|
|
|
ThorGoLucky
Snuggle Wolf
USA
1486 Posts |
 Posted - 12/15/2012 : 18:20:17
|
Yet another shooting brings cries for "gun control". I have an idea of framing it differently. Frame the argument by advocting for the implementation of the "well regulated militia" clause of the second amendment. That way, opponents can be framed as not supporting the US constitution. A well regulated militia is disciplined and trained, so let's require states to create militias that citizens can join for training and certification for the right to bear arms.
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2012 : 20:18:34 [Permalink]
|
"The right to keep and bear arms" is not a subordinate clause. At least to me, the Second Amendment is saying that people's right to guns "shall not be abridged" because they need them so as to become a well-regulated militia. And that's what it appears that the courts have decided after decades of legal grappling with gun control, too. The right to keep and bear arms is unalienable. Whether exercising that right leads to a well-regulated militia or not is irrelevant to the basic question of whether the right exists. It does.
And I speak as someone who would like to see the amendment amended to make gun ownership more like car ownership. Driving isn't a constitutionally protected right, but we seem to do a boatload of it, anyway. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
 |
|
|
ThorGoLucky
Snuggle Wolf
USA
1486 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2012 : 20:43:31 [Permalink]
|
Ah yes, those pesky supreme court rulings. Well then, harumph!
|
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2012 : 21:10:03 [Permalink]
|
The US constitution is kind of baffling for a non-american. People seem to want to treat it almost like a religious document. "As true as the day it was written", but aren't you guys amending it all the time anyway?
As for guns. I can understand some people wanting to own rifles, but handguns are specifically for the purpose of killing people. Basically they are murder weapons. I can't really see any excuse for a civilian to own one. There are other ways to defend your home. Use the money to buy a good security system, or a taser. I don't worry about criminals getting shot, I worry about the guns being misused. |
 |
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
 Posted - 12/15/2012 : 21:58:12 [Permalink]
|
| If only it was so simple, I wish it was. Even if that could be implemented there is no reason, that I can see, to expect that atrocities such as these or any other gun deaths will cease to occur because of such requirements. |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2012 : 22:09:58 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
The US constitution is kind of baffling for a non-american. People seem to want to treat it almost like a religious document. "As true as the day it was written", but aren't you guys amending it all the time anyway? |
Actually, it's rarely amended. Decades go by with no changes. And it was deliberately designed to be very hard to change.As for guns. I can understand some people wanting to own rifles, but handguns are specifically for the purpose of killing people. Basically they are murder weapons. I can't really see any excuse for a civilian to own one. There are other ways to defend your home. Use the money to buy a good security system, or a taser. I don't worry about criminals getting shot, I worry about the guns being misused.
|
I, too, use such non-lethal defense methods (though I wish I could supplement those with an intimidating shotgun).
Most gun control advocates in the USA have given up a long time ago. I blame Lieutenant Colonel Francis Smith for the touchiness of us Yanks on the subject of guns. He started it!
 |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2012 : 22:47:27 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
The US constitution is kind of baffling for a non-american. People seem to want to treat it almost like a religious document. "As true as the day it was written", but aren't you guys amending it all the time anyway?
|
"all the time" I think might be a bit over stated. A quick search drought up... While America started on July 4,1776 with the Declaration of Independence, the Constitution wasn't adopted until 1789. The first ten amendments were added relatively right way and are what's known as "The Bill of Rights", 1791. Since then 17 other Amendments, over 220 years, have been ratified. Not like changing one's underwear which I would equate to being done "all the time".
It's really a quite involved process, very much so. Thank you for bringing that up. I enjoyed the brief review. The three links are a very fast read, do check them out. |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 12/15/2012 : 23:37:56 [Permalink]
|
The USA has by far the highest civilian gun ownership in the world, with 88.8 guns per 100 citizens.
Here in the Philippines, the situation is different. The Philippines has neither an extremely low civilian gun ownership, nor is it quite as sky-high as the that outlier state, the USA. (The next highest civilian gun ownership rate after the US is Serbia, with 58.2 guns per 100 civilians.)
The Philippines ranks 20th out of 178 nations. Here there are only 4.7 guns owned per 100 civilians. National Philippine law generally prohibits civilians from owning the more powerfully chambered or full-auto weapons, mainly restricting licensed ownership to shotguns of 12 gauge and under, and to pistols and rifles of restricted bore. Guns being rather expensive, this by itself restricts many people here from gun ownership in this Third World country.
Carrying a weapon outside one's domicile requires a special license in addition to the one issued for being allowed to own the gun, and this "carry" permit is only good for the duration and purpose for which it is issued.
Despite its gun laws, there have been multiple ongoing armed insurrections by "well regulated militias" in the Philippines for time out of mind. And both criminals and cops (these two categories are not always exclusive here) are well armed. |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
| Edited by - HalfMooner on 12/16/2012 00:37:05 |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
|
|
HalfMooner
Dingaling
Philippines
15831 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2012 : 00:36:21 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
Per hundred civilians. The US only has 0.888 guns per civilian.
|
Oops, yeah. Will edit that goof. |
“Biology is just physics that has begun to smell bad.” —HalfMooner
Here's a link to Moonscape News, and one to its Archive. |
|
|
|
Dave W.
Info Junkie
USA
26020 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2012 : 00:41:07 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by sailingsoul
If only it was so simple, I wish it was. Even if that could be implemented there is no reason, that I can see, to expect that atrocities such as these or any other gun deaths will cease to occur because of such requirements. |
No, gun restrictions won't stop the mass killings (one of the earliest US school-house massacres was done with dynamite, if I remember correctly), but they would lessen the heat-of-the-moment reactionary violence that takes far more lives every year.
