Gun Control

[37g joe]

Originally Posted by DennyCrane
Which is why this is a good debate topic - there perhaps is no "right" answer. I've sat through god knows how many Constitutional Law classes and this is one of the biggest and most polerizing talking points.
An earlier post quoted me and mentioned the checks and balances (which really speaks to the interaction of the different branches of fed gov) and how the Swiss get along as a gun nation. Actually I have no knowledge on whether or not Switzerland is a gun nation, but it would greatly shock me if it is. I can say, and having lived there, that the UK greatly restricts gun ownership. Not surprizingly, murder by gun and accidental gun death is a very very rare thing (single digits per year - here in Birmingham, we are already passing last years record death by gun which was way over 100). They perceive the US as a "wild west" gun society, and in a way, they are right. And to say that we need guns to keep our government in check borders on naive. Irregardless of how many guns we own, should the gov ever choose to "opress" us, let's face it, they could. But IMO, that isn't what the 2nd Amendment was written for. The bottom line is, guns are too easy to get here, and you choices of armament are to great.
thats funny how you mention the U.K. I was recently reading through one of my father inlaws rifleman magazines and they brought the U.k. low gun rate incedents. and showed how befor britian had the ristrictions the rates where even lower so the U.K is not a good example because it has had for quite some time low rates and they actually have been rising since implemting more restrictions.

 

[37g joe]

Originally Posted by Dogstar
I think the law is the law. But what is the law.
Article Two
A well-regulated militia (stop and think) being necessary to the security of a free State ( stop again), the right of the poeple ( should this say the State instead ) to keep and bears arms ( no exeptions there, I guess cannons whould be their WMD ) shall not be infringed ( no laws to prevent this ).
Its very confusing the way its written so there IMO lays the problem. Any gun law is an infringment of the rights. But does the law give the right to the individual or to the State ?
Only the people can change the law by voteing an Amendment that will change it. But first there has to be a reasonable want to do so. There are many control laws now that many people dont want and many people want more. So....
Personally it makes me sick every time I here about a murder or a child accidently being shot and this can happen with any type of weapon. But I own a SG for protection and used to hunt myself. But I dont know the answers to this either.....
you wonder about if this is directed towards the state or the people. The fact is the constition had already provided for the exixtence and arming of a militia in article I, section 8. (In cases of the states) so if it was intended as a right for the states thier was no need to put it as the 2 amendment. it is clearly for the people and yes cannons where considerd an arm acessible to the protection of the people.
also Tench Coxe in 1789 statement which apered in the FEDERAL GASETTE in june. remarking on the constition said: "the people are confirmed by the next article in thier right to keep and bear thier private arms" Madison later wrote Coxe that the ratification of the amendments would be "indebted to the cooperation of your pen."
If the framers of the secound amendment had intened it to apply to the right of the state to maintian militias the would of used the word state not people.

 

[37g joe]

"what is the militia? it is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them. George Mason, father of the bill of rights

"laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things wors for the assaulted and beter for the assailants: they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man
Thomas Jeffersons :complace book, 1774-1776

The right of a citizen to keep and bear arms has justly been considered the palladium of the liberties of the republic, since it offers a strong mroal check against the usurpation and arbitary power of rulers, and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.
Joseph Story, 1833
U.S. Supreme Court Justice
but what do these shmucks know right they are just our founding fathers as someone earlyier stated they are archaic.
It is quite evident what thier intent was everyone can see it and I dont belive you cant understand you have different motives for disarming the people. you dont want to protect the ideas and values of this nation you want to create a new nation one that suits your interests. if you dont like the foundations of this nation thier are plenty of other places to go.

 

[phixer]

I think some clairification might be in order. Fully automatic weapons are designed for one purpose. To kill large numbers quickly and are regulated for official use only, i.e military applications and law enforcement. They are ALREADY illegal for sale or use unless you are licensed to have one. Semi automatic weapons are completely different and do not have the same rate of fire, i.e one round per trigger pull. The calibers are often the same but the distinguishing factor is the rate of fire.
Many who complain about our gun laws have never been to the middle east, Ive been there many times and can say with certainty that disarming people is the easiest way control them.

