What will it take for American to give up guns?

[marcjacob]

I know this wont be popular, but these are my thoughts on the School Shootings that once again are happening in the States.

This happened once in the UK, in Dunblane. It shocked the nation and within a year handguns where banned in the UK.

What will it take before America bans gun ownership? It seems to be a right of all Americans to have a gun.

I fully agree with the American idea that you can kill an intruder in your own home if you feel you need too, we in the UK have too tight laws on that. But when you have mass gun ownership, c*nts like the person who has just killed small kids, have easy access to guns. He decided for whatever sick reason, to go out "in a blaze of glory", and all he had to do was open his cupboard, pull out the (probably) legal guns, and head to the school.

This isnt a new thing, sadly, for America to face. So what has to happen before Americans decide to remove guns from their society? How many school kids have to die before people decide that guns shouldnt be this easy to get hold of? What price should the "right to own a gun" be set at? 50 kids? 200, 000? a million?

This isnt an attack on America. I Love America, id love to live there one day. I support America more that most people in the world do. This is my thoughts.

[Lee]

Did you know that all the ban in the UK did was to legal gun holders (such as myself) was to to move the guns we owned out of the country?

There are still illegal firearms that can be gotten extremely easily in the UK if you know the right people to speak to.

I do not beleive the solution is banning firearms but putting tighter controls on ammunition supplies.

Regards,

Lee

[marcjacob]

yes i did, but my point is that you have to know where to get them. it means that any old nut cant get guns that easy. if you remember the dunblane case was someone who legitimately owned a gun.

banning guns will never rid the world of them, it just makes it harder than opening a cupboard.

[Xstr8guy]

In this country, the only thing people love more than jesus is their guns. Real gun control laws will NEVER happen in the U.S. just like we will never have true separation of church and state.

[chadknowslaw]

The 2nd Amendment would need to be repealed. In all the years since 1789 only one amendment has been repealed -- the was the 21st Amendment ratified December 5, 1933 repealing the 18th Amendment --Prohibition.





Here is a trick question for the wanna be lawyers:

How many amendments were in the initial bill of rights, transmitted September 25, 1789 to the State's legislatures for approval ??

[Jasun]

I'll never get rid of my guns.

but I also would never point my gun at another person.. not even in jest.

I also think that before one can shoot a gun, one should be licensed. I ride a motorcycle and can kill a person with it and I had to prove that i was capable of operating it without doing that before I was allowed on the street.

But yeah.. Some Americans are morons.

[chadknowslaw]

I did give up my guns-- voluntarily! When I moved from Iowa to Arizona, I figured I really didn't need them anymore. I gave a really really sweet 9 mm semi-auto to a deputy sheriff friend of mine --it was built by a South African heavy arms manufacturer that dabbled in high-quality small arms. It was slender for smaller hands [like mine] and all edges smoothed for concealed carry. It had an anti-recoil mechanism under the barrel so it had almost zero kick. The arms dealer that sold it to me had been an unwavering fan of Glocks until he test fired the Vector I bought from him. Try as he might, that gun would not jam. It certainly was not the $79.95 piece of shit armed robbery weapon that Taurus manufactures.

Unlike many people I trained in using firearms before using them and like Jasun give firearms a lot of respect. I don't believe any gun intentionally hurt anybody, but there are a lot of idiots/cowards that use guns to hurt people and THOSE fuckers need to be controlled!

[gaybucks_chip]

The 2nd Amendment would need to be repealed. In all the years since 1789 only one amendment has been repealed -- the was the 21st Amendment ratified December 5, 1933 repealing the 18th Amendment --Prohibition.

Is there not some controversy about the 2nd amendment's meaning? I remember some years ago somebody arguing that the 2nd amendment protects ownership of guns by "a militia", not by individuals. Dunno if that ever got sorted out, but if it got sorted out in favor of individual gun owners rights, how have the local bans been upheld as constututional?

