Is the right to bear arms outdated.

#2
Just as soon as you can guarantee a robber won't come through my door, or a rapist through my neighbor's, then sure, I'd agree. Until then here are some facts to consider:

According to the FBI, since 2006 gun sales have increased at the same time that gun violence has decreased (Gun crime continues to decrease, despite increase in gun sales | The Daily Caller
)

Only 7% of gun violence is committed by guns lawfully in the possession of the owner (FBI — Uniform Crime Reports
)

It is estimated that over 2 million crimes a year in the US are prevented by the lawful posession of a firearm (Kleck-Gertz DGU Freq Study (gunsandcrime)
)

In every instance where local ordinance has banned guns in the US, crime has increased (Gun Control - Just Facts
)

In the four years after the United Kingdom banned handguns in 1996, gun crime rose by 40 percent (The Captain's Journal » Do Gun Bans Reduce Violent Crime? Ask the Aussies and Brits
)

In 1996 your country of Australia passed laws banning most guns and making it a crime to use a gun defensively. Since then armed robberies rose by 51 percent, unarmed robberies by 37 percent, assaults by 24 percent and kidnappings by 43 percent (Google it).

In 1929 the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, around 20 million dissidents were exterminated (Google it)

In 1911 Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917 1.5 million Armenians were exterminated (Google it)

Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, a total of 13 million Jews and other "undersireables" were exterminated (Google it)

This is also an interesting read: http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
 

Professor Plumpe

School for Scandal
#3
I would like to point out that the UK stats are a bit different in that handguns were only able to be owned by members of reputable gun clubs. This didn't stop the Dunblane School masscre though as the perp was a member of such a club which is why the legislation was brought in.

I am not sure you can quote the statistics without stating that guns are far more widely available than they ever have been - armed conflicts abroad and terrorist actions at home are one reason plus there's any number of people trying to make a fast buck by selling the damned things. The fact remains, for the UK at least, gun crime here is mainly limited to ethnic minority gangs and the odd criminal. 99% of British Citizens will go through life without ever seeing or hearing a gun go off. Guns in the general population have been banned for over 100 years and the concept of gun ownership is alien to us.

I would also add that getting hold of a gun in the UK is not that hard or expensive. Obtaining ammunition on the other hand is virtually impossible.

Banning handguns here has not changed anything at all.

I would like to offer an observation re: gun control however. I do not believe that you can get the genie back in the bottle and I also believe that you would never be able to ban guns in the USA period. But i would ask how and why the family in question in the CT incident owned 7 high powered guns between them. There also doesn't seem to be a requirement (as in the UK) for gun owners to keep them under lock and key either.

To have that number of potentially lethal weapons lying around the average house does seem to be a tad careless of the likely consequences, so some degree of gun owning discipline could be instigated legally, and it would improve people's mindset if a gun wasn't seen as an everyday object such as a can opener.
 
#4
I would like to offer an observation re: gun control however. I do not believe that you can get the genie back in the bottle and I also believe that you would never be able to ban guns in the USA period. But i would ask how and why the family in question in the CT incident owned 7 high powered guns between them. There also doesn't seem to be a requirement (as in the UK) for gun owners to keep them under lock and key either.

To have that number of potentially lethal weapons lying around the average house does seem to be a tad careless of the likely consequences, so some degree of gun owning discipline could be instigated legally, and it would improve people's mindset if a gun wasn't seen as an everyday object such as a can opener.
I agree....what is done cannot be undone by a law for only the lawful would obey it.

As far as the number of guns goes, why do you consider 7 to be too many? You can really only use one at a time effectively so having more than one doesn't make you any more likely to use one anyway.

As for keeping it under lock and key, no we don't and doing that would negate their potential for protection (there have been studies done that show that in the US, more lives are saved than taken from guns...think women protecting themselves from potential rapists...happens every day).

As for seeing it as an everyday object, well, that is how I was raised. How almost everyone I know was raised and my home state has the lowest serious crime rate in the nation. I believe that is in large part because of the proliferation of guns...every potential criminal knows that the house they break into is likely to have an armed citizen, or more, inside. It has been said that the sound of a shotgun being cocked is one of the best deterrents to crime ever devised. I tend to agree with that.

Still, if it were possible to wave a magic wand and remove every gun from the unlawful, and to guarantee the government would be benevolent then I'd support it...but it cannot be done. Here are some interesting things that happened to other countries that banned them:

In 1929 the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, around 20 million dissidents were exterminated (Google it)

In 1911 Turkey established gun control. From 1915 to 1917 1.5 million Armenians were exterminated (Google it)

I think you also know what happened in Germany when it was done...and so on.
 

Frank3

New Member
#5
Take the right to bear arms from law abiding citizens , and only criminals will have them . They have them now , and most didn't get them honestly .
I know its an old argument , But locks only keep honest people honest .
Look what happens now , create a no gun zone , and someone shoots it up . Who's gonna stop them !
 

Pete McCluskey.

