Is the right to bear arms outdated.

[Bob Fechter]

"Things fall apart; the centre cannot hold;

Mere anarchy is loosed upon the world,

The blood-dimmed tide is loosed, and everywhere

The ceremony of innocence is drowned;

The best lack all conviction, while the worst

Are full of passionate intensity." (Yeats, The Second Coming)

 

[Larry L.]

...with extremely harsh consequences for even just posesing one. Just as it should be for guns.

Really! The Founding Fathers obviously disagreed with you, sir.

 

[Larry L.]

The best that gun control advocates like me can hope for is a ban on assault weapons, high-capacity magazines, and high-energy ammunition. That's enough for me.

Please explain the difference in the degree of 'dead' created by low velocity ammo vs. high velocity...and the difference between being killed by one round or ten.

'Would appreciate it if you could also quote the part of the Second Amendment wherein The Founders listed the type of guns we can and cannot have, and the amount & type of ammo with which they can be loaded. Also, please point out the list of places The Founders said we could and could NOT "carry"...and where they said we had to have govt's permission - and also had to pay a fee - to carry concealed weapons (CCWs)...or maybe quote the part where The Founders said that govt had the authority to do ANY of that.

The Founders said we had the right - the RIGHT - to keep and BEAR arms - period - and that congress shall pass NO LAW infringing on those rights. Govt telling us WHERE we can and cannot carry...WHAT we can and cannot carry or OWN...HOW we can and cannot carry (in the open or concealed) are all "infringements", sir...every darned one of them...no matter how some Philly lawyer or guy in a black robe 'interprets' or spins it.

I'll say again what's been said ad nauseam: The ONLY people in this country who are going to obey any new gun law or gun BAN that your side thinks ought to be enacted are the same people who have obeyed the current gun laws: law abiding people. And they aren't the problem. Criminals and loons will just ignore any new law(s)...just like they always have.

E.g.: The "Gun-free Zone" laws are probably THEE crown jewel in the anti-gun 'crown', right? How well did they work in protecting the folks at Columbine, V.T., Sandy Hook, or any number of other places? None too well, huh. And yet those laws declare it's absolutely verboten to have a gun - any gun - within that zone, right? Well, if gun laws are the end-all-and-BE-all of gun defense, how did the guns get into those places then...and how is it that all those people ended up dead?

And then, of course, we had those bank robbers in North(?) Hollywood a few years back who used illegal, fully automatic AR15s (or whatever 'twas they had) and armor-piercing ammo to do their deed. How many gun laws did THEY break? AND - IF semi-auto assault weapons had been BANNED at that time - the gun shop whose assault weapons the police 'borrowed' WOULD NOT HAVE HAD ANY FOR THE P.D. TO BORROW! How might that episode have ended had the shop NOT had those weapons???

My point? Push-come-to-shove, gun laws aren't going to protect anyone. The only defense against a gun that gives anyone any hope at all of coming out on top is another gun...not some goofy law. That's just the plain truth. The cavalry only arrives in time in 1950's movies.

Good grief! It's waaaaaay past midnight! I'M OLD! I need to go night-night!

Best regards to you, sir.

 

[Jeff Young]

Please explain the difference in the degree of 'dead' created by low velocity ammo vs. high velocity...and the difference between being killed by one round or ten.

'Would appreciate it if you could also quote the part of the Second Amendment wherein The Founders listed the type of guns we can and cannot have, and the amount & type of ammo with which they can be loaded. Also, please point out the list of places The Founders said we could and could NOT "carry"...and where they said we had to have govt's permission - and also had to pay a fee - to carry concealed weapons (CCWs)...or maybe quote the part where The Founders said that govt had the authority to do ANY of that.

The Founders said we had the right - the RIGHT - to keep and BEAR arms - period - and that congress shall pass NO LAW infringing on those rights. Govt telling us WHERE we can and cannot carry...WHAT we can and cannot carry or OWN...HOW we can and cannot carry (in the open or concealed) are all "infringements", sir...every darned one of them...no matter how some Philly lawyer or guy in a black robe 'interprets' or spins it.

