When the right to bear arms is enshrined in the Constitution it's reasonable to assume that the right to bear arms exists for the reason defined by the Constitution. What is the point of speculating on the need to defend the country from the government unless that is also enshrined in the Constitution?
Well you can speculate as much as you want, I'm talking about their rights under their Constitution.
You agree that they have the right to defend their country from attack, right?
I think it's hard and misleading to compare knives and guns. Knives are implements that have a legitimate, mainstream, widespread everyday use - in the kitchen, for example. Aren't knives that are designed as offensive weapons (i.e. not your common kitchen knife) just as illegal as guns in the UK?
So if people co-opt a common implement as a weapon that's hard to deal with.
Guns - for the large part - don't have a legitimate, mainstream, widespread, common use. They are just plain weapons, other than the aforementioned hunting/shooting/reenactment niches. Your average handgun in America is simply a weapon, whether it's used or not. Your average knife in the UK is simply a kitchen utensil that could potentially be a weapon.
That seems to be a significant and important distinction, to me.
Yes but how many times have you heard about a school kid going on a crazy knife rampage with dozens of deaths or a schizophrenic commiting the murder of 10 people in a supermarket with a knife. The sad reality is crazy people may always have a way to kill people but with a gun, the number of those murdered is much higher than had it been with a knife. These mass public killings that sadly seem to happen yearly in America do not happen with knives.
Why do you feel that defending yourself against criminals is "nonsense"?
If every citizen in Germany had kept guns and rebelled against the Nazi government, would that have been "nonsense"?
You seem to miss the fact that even if every citizen in Germany had had a gun it wouldn't have mattered because they were brainwashed into believing and worshiping their government.
You seem to miss the fact that even if every citizen in Germany had had a gun it wouldn't have mattered because they were brainwashed into believing and worshiping their government.
Aye, it seems like Americans are obsessed with Nazi Germany
When the right to bear arms is enshrined in the Constitution it's reasonable to assume that the right to bear arms exists for the reason defined by the Constitution. What is the point of speculating on the need to defend the country from the government unless that is also enshrined in the Constitution?
Of course, the Constitution was drawn up in the days of muzzle -loading guns and they couldn't anticpate the effect modern weaponry would have on the population.
Yes but how many times have you heard about a school kid going on a crazy knife rampage with dozens of deaths or a schizophrenic commiting the murder of 10 people in a supermarket with a knife. The sad reality is crazy people may always have a way to kill people but with a gun, the number of those murdered is much higher than had it been with a knife. These mass public killings that sadly seem to happen yearly in America do not happen with knives.
I think the key really is the balance. I read that America's crime rate per capita is roughly the same as ours, but murders and mass killings over there are committed more by one deranged individual than by gangs or groups of people as is the case over here. They have better countermeasures to help tackle the problem of gun crime, like having armed police and people deciding to buy a gun for their own protection and safety. Over here, knife crime is a problem but not so much that the police and public need to be better armed, however of course it doesn't prevent knife related murders.
Who the hell is going to be attacking America in such a way that handguns would be any use at all in defending against them?!
The right to bear arms is constitutionally linked to the defence of the state. It would appear that some people interpret this to mean that owning a gun is a right regardless of whether the state can only be effectively defended by other means. What's more disturbing is the implication that since owning a gun is a right, the gun may be used, under the Constitution, if the bearer does not agree with the government's policies. In that situation the Constitution is being used to justify the attempted murder of a democratically elected representative.
Back when the Constitution was framed, guns were muskets and flintlocks, not the weapons we have today.
The phrasing of the Second Amendment is ambiguous too, with huge debate over a contentious comma which could make a huge difference to the meaning.
The Constitution- amongst some Americans of my acquaintance- seems to have a quasi religious status. They regard it as inspired word of God. Therefore, any attempt to limit the rights of citizens under the Constitution are to be fought to the death, in their opinion. Hence their insistence on the right to bear arms.
You have a complicated mindset which is very difficult to understand. They ask me 'so what do you do if you feel threatened?' I say 'I ring the police'. They would rather have their weapons as their defence. The mindset, imho, will never change, if anything it will become more entrenched.
A country of over 300 million people, and you're bound to get a tiny handful of nutcases who will murder people - using a gun or not. Murder rates are usually relative to the population size, and America fares better than many countries in the world.
A country of over 300 million people, and you're bound to get a tiny handful of nutcases who will murder people - using a gun or not. Murder rates are usually relative to the population size, and America fares better than many countries in the world.
See my post - 56 - above.
America's crime and murder rate is significantly higher.
Can anyone explain to me why guns are still such a massive part of American culture in 2011 and, why, despite so many horrible shooting incidents over the years, they are doing absolutely nothing to tighten their gun laws...they don't even seem to think they NEED tightening.
Does this thing America has with guns go back to the wild west days, or something? I don't get it.