 

[37g joe]

Originally Posted by Phixer
Many who complain about our gun laws have never been to the middle east, Ive been there many times and can say with certainty that disarming people is the easiest way control them.
You are right it is the easiest way to control people. Take thier weapons away and then people are helpless to defend themselves. I have been to east africa and understand the politics. The degree that I was getting in college was crosscultural comunications (curently taking a leave from school since my son was born.) My wife has her degree in International studdies and minor in politcal science and is she is curently seeking a job with the state department. I am not coming from a background where I dont understand whats going on in the rest of the world. The fact is time and time again nations have taken weapons away from thier citizens to "control them". Then those who they find as a threat to thier power they slaughter and destroy. The only people left with the weapons is the goverment and the criminals and most of the time thats one in the same. Why do felons if they where given the opertunity overwhelmingly support the political party that wants to put so many regulations on guns?
Awnser:
1: because they disarm thier victims and since criminals well always be able to get weapons it does not restrict thier supply.
2: Time and time again That political party is more concerned about the rights of the criminals than of the victims (lessining criminal senticing and punishments)
3: That political party supports thier world outlook by trying to Decrimanlize the crimes they commit.

 

[zoie2]

A fully auto weapon is not a NEED it's a WANT. My husband and I collect guns. We don't hunt, it's a hobby. We go to the range together and have fun. My friends say we are like the Gummers on Tremors. (My husband actually has the Barret featured in that film. I have a Lar, Grizzley).
I read and see the excitement when people upgrade their tanks. Get bigger, better tanks, with more power, better lighting, more power heads... the list can go on. Some of you probably drool, viewing the tanks others have. I have seen some awesome ones!! I've wiped my chin now and then.
It's the same with guns. It's a hobby and the bigger and better ones I can get, I want. It's fun. VERY fun.

 

[yimmy]

We have a very nice gun club in scottsdale. I asked how much it costs for an MP5 he said 17,500$. I would own one if I had the money. Huntings okay not much fun in my opinion tracking stuff. So I could see having a full auto for a shooting range. I personally think hand guns would be the most fun to shoot...JMO. I didn't read through this full post but AZ is a freaky place to live in when you read the rules and laws about guns. No records are kept about who bought the gun and what the gun was. You have to be 21 to buy a hand gun which you can "gift" to someone under 21 legally. You have to be 18 to own a rifle high powered or not. Just don't get it. I guess it's harder to shoot yourself in the head with a pistol. When I'm older I'm going to have pistols not for hunting or planned on self defense but for collecting guns and going out to shoot targets.

 

[phixer]

Tend to agree, most folks do not need to personnally own fully automatic weapons, hand grenades or MX missles to protect themselves. When the average citizen requires such a weapon for home defense its too late and the local government has already failed. However a person can request a license to own such a weapon providing they meet the requirements for ownership. The law already prohibits these weapons without a license.....The rest of them have a legitimate purpose.

 

[dennycrane]

Originally Posted by 37g Joe
but what do these shmucks know right they are just our founding fathers as someone earlyier stated they are archaic.
It is quite evident what thier intent was everyone can see it and I dont belive you cant understand you have different motives for disarming the people. you dont want to protect the ideas and values of this nation you want to create a new nation one that suits your interests. if you dont like the foundations of this nation thier are plenty of other places to go.