I love this!

So under your thinking, I should be allowed to be mentally disabled, drunk, and still buy a surplus M60 and drive it around schools, churches and playgrounds, because, you know, the Second Amendment says nothing about ANY limitations on the kind of arms I can bear, where I can bear, or who can bear them. Felons, kids, the insane, -- no problem!

 

[Jeff Young]

We don't "play" with guns. I've had guns since I was 14. I know the ballistics of everything I shoot and I respect what they can do. I treat the 4000lb vehicle I drive daily with the same respect. There are 80 million gun owners in the US that do the same. Another Fast and Furious gun showed up at a murder scene in Mexico, our goverment was responsible for that. You don't have to own a weapon if you so choose. Don't assume that you can make my choice for me. Drunk drivers still account for 25,000 deaths a year, tobbaco accounts for 400,000 deaths a year.

Yes, you do play with guns. It's a hobby. Responsible adults should be allowed to have hobbies like gun collection/shooting for fun or competition/hunting. But your gun is no protection against "government tyranny" and self protection? Ok. But there are plenty of countries out there with strict gun control laws where the crime rates or lower than they are here.

When your hobby or way of life or culture results in tens of thousands of deaths a year, we tend to do something about, just like we did with tobacco and drunk driving.

Guns are up next.

 

[Fred W Ballinger]

According to the thread below, Americans are now panic buying guns?

http://www.garagejournal.com/forum/showthread.php?t=179199

Cheers

Fred W B

 

[Danimal W]

Since drunk driving problem/addressing problem has been brought up multiple times....I'm going to make a crystal clear comment on this that even the antigun crowd can understand..... Laws were enacted that punish those who misuse alcohol and vehicles.... Plain and simple, you punish those who commit the crimes.

 

[Danimal W]

And I will mention this FACT......

Ted Kennedy misused alcohol and a vehicle...and killed a woman and it got covered up and downplayed...not a single thing happened to him. He and his drunk ass killed more than me, a law abiding subject (sadly, as a natural born citizen, I feel more like a subject than a citizen).

So sorry, but why didn't he have to pay for his crime?

Our government is so fricken corrupt it is pathetic. The majority of elected politicians care more about their careers and fame than doing their duty. We need term limits, like two terms that can not be consecutive. That way, if they want to be reelected, they do it on their time and not while on our payroll. They work for us, not the other way around. They "forget" this.

 

[Jim Rosenthal]

Kudos to LB for quoting William butler Yeats: Bob, I may not agree with you sometimes, but your literary taste here is peerless.

Larry: the actual Constitution and Bill of Rights are short documents. Read them again. Subsequent to those two documents we have had volumes of Federal law written and interpreted, as well as common law and case law. If there is a weakness to the original documents of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, it IS their brevity and the fact that they were written in a simpler time. Not even the most visionary of the Founding Fathers could have imagined what the world, and the US, would look like two hundred years on.

I've read the Second Amendment, and I don't agree with what you say. Those of you who are so hot on the Second Amendment conveniently forget some other amendments which didn't turn out too well, and some Supreme Court decisions (Dred Scott, for example) that didn't turn out so well either.

I think what the Second Amendment says is this: "As passed by the Congress:

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.

As ratified by the States and authenticated by Thomas Jefferson, Secretary of State:

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.[8]

Gun rights advocates conveniently forget the first clause of those statements, and concentrate on the second. If gun enthusiasts are willing to have their guns stored and locked up in a local armory as part of a well-regulated militia, then they should have any firearms they want. That is essentially what we have with the National Guard. Allowing lunatics like Adam Lanza access to assault weapons is not "well-regulating" a militia. If you think it is, you are sadly mistaken.

