of a ban?

 

[George]

Maybe because it was only a restriction?

So what now,... are you arguing in favour of a ban?

If you restrict supply, prices go up. still serves the goals of the Banners by making guns less affordable to the common people.

 

[senojekips]

If you restrict supply, prices go up. still serves the goals of the Banners by making guns less affordable to the common people.

I have already shown that the arguments for a more heavily armed populace being less violent, are clearly false. Yossarian stated, restrictions don't appear to work, so I asked if he advocated a complete ban.

In short, I don't really care what doesn't work, we see that all around us,... what I want to know is what people think will work.

 

[George]

I have already shown that the arguments for a more heavily armed populace being less violent, are clearly false. Yossarian stated, restrictions don't appear to work, so I asked if he advocated a complete ban.

In short, I don't really care what doesn't work, we see that all around us,... what I want to know is what people think will work.

Well...There's a book titled "More guns, less crime" by Gary Cleck(?) about sums it up. "Common Sence" may indicate that gun controll is right & reasonable, but the facts are the low control States have lower crime than high control States. Gun control is OSHA(job safety) for criminals. Thrown in serious jail time for violent offenses w/o cutting deals, early relese, ect(end the revolving door/slap on the wrist). Get Familys back together(end paying unwed females to have babys) Teach children morals so they don't adopt debased morals from popular movies.

 

[senojekips]

George, you have obviously not done your homework. The book "More guns, less crime", was written by John Lott, not Gary Cleck, and is universally disregarded by all but the pro firearms lobby, as the reasoning used is about of the same quality as that being used here with lots of "truisms" and hand picked and unproven "statistics" but little actual fact. It would appear that Mr. Lott is embroiled in several very controversial affairs and is certainly not a credible source of factual information.

John Lott's Unethical Conduct

• he almost certainly fabricated a mysterious survey and certainly behaved unethically in making claims for which he had no supporting data
• he presented results purporting to show that "more guns" led to "less crime" when those results were the product of coding errors
• he pretended to be a woman called "Mary Rosh" on the internet in order to praise his own research and accuse his critics of fraud.

Sources: http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/lott.php
http://www.whoismaryrosh.com/

As I said earlier, the undeniable "facts" are that they realised back in the days of "The Wild West" that people carrying firearms led to a high rate of crime and gratuitous murder, and to this end they started controlling the carrying of guns within towns. We all know the result,... the rate of all firearm related crime dropped significantly. Virtually ever since that time there have been a hard core of deniers who have been doing everything within their power to reverse this.

As I have said all along,

Originally Posted by senojekips
Guns in the US are not the problem, it's a poor "cultural attitude" towards firearms and their place in society.

 

[George]

George, you have obviously not done your homework. The book "More guns, less crime", was written by John Lott, not Gary Cleck, and is universally disregarded by all but the pro firearms lobby, as the reasoning used is about of the same quality as that being used here with lots of "truisms" and hand picked and unproven "statistics" but little actual fact. It would appear that Mr. Lott is embroiled in several very controversial affairs and is certainly not a credible source of factual information.

Sources: http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/lott.php
http://www.whoismaryrosh.com/

As I said earlier, the undeniable "facts" are that they realised back in the days of "The Wild West" that people carrying firearms led to a high rate of crime and gratuitous murder, and to this end they started controlling the carrying of guns within towns. We all know the result,... the rate of all firearm related crime dropped significantly. Virtually ever since that time there have been a hard core of deniers who have been doing everything within their power to reverse this.

As I have said all along,

Hadn't seen that top part before. As far as the Old west, Saloons, wiskey & guns tend to be a poor mix. Here in fla CCW holders can't carry in a Bar, not that the Law keeps those who illegally carry from having guns in Bars. Of course the Real West wasn't as wild as the movies make it seem.

 

[senojekips]

Of course the Real West wasn't as wild as the movies make it seem.

Tell it to those in "boot hill" historical record does dispel many myths like the face toface shootouts at high noon etc., but they can't deny the high proportion of people murdered for slights , real or imagined, usually shot where they stood or sat, often killed in ambush or from behind.