Lifetime Premier Supporter
#7
Yes I know Bob and I owned guns prior to them being banned by the Howard Government in 1966. and as Darrin previously stated armed crime in Australia has increased since then.
Guess why? Criminals have no respect for the law and they didn't hand their guns in. Only the law abiding did. The bad guys now know that no one carries for self protection.
I started this thread to have the debate away from the threads showing sympathy for the most recent tragedy.
If the school security or one of the teachers were armed maybe they would have got the guy before he killed so many. Just a thought.
 

Professor Plumpe

School for Scandal
#8
But I can see a catch 22 situation staring us in the face. On the basis that you should never take a knife to a gunfight, it would be pointless for anyone who might be at risk from a gun toting not-afraid-to-use-it villain, with anything else than an "equaliser"

This philosophy goes all the way back to Samuel Colt who called his famous hand artillery "The Peacemaker" in a savage twist of irony.

So, gun use feeds on itself and always will do as long as there exists fear of violent crime.

Applying this logic to the recent tragic events in CT should predict that many more guns are purchased in the USA over the coming weeks.
 

Jeff Young

Bronze Supporter
#9
Pete, the Second Amendment is there to insure our freedom from an oppressive government.
Which is ludicrous and silly and which is why the 2nd is outdated. You go with trying to take on a M1A2 tank with your bad ass .38. Have fun.

The idea of an armed citizenry having any ability to prevent oppression by the government ended shortly after the Revolution.

The best protection against an oppressive government? An educated, informed, officer corps in the military that is dedicated to civilian government at all costs (something the UK, the US, Australia and NZ are all fortunate to have). A strong and independent judiciary that is not afraid to check the power of the government to oppress. And a strong and well educated population that is able to, collectively, use the political process to avoid the mistakes that Germany and Italy made in actually electing tyrants to power.

You have an individual right to own a firearm per the 2nd Amendment, that is entirely true. But it is an anachronism. It is as if we had guaranteed the right to sustenance farming or something.
 

Dimi Terleckyj

Lifetime Premier Supporter
#10
Hi All

I was deeply saddened by the school shooting and my thoughts go out to all the families touched by this trajedy.

Pete:
The problem with gun control is that it doesn't work.
It only stops the law abiding people from having them, The criminals that use guns to commit crimes will always have and use them because the law has no meaning for them and the police and courts are too lenient in dealing with these people.

Just look at the number of shootings we have had in Sydney this year alone.
Almost one a night and all guns are banned, (big joke).

I wish I had the answer.

Dimi
 

David Morton

Lifetime Premier Supporter
#11
It will happen again and it will happen here as well. There are plenty of people in need of treatment and even incarceration for their mental /phsychological problems that are now roaming the streets and at total liberty. We have had the problem here exacerbated by previous prime ministers and their governments closing 'Mental Hospitals' ( I don't like that term but it is what it is) in the period 1980 to 1990. I'm/ we are not allowed to 'bear arms' period though we have gone from unarmed police to response units with Glocks and machine guns in all areas of the U.K. ( quite a few use the Ace cafe on Londons N.Circular and believe me these guys are armed to the hilt. In spite of them being within (maybe) 30 minutes of anywhere in the capital and slightly longer outside , some total fruitcake will committ another attrocity and unless he dies at the scene he is locked away for ever and a huge cost.
We all feel so very sad at a time like this but in a way also numb and and totally expecting and even inured to the next attrocity.
Gun law? Its a load of hot air and kids being slaughtered will not make the slightest difference.
 

Professor Plumpe

School for Scandal
#12
I also believe that more extreme Gun Control is not the answer. I believe it is a moral and political issue. Since we are discussing a tragedy in the United States, I will use some relevant data. I would like to point out that this is not an anti US post. This last comment is directed towards the paranoids amongst us - please do not derail a proper discussion.

Some recent data would suggest that for a 307 million US population there are 300 million guns in circulation and that's just the ones they know about. It translates to roughly 90 guns per 100 population.

By coincidence? The US is No. 4 highest overall death rate from guns in the world, (10,000) however, if you apply the deaths per 100,000 it slips down the list a little with South Africa remaining top of everything. Even so, the USA appears around No. 8 in the world of gun deaths per 100,000 per capita.

Lots of guns and lots of deaths. The two must be related. Someone on here said that if you took the guns away they would find another way, but I truthfully doubt that a man with a machete, for example, could exact that kind of death toll.

I realise that statistics like these can be used in different ways, and they may not be up to date but they are close to the truth. To fiddle with the statistics is to attempt to bury the problem. I suppose it's a bit like being an alcoholic - first you have to accept there is a problem. I happen to believe there is, and it probably starts (but doesn't end) with the 1st and 2nd Amendments.

I will say again, this is not an anti US post. To suggest it is denies me the right to debate serious world issues that affect us all, for what happens in the USA inevitably is exported and therefore concerns everyone.
 

Dave P

Bronze Supporter
#13
Jeff Young

I can never believe the endless stream of crap you spew on this forum. Maybe you would think twice if you we're being marched to some ditch at gun point. They can have my weapons when they pry them from my cold dead hands. Keep up the good work. I have had enough liberal crap here and surely not going to pay for some idiot to have a platform.
 