The idea of the Second Amendment was to provide for the maintenance of a domestic security force. It does not say anything about allowing the populace to own weapons of a level of lethality that could not have been imagined by the Founders. As I've said three times before here, I don't have a problem with hunting weapons (rifles or shotguns) target shooting, etc. I DO have a problem with assault weapons and their associated hardware and I'm going to do everything I can to support a ban- and a retroactive ban, too- on assault weapons so that they are in armories and police and military gun racks only. And I think gun rights enthusiasts have two choices- fight for the unreasonable, or get on the train as opposed to getting run over by it.

 

[Pat]

I'm advocating a ban on spoons until we end this obesity epidemic. At least tablespoons: the assault rifle of spoons. Teaspoons are still OK
-Ezra Levant

 

[Tom P]

Yes, you do play with guns. It's a hobby. Responsible adults should be allowed to have hobbies like gun collection/shooting for fun or competition/hunting. But your gun is no protection against "government tyranny" and self protection? Ok. But there are plenty of countries out there with strict gun control laws where the crime rates or lower than they are here.

When your hobby or way of life or culture results in tens of thousands of deaths a year, we tend to do something about, just like we did with tobacco and drunk driving.

Guns are up next.[/QUOTE

80 million people that own guns did not cause the Newtown killings. People that examined the killer and didn't act on the findings caused this tragedy. US firearm deaths by homicide are 3.7 in 100,000, by suicide are 6.1 in 100,000. The US death with automobiles is 10.4 per 100,000. Start walking Jeff. The actions taken for alcohol and tobbaco have put a bandade on the problem.

 

[Tom P]

I'm advocating a ban on spoons until we end this obesity epidemic. At least tablespoons: the assault rifle of spoons. Teaspoons are still OK
-Ezra Levant

Pat, that's good. The cost to healthcare due to obesity is huge (no pun intended). Wonder what the related death stats are?

 

[Danimal W]

Well, I for one, think that there are too many vehicle related injuries and deaths. We'll start with all dorms of racing, since racing is for entertainment purposes only. And this ban on racing and racing related items should be retroactive. So anyone who owns such items must turn them in, with no compensation. It doesn't matter that most people involved in racing are safe, if it saves one person, it's worth it.

Then we need to focus on all privately owned vehicles. Afterall, MOST vehicles m, if not all vehicles are misused EVERY day. Ban those retroactively too.

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

The "hobby" or target practice part of gun ownership you refer to is called "gun proficiency". That's knowing how to use the gun well and do it safely. I live in Tucson about a half mile from the mountains. This morning while on the forum a bobcat weighing about 35 lbs walked past the window 5 feet from the house. That's the seventh one I've seen this year along with a mother mountain lion with 2 cubs in the back yard 50 feet from the house and 5 diamond back rattlesnakes. I walk my dog every morning and carry a 22 cal pistol with birdshot during snake season and long rifle hollowpoints this time of year. I haven't shot at any of the bobcats or mountain lions because they didn't threaten me, I did shoot one rattlesnake because he was aggressive. I would not like to be out walking in this area without a firearm. I also would not like to be waitng for a 15 to 20 minute police response time if someone broke into my house while I'm here. 25 years in Tucson my house has been broken into twice, both times I was not home. They didn't get firearms because they were locked up. So if you feel all warm and comfy and want to let someone do what they will, have at it. You're not taking my weapons!

 

[Jim Craik]

Jeff, maybe we should give this some more thought, it seems that when they are not fighting tyranny and spoons they are killing themselves and each other.

Bloody Red States and "The Geography of Gun Violence"
Posted by Charles Mudede on Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 8:48 AM


This is the map (notice the reddest states), and this is the finding on American gun violence...

We did find several factors that are associated with firearm deaths at the state level. On the economic front, gun violence was higher in states with lower average incomes. Similarly, gun violence was less likely in states with more college graduates and stronger knowledge-based economies. Gun violence was also higher in states that tend to vote Republican.
​

The national average for gun deaths per 100,000 people is 10. Deep red Alaska is at the top of this national average (20.9 per 100,000), and deep blue Hawaii is at the bottom (3.1 per 100,000).