It wasn't only in the West either, read about the extended Hall family in Kentucky. Eight point four percent of their menfolk were killed or maimed by gunshot, the last of the documented deaths being that of Alton Mullins, shot to death on the couthouse steps in Democrat KY on 7th April 1933, aged just 23 years. Great Grand Nephew of Thomas Talton Hall, the first man hung in the new Wise county Jail, WV. Reputed to have shot more than 20 men, (some say it could be many times that) he made his mistake when he shot the local Sherriff. I know a bit about them because they are my blood relatives.

Here's Alton just four hours before his demise, pretty damn slick unit ,... huh?

 

[Big_Z]

People say we should drop our weapons. That is ingrained in our souls. If I drop my weapon how do I protect my household? Dropping my weapon is like giving people who want to take mine the advantage.

 

[senojekips]

People say we should drop our weapons. That is ingrained in our souls. If I drop my weapon how do I protect my household? Dropping my weapon is like giving people who want to take mine the advantage.

Perhaps if you could "un-ingrain" this stupid fascination with the irresponsible usage of firearms, you would have no need to defend your family.

You make it sound as if you and your family are under constant seige from murderous armed killers, as in Somalia or such like.
If it's like this in your home, what do you do when you leave the house,... hire an armed militia to escort you everywhere you go? Is your car armoured and fitted with anti hijacking devices a la South Africa.

If not,.. and it's as dangerous as you intimate, I would say that you are really leaving yourself recklessly exposed to great danger.

 

[Big_Z]

Who said I am being irresponsible with a firearm? It's my right to be armed. You are missing the whole idea Seno.

 

[George]

Tell it to those in "boot hill" historical record does dispel many myths like the face toface shootouts at high noon etc., but they can't deny the high proportion of people murdered for slights , real or imagined, usually shot where they stood or sat, often killed in ambush or from behind.

It wasn't only in the West either, read about the extended Hall family in Kentucky. Eight point four percent of their menfolk were killed or maimed by gunshot, the last of the documented deaths being that of Alton Mullins, shot to death on the couthouse steps in Democrat KY on 7th April 1933, aged just 23 years. Great Grand Nephew of Thomas Talton Hall, the first man hung in the new Wise county Jail, WV. Reputed to have shot more than 20 men, (some say it could be many times that) he made his mistake when he shot the local Sherriff. I know a bit about them because they are my blood relatives.

Here's Alton just four hours before his demise, pretty damn slick unit ,... huh?

Lack of guns didn't stop the Clans of Scotland from slaughtering each other for Centurys. Many of the family feuds in Ky were leftover hard feelings from the War.

 

[senojekips]

Who said I am being irresponsible with a firearm? It's my right to be armed. You are missing the whole idea Seno.

No, you are missing the whole issue, and you do it in such a manner that it could only be a deliberate attempt to avoid facing up to the truth. Just read everything in regard to the subject of the thread, and don't try to sidetrack to a discussion about yourself or any other individual, you know and I know that that is not what it is all about.

I have said on no less than three separate occasions that the whole issue is based on a poor cultural attitude towards firearms in the US. Irresponsible attitudes and usage are the cause and effect of the problem, exacerbated by the ease with which firearms can be obtained.

As MontyB stated earlier, if you were genuinely so paranoid about your own safety you would certainly never drive a vehicle as the chances of being killed in a vehicle is nearly twice as great as being shot.

13 per 100,000 for road deaths (averaged over the last three years).
7.7 per 100,000 for homicides by firearm

Your reasoning just doesn't hold water whichever way you look at it.

 

[senojekips]

Lack of guns didn't stop the Clans of Scotland from slaughtering each other for Centurys.

It's been a very long time since I've read a headline about a serial killer or mugger using a broadsword.

Many of the family feuds in Ky were leftover hard feelings from the War.

Yes, you are correct, it was a combination of "old scores" being settled, and protecting their main source of income, Bootleg liquor, from both their old Civil War adversaries and the Revenue man. Back in the hills there was no law except that which you administered yourself, it was kill or be killed.

I think law enforcement has advanced a little since that time in the US.

 

[Big_Z]

I see exactly what you are trying to say. "Take away the weapons and all of our worries go away." That sounds pretty wishful to me. Have you thought about the cultural impacts that might have? How much American history do you actually know?

 

[Yossarian]

Or the monpoly the pricks who steal around were I live would have, or the robberies that now would go unanswered...

I don't like that part of it, a little disuassion goes a long way, don't try and take that away.