|
School Shooting in... Finland. 7 killed (pg. 6)
|
View this Thread in Original format
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zild
I don't understand the point you are trying to make. My point is that if someone wants to kill someone with a gun they are going to do it legal or otherwise. So you shouldn't penalize law abiding citizens for something they didn't do when your real problem lies with black market firearms. Which like I said earlier are easier and cheaper to obtain. |
Well I'll have to take your word that they are cheaper and easier to obtain, but that doesn't alter the fact that should all guns be made illegal, then the police would have a lot easier job identifying and prosecuting actual criminals
Also, given that there are no valid arguments for gun ownership, other than daft justifications that just don't wash, ordinary citizens wouldn't be penalised would they? |
|
|
| Zild |
| Also you do realize that the Bill of Rights was required before the states would ratify the constitution as a safeguard for the people against the government. Therefore your argument that right to bear arms was thrown in there just to safeguard against the British is also laughable. It is meant to safeguard against anyone including the government of the US from infringing upon the rights of the people of the US. |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by Zild
Are you serious? So because there were 694 less idiots that year responsible law abiding citizens should surrender their rights?
Hey if you are playing with fire and you burn yourself that is your fault. It doesn't mean there should be a law passed that none of us are allowed access to fire anymore. |
When I was in elementary school I had to have surgery, and I shared a hospital room with a boy my age who had been shot in the side of the head with a gun by his best friend when they were playing with it. They found it in a lockbox in the closet and they smashed the box to get inside of it. He died in surgery from hemorraghing in his brain. And I've been for gun control all my life because of that. |
|
|
| ams.rld |
| quote: | Originally posted by Lebezniatnikov
When I was in elementary school I had to have surgery, and I shared a hospital room with a boy my age who had been shot in the side of the head with a gun by his best friend when they were playing with it. They found it in a lockbox in the closet and they smashed the box to get inside of it. He died in surgery from hemorraghing in his brain. And I've been for gun control all my life because of that. |
Sounds like a made up story by a future politician. If it isn't, than the fault is in the adults in the house who should have done better at hiding the gun. |
|
|
| George Smiley |
| quote: | Originally posted by ams.rld
Sounds like a made up story by a future politician. If it isn't, than the fault is in the adults in the house who should have done better at hiding the gun. |
Indeed, one might come to the conclusion that they shouldn't have been allowed to possess a gun in the first place... |
|
|
| ams.rld |
| quote: | Originally posted by George Smiley
Indeed, one might come to the conclusion that they shouldn't have been allowed to possess a gun in the first place... |
No, this way the offspring of stupid parents get killed. It's a good thing for society one might say.... |
|
|
| eROs.au |
| quote: | Originally posted by George Smiley
Here's some figures:
In 2004 there were 11,624 homicides and 649 accidental (!) deaths caused by firearms in America. If you can find me 12,273 eyewhitness statements saying that owning a gun saved their lives from 2004, I'll take back everything I said (ah what the hell, if you can find me 12,273 statements from the entire 21st century in America I'll take back what I said!) |
| quote: | | According to the Department of Justice, Americans use guns for defensive purposes 1.5 million times a year. |
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/...302/ai_n9231398
1,500,000 - 11,624 = 1,490,000 ish |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by ams.rld
Sounds like a made up story by a future politician. |
Good one. 
But just for the sake of your assinine claim, let's journey down this rabbit hole, shall we? Why would a politician make up a story that makes gun ownership look bad? Politicians by their nature want to appeal to the people to gain support, right? So here you are really admitting that the population is against private gun ownership and that an appeal for greater gun control will make a politician more popular?
Anyway, it's a true story, and you can deny it all you want. And you can also blame poor parenting all you want. But the fact of the matter is that hundreds of people die in accidental gun deaths every year, and a surprising proportion of them are children who find guns hidden in their parents' room. Blame the parents if you will. You can keep passing the buck til kingdom comes. |
|
|
| Lebezniatnikov |
| quote: | Originally posted by Trancer-X
It's funny but I was just thinking the exact same thing about anyone claiming that the Second Amendment DOESN'T grant US citizens the right to own guns.
|
Wow, until I read that I really thought you were using those documents to argue (more logically in my opinion) that the 2nd amendment protects the ability of the populace to form a militia in absentia of a standard organized militia and NOT an individual right to possess guns for leisure or self-defense. Amendment is completely out of date in my opinion. |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
The cherry-picking of the second amendment really irks me. |
Me too, especially in light of the fact that we have so many historical accounts to go by which clearly state our Founding Fathers thoughts as to what it was all about.
| quote: | Originally written by Alexander Hamilton in Federalist 29
The project of disciplining all the militia of the United States is as futile as it would be injurious, if it were capable of being carried into execution. A tolerable expertness in military movements is a business that requires time and practice. It is not a day, or even a week, that will suffice for the attainment of it. To oblige the great body of the yeomanry, and of the other classes of the citizens, to be under arms for the purpose of going through military exercises and evolutions, as often as might be necessary to acquire the degree of perfection which would entitle them to the character of a well-regulated militia, would be a real grievance to the people, and a serious public inconvenience and loss. It would form an annual deduction from the productive labor of the country, to an amount which, calculating upon the present numbers of the people, would not fall far short of the whole expense of the civil establishments of all the States. To attempt a thing which would abridge the mass of labor and industry to so considerable an extent, would be unwise: and the experiment, if made, could not succeed, because it would not long be endured. Little more can reasonably be aimed at, with respect to the people at large, than to have them properly armed and equipped; and in order to see that this be not neglected, it will be necessary to assemble them once or twice in the course of a year.