Our problem is not the availability of guns, it is the culture, especially gang culture.
Millions of rural people live with guns and use them to kill animals. Generally rural areas also have low murder rates. My county probably has a couple thousand people and even more guns. We have a murder maybe one every five years. Yet guns are used all the time to kill deer and rabbits and squirrels.
We have quite a black market. I'm not completely against gun control, but banning guns would not be effective, because criminals get guns. Period. At the same time, you would be robbing rural people of their right to hunt.
Maybe it's because I've been raised around guns, but I know that inanimate object cannot be inherently evil. A gun is a tool that people choose to use, and they can have good purposes (such as for food).
The murder rate will not change unless you change the culture of the people who use guns for evil.
It's not fair (nor is it constitutional) to take freedoms away from the law abiding to protect them from the criminals, especially since it won't protect anyone.
Maybe there are no murders in Britain because guns are so hard to get. However, we have so many ways to get a gun that people would still get them. Guns are not the main issue. The culture is the main issue.
I also think the media skews the image of our culture over here. Even in this redneck area, most people don't carry guns and it's rare that anyone is shot, even by accident. If you are raised around guns and taught how to use them, they are much less dangerous.
I feel safer when good people have guns. I know if all guns were banned then only people with ill intent would have them, because they have guns anyway.
I've shot a gun as a kid, but it's been years. Still, I know that you have to be very careful with them and there are certain ways to handle a gun. I was raised with the right morals to know that using a gun for the wrong reasons is evil. Unfortunately, our media and even parents and society don't always push that idea so much.
If we want to reduce gun crime we have to change the culture. I'm not against gun control, but a complete ban would not work. It would also deprive people of the right to prepare their own food. Actually, hunting is probably more eco-friendly than buying processed meat at the store.
I realize most of you have not been raised around guns. However, as someone who has, I have seen that guns can have good and bad purposes, depending on how they are used. If you teach people to respect guns and how to use them properly and you did do some screening ahead of time (which we do some of) there would be less gun crime.
This country has had a gun culture from the beginning. Partly was out of necessity. Guns are often more accurate than bows when food is needed. In the 17th century I would venture to assume that Britain had cities and markets. Not many places here did. Even into the 19th century, pioneers moving westward needed guns to protect themselves from wild animals and kill food. Guns were used for battles with Native Americans (obviously we did not treat them fairly) and in the war. Early settlers had to have and use guns simply for survival. There is still an element of that today in the rural areas. Sure, most rural areas have supermarkets, but people still enjoy hunting and it's cheaper than buying all that meat at the market. It may be safer too, since there's less processing and preservatives.
Guns can be used for evil, but they are not always. We have more gun crime, but we also have a lot more guns. I would venture to guess that almost all guns in this country are never used to kill people and a very small percentage of the population are homicidal. However, the news doesn't highlight the millions who safely use guns. It highlights events like this. Banning guns because of this would be illegal and ineffective.
I wonder sometimes if non-Americans watch the news and think that this is the Wild West. It is not. America overall is safe. Most cities have good and bad areas. I would venture to guess even Britain has crime. Banning guns would not stop crime. Maybe other factors, such as culture and economy and other criminal aspects (gangs and drugs especially), are great factors as well. Guns are not the major factor in our crime. Banning them would not solve anything.
he state can only be effectively defended by other means. What's more disturbing is the implication that since owning a gun is a right, the gun may be used, under the Constitution, if the bearer does not agree with the government's policies. In that situation the Constitution is being used to justify the attempted murder of a democratically elected representative.
Throwing off the attacks by a dictator is not "using arms against the government simply for disagreeing with policies", it is legitimate defence against an attack on a democratic nation.
By ignoring the Constitution, the government is not democratic. Governments that have lost the mandate to govern, but choose not to let go of power are classed as dictators, and I believe the citizens have the right to defend against such dictators.
Catch 22 - because guns are 'mainstream' for want of a better word, people have them because others do.
If I lived in America, I wouldn't want a gun but would probably still have one because I'd deem it necessary as so many of the population do, including criminals.
What does anybody need a gun for if not for kiiling people?
Beyond the natural but niche legitimate uses of hunting and competitive shooting.
I wouldn't call hunting niche. Probably nearly every state, even New York, has people who hunt in the rural areas. Hunting is big business, I think especially in the south and Midwest.
I wouldn't call hunting niche. Probably nearly every state, even New York, has people who hunt in the rural areas. Hunting is big business, I think especially in the south and Midwest.
Perhaps niche is the wrong word. If people have guns that are used specifically for hunting I can understand that.
The point I was trying to make is this: are most of the handguns sitting in the average Americans households there for the specific purpose of hunting? I doubt that is the case.
i think we've been through this so many times because it is hard to find any trace of logic in the oft repeated phrase "It's not guns that kill, it's the people that use them"
There are nut cases in every country. However in the UK and a number of other countries we do at least try to prevent them from owning lethal weapons. This simple logic is lost on the stoopid yanks. Then America is suddenly baffled when incidents like this happen. Amazing.