Calm down, Joe. I didn't call the founding fathers archaic. I did call their intentions of the 2nd Amendment archaic, and in line with the definition of archaic (out dated), their intentions are. If you deem the 2nd as an instrument to arm one's citizens against the protection from their own country, then it is ineffective. But that isn't what it was for. And as for protecting the ideas, values and rights of people in this nation, I do it on a daily basis. This country's values covers a wide spectrum of culture, beliefs and ideas of community, but the one value that seems to be consistent is the freedom to walk out your front door and not have a gun pulled on you. You can never ensure that this won't happen, but heavier gun restrictions will without a doubt lessen the likelyhood.
In the US, 41% of household own a gun with a per 100,000 Intentional Gun Death rate of 13.47. Switzerland has 27.2% household gun ownership with a 6.2 per 100,000 IGD. England has 4% household gun ownership with a 0.4 per 100,000 IGD. All three countries have gun control laws in place. Can you guess which country is most successfull? Do you think England has left itself open to become a evil tyrant government? Do you think England is in jeopardy of becoming invaded and taken over?
With respect to what our founding fathers did for forming our country, they did so with the INTENTIONS of providing a mechanism for change when change is necessary (re: amendments), hense the reason slavery was abolished. I said it before, I'm all for gun ownership...but reasonable gun ownership.
And thank you, but I'll stay in this country and do what I can to make it better. If a complete gun free society is what you are looking for, perhaps you should move...to Somolia.

 

[37g joe]

Originally Posted by DennyCrane
This country's values covers a wide spectrum of culture, beliefs and ideas of community, but the one value that seems to be consistent is the freedom to walk out your front door and not have a gun pulled on you. You can never ensure that this won't happen, but heavier gun restrictions will without a doubt lessen the likelyhood.
Washington D.C. enacted a virtual ban on handguns in 1976. Between 1976 and 1991, Washington D.C.'s homicide rate rose 200%, while the U.S. rate rose 12%
with out a doubt huh?

 

[phixer]

Please review your history.
1. Fact: The murder rates in many nations (such as England) were ALREADY LOW BEFORE enacting gun control. Thus, their restrictive laws cannot be credited with lowering their crime rates.
2. Fact: Gun control has done nothing to keep crime rates from rising in many of the nations that have imposed severe firearms restrictions.
* England: According to the BBC News, handgun crime in the United Kingdom rose by 40% in the two years after it passed its draconian gun ban in 1997.
3. Fact: British citizens are now more likely to become a victim of crime than are people in the United States:
* In 1998, a study conducted jointly by statisticians from the U.S. Department of Justice and the University of Cambridge in England found that most crime is now worse in England than in the United States.
* "You are more likely to be mugged in England than in the United States," stated the Reuters news agency in summarizing the study. "The rate of robbery is now 1.4 times higher in England and Wales than in the United States, and the British burglary rate is nearly double America's. The murder rate in the United States is reportedly higher than in England, but according to the DOJ study, "the difference between the [murder rates in the] two countries has narrowed over the past 16 years.
* The United Nations confirmed these results in 2000 when it reported that the crime rate in England is higher than the crime rates of 16 other industrialized nations, including the United States.
4. Fact: British authorities routinely underreport crime statistics. Comparing statistics between different nations can be quite difficult since foreign officials frequently use different standards in compiling crime statistics.
* The British media has remained quite critical of authorities there for "fiddling" with crime data. Consider some of the headlines in their papers: "Crime figures a sham, say police, "Police are accused of fiddling crime data, and "Police figures under-record offences by 20 percent.
* British police have also criticized the system because of the "widespread manipulation" of crime data:
Sgt. Mike Bennett says officers have become increasingly frustrated with the practice of manipulating statistics. "The crime figures are meaningless," he said. "Police everywhere know exactly what is going on.
c. According to The Electronic Telegraph, "Officers said the recorded level of crime bore no resemblance to the actual amount of crime being committed.
* Underreporting crime data: "One former Scotland Yard officer told The Telegraph of a series of tricks that rendered crime figures 'a complete sham.' A classic example, he said, was where a series of homes in a block flats were burgled and were regularly recorded as one crime. Another involved pickpocketing, which was not recorded as a crime unless the victim had actually seen the item being stolen.
* Underreporting murder data: British crime reporting tactics keep murder rates artificially low. "Suppose that three men kill a woman during an argument outside a bar. They are arrested for murder, but because of problems with identification (the main witness is dead), charges are eventually dropped. In American crime statistics, the event counts as a three-person homicide, but in British statistics it counts as nothing at all. 'With such differences in reporting criteria, comparisons of U.S. homicide rates with British homicide rates is a sham,' [a 2000 report from the Inspectorate of Constabulary] concludes.
5. Fact: Many nations with stricter gun control laws have violence rates that are equal to, or greater than, that of the United States. Consider the following rates:
High Gun
Ownership Countries
Low Gun
Ownership Countries
Country
Suicide
Homicide
Total*
Country
Suicide
Homicide
Total*
Switzerland 21.4
2.7
24.1
Denmark 22.3
4.9
27.2
U.S. 11.6
7.4
19.0
France 20.8
1.1
21.9
Israel 6.5
1.4
7.9
Japan** 16.7
0.6
17.3
* The figures listed in the table are the rates per 100,000 people.