"But though the scheme of disciplining the whole nation must be abandoned as mischievous or impracticable; yet it is a matter of the utmost importance that a well-digested plan should, as soon as possible, be adopted for the proper establishment of the militia. The attention of the government ought particularly to be directed to the formation of a select corps of moderate extent, upon such principles as will really fit them for service in case of need. By thus circumscribing the plan, it will be possible to have an excellent body of well-trained militia, ready to take the field whenever the defense of the State shall require it. This will not only lessen the call for military establishments, but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens. This appears to me the only substitute that can be devised for a standing army, and the best possible security against it, if it should exist. |
You have to bear in mind that until the Militia Act was passed in May of 1792 there was no organized militia, only an enrolled one. At that point in time it was still considered to be the duty of our citizens to guard our freedoms (from enemies both foreign and domestic.) If you were a legal citizen and you owned a gun, you were pretty much considered to be a part of the militia.
| quote: | Title 10, Section 311 of the U.S. Code states: (a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are - (1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and (2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia. |
James Madison primarily authored the Second Amendment and he goes on to elaborate:
| quote: | Originally written by James Madison in Federalist 46:
The only refuge left for those who prophesy the downfall of the State governments is the visionary supposition that the federal government may previously accumulate a military force for the projects of ambition. The reasonings contained in these papers must have been employed to little purpose indeed, if it could be necessary now to disprove the reality of this danger. That the people and the States should, for a sufficient period of time, elect an uninterupted succession of men ready to betray both; that the traitors should, throughout this period, uniformly and systematically pursue some fixed plan for the extension of the military establishment; that the governments and the people of the States should silently and patiently behold the gathering storm, and continue to supply the materials, until it should be prepared to burst on their own heads, must appear to every one more like the incoherent dreams of a delirious jealousy, or the misjudged exaggerations of a counterfeit zeal, than like the sober apprehensions of genuine patriotism. Extravagant as the supposition is, let it however be made. Let a regular army, fully equal to the resources of the country, be formed; and let it be entirely at the devotion of the federal government; still it would not be going too far to say, that the State governments, with the people on their side, would be able to repel the danger. The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops. Those who are best acquainted with the last successful resistance of this country against the British arms, will be most inclined to deny the possibility of it. Besides the advantage of being armed, which the Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation, the existence of subordinate governments, to which the people are attached, and by which the militia officers are appointed, forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition, more insurmountable than any which a simple government of any form can admit of. Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms. And it is not certain, that with this aid alone they would not be able to shake off their yokes. But were the people to possess the additional advantages of local governments chosen by themselves, who could collect the national will and direct the national force, and of officers appointed out of the militia, by these governments, and attached both to them and to the militia, it may be affirmed with the greatest assurance, that the throne of every tyranny in Europe would be speedily overturned in spite of the legions which surround it. Let us not insult the free and gallant citizens of America with the suspicion, that they would be less able to defend the rights of which they would be in actual possession, than the debased subjects of arbitrary power would be to rescue theirs from the hands of their oppressors. Let us rather no longer insult them with the supposition that they can ever reduce themselves to the necessity of making the experiment, by a blind and tame submission to the long train of insidious measures which must precede and produce it. |
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
Not to mention the fact that, if the second amendment were intended to provide an unqualified right to bear arms, then the amendment itself would not have been qualified "A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state..." |
I addressed this above.
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
I'd go so far as to say that anyone claiming that the second amendment grants US citizens the right to own guns is someone that I could never trust with the constitution, since they are either incapable of performing basic tasks of reading and drawing reasonable inferences from what they read, or they are willfully distorting its meaning for whatever nefarious purpose they have in mind. |
It's funny but I was just thinking the exact same thing about anyone claiming that the Second Amendment DOESN'T grant US citizens the right to own guns.
At least our Department of Justice still appears to side with gun rights advocates because they say that (via an internal memo),"The Second Amendment secures a right of individuals generally, not a right of States or a right restricted to persons serving in militias."
| quote: | Originally posted by Arbiter
My personal point of view is that people can posit whatever hypothetical scenarios regarding how banning guns might advantage criminals by impairing the ability of people to defend themselves, but the truth is that reality is unsurprisingly out of synch with their harebrained rationalizations, as those countries which have either banned or seriously restricted firearm ownership do not suffer from any of the adverse effects that it is claimed we would necessarily suffer if we were to impose similar restrictions. And I'd say the fact that this particular incident took place in a country with high gun ownership serves to reinforce the apparently hard-to-stomach correlation between people owning guns and people using them to kill other people. |
I think that it's amazing how we allow our own government (who supposedly derives it's powers from the governed) to aid and abet people who commit attrocities which score anywhere from the hundreds of thousands to the millions (all around the world), all for the sake of protecting our corporate interests abroad while "We The People" are continually having our "inalienable rights" (which thankfully still include the Second Amendment) swept away under the guise of rational thought and public discourse. It's not rational, though, and the true nature of the beast is anything but public. The fact of the matter is that globalists have been and still are pushing for the disarmament of America and they actively seek to mold public opinion/perception through their many think-tanks, PR groups and other such agents of change and as unfortunate it is for the rest of us, they've been doing a damn good job.
Also, when considering the correlation between people owning guns and people using them to kill other people, you definitely have to account for the fact that violence has been glorified here in America ever since the days of the Cowboys and Indians and will probably continue to be glorified until people take it upon themselves to reject it as a means to solve their problems. Hence, my original post stating that we need to attack the motivations which lead to violence rather than the tools which can be used to carry it out. |
|
|
| HardTranceProd |
Mad props to Lebezniatnikov.
This guy is clued up big time. Excellent posts *THUMBS UP* |
|
|
| Trancer-X |
| quote: | Originally posted by HardTranceProd
Mad props to Lebezniatnikov.
This guy is clued up big time. Excellent posts *THUMBS UP* |
"Clued up" to what? Propaganda? |
|
|
|
|