Firearms account for about twice the murders by all other weapon choices combined. Of course, if we got rid of all the firearms, then some other category would become the majority weapon-of-choice for homicide, but the important part is that no small part of the violence would change category from "murder" to, say, "assault and battery." The stereotypical 98-pound weakling might kill someone with a handgun, but not be able to do so with his hands, or maybe even a knife. There would still be a victim, but the victim would be alive. That's the important part. |
- Dave W. (Private Msg, EMail)
Evidently, I rock!
Why not question something for a change?
Visit Dave's Psoriasis Info, too. |
|
|
|
On fire for Christ
SFN Regular
Norway
1273 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2012 : 01:47:37 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
No, gun restrictions won't stop the mass killings (one of the earliest US school-house massacres was done with dynamite,
|
Well it would certainly make it a lot more difficult. The guns used in this case (and others) were legally purchased. If someone had to obtain something illegally, they may be arrested in the process, or may even be deterred by the process altogether, especially for socially awkward teenagers, with presumably few black market weapons dealer contacts. Also, if someone could only use illegally obtained weapons, it would be far more expensive and their options in terms of choice and ammunition would be far more limited.
|
|
|
|
|
Dr. Mabuse
Septic Fiend
Sweden
9687 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2012 : 06:38:22 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by On fire for Christ
As for guns. I can understand some people wanting to own rifles, but handguns are specifically for the purpose of killing people. Basically they are murder weapons. |
They have a legitimate use as personal protection against wild animals in the wilderness, from snakes and big rats to larger critters like wolves, mountain lions or bears. (Though you would preferably have a .44 Magnum rather than .22 competition pistol if you're going up against a bear)
|
Dr. Mabuse - "When the going gets tough, the tough get Duct-tape..."
Dr. Mabuse whisper.mp3
"Equivocation is not just a job, for a creationist it's a way of life..." Dr. Mabuse
Support American Troops in Iraq:
Send them unarmed civilians for target practice..
Collateralmurder. |
|
|
|
Kil
Evil Skeptic
USA
13476 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2012 : 11:52:14 [Permalink]
|
You know... There is still a debate going on regarding the 2nd amendments wording. Of all the first ten amendments, it's the hardest to decipher.
Also... When it was written, they were using flintlocks and muskets. Those were good for up to 6 rounds a minute, for the very proficient. Todays guns, and especially semi automatics can unload up to 600 rounds a minute. These are different times... |
Uncertainty may make you uncomfortable. Certainty makes you ridiculous.
Why not question something for a change?
Genetic Literacy Project |
|
|
|
sailingsoul
SFN Addict
2830 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2012 : 12:43:01 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Dave W.
No, gun restrictions won't stop the mass killings (one of the earliest US school-house massacres was done with dynamite, if I remember correctly), but they would lessen the heat-of-the-moment reactionary violence that takes far more lives every year.
Firearms account for about twice the murders by all other weapon choices combined. Of course, if we got rid of all the firearms, then some other category would become the majority weapon-of-choice for homicide, but the important part is that no small part of the violence would change category from "murder" to, say, "assault and battery." The stereotypical 98-pound weakling might kill someone with a handgun, but not be able to do so with his hands, or maybe even a knife. There would still be a victim, but the victim would be alive. That's the important part.
|
I agree with Dave's comments and they fit reality as I understand it.
I recall a tragic murder of a German tourist in Miami when I lived in Florida a good 20 years ago. While most of the finer details excape me what was unforgettable was the killer had been caught for shoplifting just a few weeks before with a illegal hand gun and the police responding did nothing about the gun violation. If they had added those charges the arrest the offender would have likely not been on the street. That I remember clearly.
As I see it, what citizens can do for everyone's safety is to report irrational comments and/or behavior involving guns or threats of real violence to the authorities to investigate. Hopfully those who are of no real threat will receive their needed wake up call that what they did will not be tolerated and is in fact prosecutable. I would for those who are reasonably balanced being put on notice that future threats could/will put them in jail would be a powerful attitude adjustor, if in fact they poses no real threat. For those unstable or that are potential threats will have a greater chance to be dealt with before they go nuts with the general public. I can see this as a way of reducing tragedies of greater magnitude vs less. No doubt following this kind of response to improper threats is what allowed the athorities to respond as they have today elsewhere in the US where a man who made some threats was arrested. Link.
AP
CEDAR LAKE, Ind. -- Authorities say an Indiana man who had 47 guns and ammunition in his home has been arrested after allegedly threatening to kill people at an elementary school near his home. |
Hay Kil! do you have family in Indiana? |
There are only two types of religious people, the deceivers and the deceived. SS |
|
|
|
Machi4velli
SFN Regular
USA
854 Posts |
Posted - 12/16/2012 : 20:19:55 [Permalink]
|
Originally posted by Kil
Also... When it was written, they were using flintlocks and muskets. Those were good for up to 6 rounds a minute, for the very proficient. Todays guns, and especially semi automatics can unload up to 600 rounds a minute. These are different times...
|
What?! The full auto firing speed for an AK-47 is 600 rounds per minute! You're off by a factor of at least 10 for semi-automatic rifles. |
"Truth does not change because it is, or is not, believed by a majority of the people."
-Giordano Bruno
"The greatest enemy of knowledge is not ignorance, but the illusion of knowledge."
-Stephen Hawking
"Seeking what is true is not seeking what is desirable"
-Albert Camus |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Well regulated militias