 

[37g joe]

Florida adopted a right-to-carry law in 1987. Between 1987 and 1996, these changes occurred:
Florida United States
homicide rate -36% -0.4%
firearm homicide rate -37% +15%
handgun homicide rate -41% +24%
* Assault weapons were involved in less than 1% of homicides before the assault weapons ban took effect in 1994. The same is true as of 1998.
As of 1998, about 13% of homicides involve knives, 5% involve bludgeons, and 6% are committed with hands and feet. (3)

 

[37g joe]

Originally Posted by Phixer
Please review your history.
1. Fact: The murder rates in many nations (such as England) were ALREADY LOW BEFORE enacting gun control. Thus, their restrictive laws cannot be credited with lowering their crime rates.
2. Fact: Gun control has done nothing to keep crime rates from rising in many of the nations that have imposed severe firearms restrictions.
* England: According to the BBC News, handgun crime in the United Kingdom rose by 40% in the two years after it passed its draconian gun ban in 1997.
3. Fact: British citizens are now more likely to become a victim of crime than are people in the United States:
* In 1998, a study conducted jointly by statisticians from the U.S. Department of Justice and the University of Cambridge in England found that most crime is now worse in England than in the United States.
* "You are more likely to be mugged in England than in the United States," stated the Reuters news agency in summarizing the study. "The rate of robbery is now 1.4 times higher in England and Wales than in the United States, and the British burglary rate is nearly double America's. The murder rate in the United States is reportedly higher than in England, but according to the DOJ study, "the difference between the [murder rates in the] two countries has narrowed over the past 16 years.
* The United Nations confirmed these results in 2000 when it reported that the crime rate in England is higher than the crime rates of 16 other industrialized nations, including the United States.
4. Fact: British authorities routinely underreport crime statistics. Comparing statistics between different nations can be quite difficult since foreign officials frequently use different standards in compiling crime statistics.
* The British media has remained quite critical of authorities there for "fiddling" with crime data. Consider some of the headlines in their papers: "Crime figures a sham, say police, "Police are accused of fiddling crime data, and "Police figures under-record offences by 20 percent.
* British police have also criticized the system because of the "widespread manipulation" of crime data:
Sgt. Mike Bennett says officers have become increasingly frustrated with the practice of manipulating statistics. "The crime figures are meaningless," he said. "Police everywhere know exactly what is going on.
c. According to The Electronic Telegraph, "Officers said the recorded level of crime bore no resemblance to the actual amount of crime being committed.
* Underreporting crime data: "One former Scotland Yard officer told The Telegraph of a series of tricks that rendered crime figures 'a complete sham.' A classic example, he said, was where a series of homes in a block flats were burgled and were regularly recorded as one crime. Another involved pickpocketing, which was not recorded as a crime unless the victim had actually seen the item being stolen.
* Underreporting murder data: British crime reporting tactics keep murder rates artificially low. "Suppose that three men kill a woman during an argument outside a bar. They are arrested for murder, but because of problems with identification (the main witness is dead), charges are eventually dropped. In American crime statistics, the event counts as a three-person homicide, but in British statistics it counts as nothing at all. 'With such differences in reporting criteria, comparisons of U.S. homicide rates with British homicide rates is a sham,' [a 2000 report from the Inspectorate of Constabulary] concludes.
5. Fact: Many nations with stricter gun control laws have violence rates that are equal to, or greater than, that of the United States. Consider the following rates:
High Gun
Ownership Countries
Low Gun
Ownership Countries
Country
Suicide
Homicide
Total*
Country
Suicide
Homicide
Total*
Switzerland 21.4
2.7
24.1
Denmark 22.3
4.9
27.2
U.S. 11.6
7.4
19.0
France 20.8
1.1
21.9
Israel 6.5
1.4
7.9
Japan** 16.7
0.6
17.3
* The figures listed in the table are the rates per 100,000 people.