Admittely, this is an area where my knowledge fits into a thimble with plenty of space left over

[chadknowslaw]

Is there not some controversy about the 2nd amendment's meaning? I remember some years ago somebody arguing that the 2nd amendment protects ownership of guns by "a militia", not by individuals. Dunno if that ever got sorted out, but if it got sorted out in favor of individual gun owners rights, how have the local bans been upheld as constututional?

Admittely, this is an area where my knowledge fits into a thimble with plenty of space left over

There has been controversy regarding that meaning, but the Bill of Rights consistently refers to rights given to individuals. The overwhelming majority of caselaw and scholarly examination points to interpreting the 2nd Amendment as a right given to the people and not a right given to States to maintain militias.

[chadknowslaw]

The answer to my trick question is actually "12". There were two proposed Amendments that were not ratified, so the ratified Bill of Rights contained only 10 Amendments.

[gaybucks_jeff]

Americans will never give up guns... it is a strictly cultural... not legal issue... Lets face reality here

[Madame0120]

:bs:
Blink! Keep your grubby hands off my Mossberg!

[Paco]

I for one do not own a gun, or rifle - no need for either - and odds are I will never! I am not what some call a "hunter", so I find them truly pointless (to defend me is an extremely poor argument!).

The tool is NOT the problem! It is the "tool" brandishing the tool, or the idiot with the gun, that is using it. So, by simply removing the first weapon of choice, one has not done anything but forced the nut-job to use their second preference, such as a knife, or gasoline.

I am sure I do not need to remind others that there are a few countries, like Switzerland, that FORCE their citizens (compulsory gun ownership for military age males) to have a rifle in their home, at all times. Yet, they suffer with little to no problems! (A few instances of "domestic" violence, which will continue to happen, with or without the almighty boomstick!)

Switzerland (SZ) has just less than half the % of guns of the US, yet gun crimes/murders are 1/3 or less.

It is VERY clear that the minset is what sets both apart.
US: I want a lot of guns, 'cause they are cool, plus it is my god (? WTF) given right!
SZ: I do not want it, but I will keep it by my door, because I HAVE to!

Unlike most others, I do not see these last shootings as a "big problem", because I know as population grows so will the so will the overall number of these "problems". More people = more problems. It is very unfortunate that many chose to only look at and hear only one figure - 'X' deaths per year.

Speaking of: what is the annual percentage of school shooting? (The figure that truly matters!)
population [divided by] school shootings

I highly doubt the percentage (per capita) has gone up, at all.

One thing is for sure: we'd all be better off with out weapons, but I know that will not happen (too much machismo now a days, from both males and females), because we really have not evolved. We only think we have (evolved) because we have made some technological advancements - technology has evolved, yet we regress, further each day.

Prime example: people are always gawking in each other’s backyard even though their own is a freakin' mess.

[marcjacob]

Im not going to argue my point further, i knew this would be a thread that most americans would disagree strongly with. All i will say is that the "guns dont kill people" argument doesnt wash. The kids in that school wernt killed by a gun walking in on its own. Guns need people to kill other people. There primary purpose is to kill either animals or people. No gun every killed someone alone, its people that kill, the guns are tools. On that basis Iraq should have been allowed nukes, after all, "nuclear weapons dont kill people, the person who presses the button does".

[chadknowslaw]

Im not going to argue my point further, i knew this would be a thread that most americans would disagree strongly with. All i will say is that the "guns dont kill people" argument doesnt wash. The kids in that school wernt killed by a gun walking in on its own. Guns need people to kill other people. There primary purpose is to kill either animals or people. No gun every killed someone alone, its people that kill, the guns are tools. On that basis Iraq should have been allowed nukes, after all, "nuclear weapons dont kill people, the person who presses the button does".

Actually, to be consistent, you would have to argue against ALL nuclear weapons if you use the Iraq/nuclear weapon comparison to people/gun ownership