Jeff Young

Bronze Supporter
#15
Jeff Young

I can never believe the endless stream of crap you spew on this forum. Maybe you would think twice if you we're being marched to some ditch at gun point. They can have my weapons when they pry them from my cold dead hands. Keep up the good work. I have had enough liberal crap here and surely not going to pay for some idiot to have a platform.
That's really insightful, thoughtful analysis.

P.S. They pried the weapons out of the very cold very dead hands of the Weaver family at Ruby Ridge, at Waco, and so on. If you "take up arms" against a government you believe oppressive, you are very likely to not only kill yourself, but your family as well. Yes, the idea that the 2nd is some sort of realistic "protection against tyranny" is backwoods yahoo mysticism.
 

Dave P

Bronze Supporter
#16
"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government"

-- Thomas Jefferson

"The very atmosphere of firearms anywhere and everywhere restrains evil interference - they deserve a place of honor with all that's good"

-- George Washington

"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed."

-- Alexander Hamilton,

"Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the act of depriving a whole nation of arms, as the blackest."

-- Mahatma Gandhi
 

Jeff Young

Bronze Supporter
#17
Yep, all from the 1770s. Anachornisms.

And you blew on the Gandhi quote, although it is a favorite of old white guys who talk to empty chairs.

He's talking about collective arms in defense of India....not arming every lout individually...

"I used to issue leaflets asking people to enlist as recruits. One of the arguments I had used was distasteful to the Commissioner : 'Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest. If we want the Arms Act to be repealed, if we want to learn the use of arms, here is a golden opportunity. If the middle class render voluntary help to Government in the hour of its trial, distrust will disappear, and the ban on possessing arms will be withdrawn.' The Commissioner referred to this and said that he appreciated my presence in the conference in spite of the differences between us. "

And this was before his philopsophy had been formed....as the title "MY EXPERIMENTS WITH TRUTH" indicate...

"The only virtue I want to claim is truth and non-violence. I lay no claim to superhuman powers. I want none. I wear the same corruptible flesh that the weakest of my fellow beings wears, and am therefore as liable to err as any. My services have many limitations, but God has upto now blessed them in spite of the imperfections. "
 

Jim Craik

Lifetime Premier Supporter
#18
Jeff, here is Jefferson backing up just what you said...


Enlighten the people, generally, and tyranny and oppressions of body and mind will vanish like spirits at the dawn of day.
Thomas Jefferson
3rd president of US (1743 - 1826) *


Dave,

You know that both Jefferson and Washinton were pro slave and against Woman, Blacks and the poor voting. They were wrong about that and they were wrong about alot of things, we changed the Constitution to correct their errors.

Dave, are you against women voting, or do the think they were wrong? It it possible that they were wrong about other things as well?

They put into their imperfect Constitution a way to amend it, why do you suppose they did that?
 
Last edited:

Dave P

Bronze Supporter
#19
Jeff: Note my last post these are quotes from great men. Notice You are not on the list.
Take your valuable opinions and go to Starbucks and try to get a coffee with them.Oh bye the way don't forget your five dollar bill.
 

Jeff Young

Bronze Supporter
#20
I also believe that more extreme Gun Control is not the answer. I believe it is a moral and political issue. Since we are discussing a tragedy in the United States, I will use some relevant data. I would like to point out that this is not an anti US post. This last comment is directed towards the paranoids amongst us - please do not derail a proper discussion.

Some recent data would suggest that for a 307 million US population there are 300 million guns in circulation and that's just the ones they know about. It translates to roughly 90 guns per 100 population.

By coincidence? The US is No. 4 highest overall death rate from guns in the world, (10,000) however, if you apply the deaths per 100,000 it slips down the list a little with South Africa remaining top of everything. Even so, the USA appears around No. 8 in the world of gun deaths per 100,000 per capita.

Lots of guns and lots of deaths. The two must be related. Someone on here said that if you took the guns away they would find another way, but I truthfully doubt that a man with a machete, for example, could exact that kind of death toll.

I realise that statistics like these can be used in different ways, and they may not be up to date but they are close to the truth. To fiddle with the statistics is to attempt to bury the problem. I suppose it's a bit like being an alcoholic - first you have to accept there is a problem. I happen to believe there is, and it probably starts (but doesn't end) with the 1st and 2nd Amendments.

I will say again, this is not an anti US post. To suggest it is denies me the right to debate serious world issues that affect us all, for what happens in the USA inevitably is exported and therefore concerns everyone.
That is a good post. The problem is most Americans don't coorelate gun ownership with higher gun deaths. In fact, they tend to believe the opposite based on limited, partisan studies. They truly think that more guns means fewer gun deaths.

It's a bizarro reality world we live in here in the US when it comes to guns. Some say it is part of our culture and history, but Canada had a similar wild West/frontier background and tey manage just fine with stricter gun control laws.

Note I do not think weapons bans are a good idea. We are adults and responsible adults should be allowed to own firearms. However, where we go astray -- FAR astray -- in analyzing gun regulations is starting with the entirely incorrect premise that a massively armed populace is some sort of protection against government tyranny. It just isn't anymore.
 
Top