We have standards on who can have guns. I am also not against tightening those standards. But it's not as simple as banning guns, because people still get them.
I'm always amazed at Brits who call us stupid because they don't like the way we run our own country. Have you been to the U.S.? You can't very well know how to run a country that you don't live in.
I wouldn't say this attack baffled us. It was a shock and a horror, but not baffling.
Attacks like this have been stopped by guns as well. There was a shooting like this at a church years ago and the church's security guard shot and killed the shooter. Granted, she was trained to use a gun, but so are most hunters and likely most gun owners. Are you saying people don't have the right to protect themselves and feel secure.
Someone also mentioned reenactments. I know of people who do Civil War reenactments and they have guns from that period. I think my dad has an antique gun as well. I think altogether he has about 6 guns and a bow. Some are almost never used (such as the antique one) and one provided the freezer full of venison that we currently have.
Perhaps niche is the wrong word. If people have guns that are used specifically for hunting I can understand that.
The point I was trying to make is this: are most of the handguns sitting in the average Americans households there for the specific purpose of hunting? I doubt that is the case.
Probably not. But most of those guns are probably never used for self-defense purposes, so what does it matter if it used for hunting?
Again, the media portrays the mass shootings, but not the millions of hunters who use guns safely.
I think most Americans don't give up their guns for fear that when they do the little green men are going to come down in a spaceship and they won't have anything to shoot them with.
Comments
Well you can speculate as much as you want, I'm talking about their rights under their Constitution.
You agree that they have the right to defend their country from attack, right?
So if people co-opt a common implement as a weapon that's hard to deal with.
Guns - for the large part - don't have a legitimate, mainstream, widespread, common use. They are just plain weapons, other than the aforementioned hunting/shooting/reenactment niches. Your average handgun in America is simply a weapon, whether it's used or not. Your average knife in the UK is simply a kitchen utensil that could potentially be a weapon.
That seems to be a significant and important distinction, to me.
in japan that happens quite often
You seem to miss the fact that even if every citizen in Germany had had a gun it wouldn't have mattered because they were brainwashed into believing and worshiping their government.
And the percentage of homicides in America by gun is 65%, as opposed to 35% in Canada and just 6% in the UK.
Personally I think our approach is the right one.
Aye, it seems like Americans are obsessed with Nazi Germany
Of course, the Constitution was drawn up in the days of muzzle -loading guns and they couldn't anticpate the effect modern weaponry would have on the population.
I think the key really is the balance. I read that America's crime rate per capita is roughly the same as ours, but murders and mass killings over there are committed more by one deranged individual than by gangs or groups of people as is the case over here. They have better countermeasures to help tackle the problem of gun crime, like having armed police and people deciding to buy a gun for their own protection and safety. Over here, knife crime is a problem but not so much that the police and public need to be better armed, however of course it doesn't prevent knife related murders.
The right to bear arms is constitutionally linked to the defence of the state. It would appear that some people interpret this to mean that owning a gun is a right regardless of whether the state can only be effectively defended by other means. What's more disturbing is the implication that since owning a gun is a right, the gun may be used, under the Constitution, if the bearer does not agree with the government's policies. In that situation the Constitution is being used to justify the attempted murder of a democratically elected representative.
The phrasing of the Second Amendment is ambiguous too, with huge debate over a contentious comma which could make a huge difference to the meaning.
The Constitution- amongst some Americans of my acquaintance- seems to have a quasi religious status. They regard it as inspired word of God. Therefore, any attempt to limit the rights of citizens under the Constitution are to be fought to the death, in their opinion. Hence their insistence on the right to bear arms.
You have a complicated mindset which is very difficult to understand. They ask me 'so what do you do if you feel threatened?' I say 'I ring the police'. They would rather have their weapons as their defence. The mindset, imho, will never change, if anything it will become more entrenched.
A country of over 300 million people, and you're bound to get a tiny handful of nutcases who will murder people - using a gun or not. Murder rates are usually relative to the population size, and America fares better than many countries in the world.
See my post - 56 - above.
America's crime and murder rate is significantly higher.
Pakistan has a population that is 1/3 the size of America and it has day to day mass killings.
But it seems that nobody would dare insinuate that Pakistanis/Muslims are psychopaths.
Our problem is not the availability of guns, it is the culture, especially gang culture.
Millions of rural people live with guns and use them to kill animals. Generally rural areas also have low murder rates. My county probably has a couple thousand people and even more guns. We have a murder maybe one every five years. Yet guns are used all the time to kill deer and rabbits and squirrels.
We have quite a black market. I'm not completely against gun control, but banning guns would not be effective, because criminals get guns. Period. At the same time, you would be robbing rural people of their right to hunt.