It seems that they have a much higher death rate in auto accidents as well, mostly because they do not wear seatbelts! It seems the are also fighting Govenment tyranny by not wearing the mandated seatbelts. It seems that Darwin was right.

Now, if we can just stop the much higher teen pregnancy rate in red states, America will turn blue even faster!

 

[Tom P]

I love this!

So under your thinking, I should be allowed to be mentally disabled, drunk, and still buy a surplus M60 and drive it around schools, churches and playgrounds, because, you know, the Second Amendment says nothing about ANY limitations on the kind of arms I can bear, where I can bear, or who can bear them. Felons, kids, the insane, -- no problem!

Jeff, you don't have a clue about weapons. An M60 is a heavy (23 lbs) 7.62mm, tripod mounted machine gun. People don't drive around with them. The responsibility of making sure the felons, kids, mentally unstable and insane don't get weapon IS the governments. Making sure that weapons don't wander off to Mexico on some moronic sting is also the governments responsibility. Covering it up with Executive privilege is criminal.

 

[Tom P]

Jeff, maybe we should give this some more thought, it seems that when they are not fighting tyranny and spoons they are killing each other.

Bloody Red States and "The Geography of Gun Violence"
Posted by Charles Mudede on Mon, Jul 23, 2012 at 8:48 AM


This is the map (notice the reddest states), and this is the finding on American gun violence...

We did find several factors that are associated with firearm deaths at the state level. On the economic front, gun violence was higher in states with lower average incomes. Similarly, gun violence was less likely in states with more college graduates and stronger knowledge-based economies. Gun violence was also higher in states that tend to vote Republican.
​

The national average for gun deaths per 100,000 people is 10. Deep red Alaska is at the top of this national average (20.9 per 100,000), and deep blue Hawaii is at the bottom (3.1 per 100,000).



It seems that they have a much higher death rate in auto accidents as well, mostly because the do not wear seatbelts! It seems the are fighting Govenment tyranny by not wearing the mandated seatbelts. Keep up the good work!

The homicide rate per 100,000 is 3.7, suicide is 6.1

 

[Jim Rosenthal]

The "hobby" or target practice part of gun ownership you refer to is called "gun proficiency". That's knowing how to use the gun well and do it safely. I live in Tucson about a half mile from the mountains. This morning while on the forum a bobcat weighing about 35 lbs walked past the window 5 feet from the house. That's the seventh one I've seen this year along with a mother mountain lion with 2 cubs in the back yard 50 feet from the house and 5 diamond back rattlesnakes. I walk my dog every morning and carry a 22 cal pistol with birdshot during snake season and long rifle hollowpoints this time of year. I haven't shot at any of the bobcats or mountain lions because they didn't threaten me, I did shoot one rattlesnake because he was aggressive. I would not like to be out walking in this area without a firearm. I also would not like to be waitng for a 15 to 20 minute police response time if someone broke into my house while I'm here. 25 years in Tucson my house has been broken into twice, both times I was not home. They didn't get firearms because they were locked up. So if you feel all warm and comfy and want to let someone do what they will, have at it. You're not taking my weapons!

Al, read my posts again. You don't need a Bushmaster AR-15 to shoot rattlesnakes etc. My point is a ban on assault weapons- military weapons in the hands of civilians.

 

[Al Wohlstrom]

My only concern is that once contol begins it won't stop with the assault weapons. Most politicians have never fired a weapon. The Gabby Giffords shooting in Tucson probably could have been prevented by the shooters father when he saw him leaving the house with a backpack he knew contained weapons, and knew his state of mind. His butt ought to be in jail. I can't believe that the Newtown shooters mother had no idea of the gravity of his mental problem since she supposedly was going to commit him. It's wacked out people, not weapons.

 

[Jim Craik]

Al, you got it partially right, it's wacked out people all right, but its wacked out people with guns!

Since we can't just remove all the wacked out people, the only answer it to remove the guns!