I was just about to post those same statistics I found on a couple diffent sites

 

[1journeyman]

First off I own guns.
Having said that... I've done some traveling as well. It seems to me that the US has a very violent society in general as compared to the rest of the world.

 

[phixer]

Overpopulated urban areas tend to bring out the best in folks.

 

[oaktree]

You have to have federal class three Lic to own a fully automatic firearm anyway which means random searches of your residence background checks and regisration with the feds I have many semi auto rifles pistols and shotguns(Hunter and ex Police) My lil girls shot every gun I had when she was four ( I had to hold some for her ) but she learned at a young age what a gun can do and how to operate one safely I leave a fully loaded gun in my vehicle and my house at all times except when other children visit My daughter now nine knows what it can do how to shoot it and she knows unless we are at the range or on the field to leave it alone and when she gets old enough she will have her own handgun she doesn't even think twice when she sees my gunbelt on the table with a fully loaded gun in it Some kids have not been educated on what a gun can do or how to use one safely and it is new to them I just think there should be more education available to our children on the safety of firearms jmo I have seen alot of people who own fully automatic weapons and most are collectors or enthusiasts who only shoot them at the range for fun they do not tote them everyday or hunt with them (my uncle has two fully automatic weapons) Most just enjoy going and firing them on occasion
Not everybody even grownups are educated enough to own a handgun but they do have a legal right to own one just like I have the legal right to type this into a public forum I wasn't going to put in my two cents on this topic but it just eats me up to see people not support our rights as americans Yes we need more education Yes we need to enforce the laws we already have NO not everybody needs a fully automatic weapon but they have the right to one But not everyone who has free speech needs to talk but they have the right too thats what sets us apart from the rest of the world we have rights set in stone Sorry for any typos I was in a hurry when written I just had to put my two cents in

 

[socal57che]

It's true that fully automatic weapons were banned decades ago. To own one you must file for and receive your tax stamp. If you have never fired a fully automatic weapon I don't expect you to understand why somebody would want one. Ignorance is bliss. Find a class 3 firing range, rent one and shoot it. Then if you still don't understand, that's fair. Semi automatic weapons are no more dangerous than a single shot .22 rifle. The person with the gun is responsible for every shot fired (any police officers here). I don't hunt anymore. I own several guns. The state of Kalifornia will not allow me to bring 2 of them into the state so they had to be left with a relative in MO. I have never killed anybody. I've never even shot anyone. Why is someone that owns a couple guns labeled as a "nut" but it's not OK to refer to an institutionalized person as a loon? The first thing the Nazi's did to the Jews was make it illegal for them to own a gun. We all know where this eventually led. If you take weapons away from law abiding citizens only criminals will have guns. The police don't count as they can only respond after the fact. I want the right to be as equally armed as the murdering rapist.
The 2 guns I own that are illegal to possess in CA are capable of carrying 90+ rounds of ammunition on the rifle. I don't hunt with them. I don't rob banks with them. I rarely load more than 20 rounds in them at one time. But...I love to shoot them. It is my recreation.
More manatees are killed by boats than any other cause.. Should it be illegal to own a boat if you live in FL?
If your government takes away your right to defend yourself one can only wonder why.
Some people collect coins. People are starving to death and yet people horde old coins for no apparent reason. It is their recreation. (I also collect coins) But should it be illegal to horde money when people are dying every day from starvation?
Rent the macine gun. Have a great day shooting it. Let others do the same.
Safe shooting and good day.

 

[socal57che]

and

 

[socal57che]

A bass boat or 4 wheeler is a toy.
This is a firearm.

 

[phixer]

Nice guns.