Maybe it's because I've been raised around guns, but I know that inanimate object cannot be inherently evil. A gun is a tool that people choose to use, and they can have good purposes (such as for food).
The murder rate will not change unless you change the culture of the people who use guns for evil.
It's not fair (nor is it constitutional) to take freedoms away from the law abiding to protect them from the criminals, especially since it won't protect anyone.
Maybe there are no murders in Britain because guns are so hard to get. However, we have so many ways to get a gun that people would still get them. Guns are not the main issue. The culture is the main issue.
I also think the media skews the image of our culture over here. Even in this redneck area, most people don't carry guns and it's rare that anyone is shot, even by accident. If you are raised around guns and taught how to use them, they are much less dangerous.
I feel safer when good people have guns. I know if all guns were banned then only people with ill intent would have them, because they have guns anyway.
I've shot a gun as a kid, but it's been years. Still, I know that you have to be very careful with them and there are certain ways to handle a gun. I was raised with the right morals to know that using a gun for the wrong reasons is evil. Unfortunately, our media and even parents and society don't always push that idea so much.
If we want to reduce gun crime we have to change the culture. I'm not against gun control, but a complete ban would not work. It would also deprive people of the right to prepare their own food. Actually, hunting is probably more eco-friendly than buying processed meat at the store.
I realize most of you have not been raised around guns. However, as someone who has, I have seen that guns can have good and bad purposes, depending on how they are used. If you teach people to respect guns and how to use them properly and you did do some screening ahead of time (which we do some of) there would be less gun crime.
This country has had a gun culture from the beginning. Partly was out of necessity. Guns are often more accurate than bows when food is needed. In the 17th century I would venture to assume that Britain had cities and markets. Not many places here did. Even into the 19th century, pioneers moving westward needed guns to protect themselves from wild animals and kill food. Guns were used for battles with Native Americans (obviously we did not treat them fairly) and in the war. Early settlers had to have and use guns simply for survival. There is still an element of that today in the rural areas. Sure, most rural areas have supermarkets, but people still enjoy hunting and it's cheaper than buying all that meat at the market. It may be safer too, since there's less processing and preservatives.
Guns can be used for evil, but they are not always. We have more gun crime, but we also have a lot more guns. I would venture to guess that almost all guns in this country are never used to kill people and a very small percentage of the population are homicidal. However, the news doesn't highlight the millions who safely use guns. It highlights events like this. Banning guns because of this would be illegal and ineffective.
I wonder sometimes if non-Americans watch the news and think that this is the Wild West. It is not. America overall is safe. Most cities have good and bad areas. I would venture to guess even Britain has crime. Banning guns would not stop crime. Maybe other factors, such as culture and economy and other criminal aspects (gangs and drugs especially), are great factors as well. Guns are not the major factor in our crime. Banning them would not solve anything.
Throwing off the attacks by a dictator is not "using arms against the government simply for disagreeing with policies", it is legitimate defence against an attack on a democratic nation.
By ignoring the Constitution, the government is not democratic. Governments that have lost the mandate to govern, but choose not to let go of power are classed as dictators, and I believe the citizens have the right to defend against such dictators.
If I lived in America, I wouldn't want a gun but would probably still have one because I'd deem it necessary as so many of the population do, including criminals.
I wouldn't call hunting niche. Probably nearly every state, even New York, has people who hunt in the rural areas. Hunting is big business, I think especially in the south and Midwest.
That's not true. Our homicide rate is higher but the UK crime rate is proportionally higher for crimes aside from that one.
Perhaps niche is the wrong word. If people have guns that are used specifically for hunting I can understand that.
The point I was trying to make is this: are most of the handguns sitting in the average Americans households there for the specific purpose of hunting? I doubt that is the case.
We have standards on who can have guns. I am also not against tightening those standards. But it's not as simple as banning guns, because people still get them.
I'm always amazed at Brits who call us stupid because they don't like the way we run our own country. Have you been to the U.S.? You can't very well know how to run a country that you don't live in.
I wouldn't say this attack baffled us. It was a shock and a horror, but not baffling.
Attacks like this have been stopped by guns as well. There was a shooting like this at a church years ago and the church's security guard shot and killed the shooter. Granted, she was trained to use a gun, but so are most hunters and likely most gun owners. Are you saying people don't have the right to protect themselves and feel secure.
Someone also mentioned reenactments. I know of people who do Civil War reenactments and they have guns from that period. I think my dad has an antique gun as well. I think altogether he has about 6 guns and a bow. Some are almost never used (such as the antique one) and one provided the freezer full of venison that we currently have.
Probably not. But most of those guns are probably never used for self-defense purposes, so what does it matter if it used for hunting?
Again, the media portrays the mass shootings, but not the millions of hunters who use guns safely.