The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Why aren't guns banned in the USA?  (Read 52664 times)

Offline graham.d

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2208
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #125 on: 03/01/2011 22:45:49 »
"Banning guns doesn't accomplish safety it accomplishes a false sense of safety.We aren't allowed to have guns so we are safe and no one is going to shoot us,WRONG.I believe that proved its self to be true with the shootings in England a few months back."

I don't think the statistics on fatal killings per capita bear you out on this.

I'm glad that you appreciate the history of what was behind the amendment. Not everyone does so. The reasons for the granting of the right to bear arms was important at the time, but it did not actually mean it quite in the way it has turned out. I believe it was intended to allow the formation of organised militia independent of the state, which could indeed still be a feature of the current situation. I don't think it was thought necessary by the founding fathers as a tool for self protection against crimes by fellow citizens using those same weapons. I actually don't see it as a very likely scenario that Americans are likely to take a weapons' led revolutionary stance against their elected government. And I don't see this to be likely in any democratic state at the present time - and not because the democratic states are necessarily really representative, but mainly that the overall systems that have been developed tend to favour the status quo anyway. Revolutions do not tend to occur in democracies. Do you really think that this is anything close to a prime reason why many people in the US bear arms? If so, there are a lot of dangerous people out there who currently are not regarded as criminals. Is it not more likely that, if you think that you are the last line of defence against an invading army, that this might just be an "invented", if only slightly plausible, excuse. With all the defence power that the US has got, I don't really think anyone would get close. There are countries that can justify this (e.g. Israel), but not the US.

Not all European countries forbid gun ownership by the way. Switzerland is an example and they have a relatively low crime rate, so I would agree gun ownership does not necessarily result in a high homicide rate, but it does in some places. The reasons can be complex. The UK has a rising problem with gun crime but it is still very low and there is general popular agreement about having tight gun laws. I don't see the need in the near future to rise up against the government either and, in any case, asymmetric wars do not tend to involve gun battles against professional, heavily armed, troops; it would be a lousy strategy.
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #126 on: 03/01/2011 23:20:53 »
Futher anecdotal evidence:

Not long after we moved from the UK to the USA, I was chatting with a church minister, and I brought up the subject of guns. I was rabbiting on about how bad I thought it was that so many people in the US felt the need to own hand guns.

After a bit, I realized he wasn't exactly in full agreement with what I was saying, then he mentioned that he always kept a loaded revolver in his bedside table. Put a bit of a damper on the conversation, let me tell you.
 

Offline CGNFOREVER

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #127 on: 04/01/2011 00:00:23 »
"Banning guns doesn't accomplish safety it accomplishes a false sense of safety.We aren't allowed to have guns so we are safe and no one is going to shoot us,WRONG.I believe that proved its self to be true with the shootings in England a few months back."

I don't think the statistics on fatal killings per capita bear you out on this.

I'm glad that you appreciate the history of what was behind the amendment. Not everyone does so. The reasons for the granting of the right to bear arms was important at the time, but it did not actually mean it quite in the way it has turned out. I believe it was intended to allow the formation of organised militia independent of the state, which could indeed still be a feature of the current situation. I don't think it was thought necessary by the founding fathers as a tool for self protection against crimes by fellow citizens using those same weapons. I actually don't see it as a very likely scenario that Americans are likely to take a weapons' led revolutionary stance against their elected government. And I don't see this to be likely in any democratic state at the present time - and not because the democratic states are necessarily really representative, but mainly that the overall systems that have been developed tend to favour the status quo anyway. Revolutions do not tend to occur in democracies. Do you really think that this is anything close to a prime reason why many people in the US bear arms? If so, there are a lot of dangerous people out there who currently are not regarded as criminals. Is it not more likely that, if you think that you are the last line of defence against an invading army, that this might just be an "invented", if only slightly plausible, excuse. With all the defence power that the US has got, I don't really think anyone would get close. There are countries that can justify this (e.g. Israel), but not the US.

Not all European countries forbid gun ownership by the way. Switzerland is an example and they have a relatively low crime rate, so I would agree gun ownership does not necessarily result in a high homicide rate, but it does in some places. The reasons can be complex. The UK has a rising problem with gun crime but it is still very low and there is general popular agreement about having tight gun laws. I don't see the need in the near future to rise up against the government either and, in any case, asymmetric wars do not tend to involve gun battles against professional, heavily armed, troops; it would be a lousy strategy.
So you're a expert on the U.S Constitution??? the Constitution means exactly what it says.Good people with guns don't kill people,bad people with guns do.It all has to do with personal responsibility.If you didn't watch that video that I gave the link to,i'll basically tell you in short what it was about.

It was about personal responsibility, you and you alone are responsible for your actions.If some lunatic goes out and murders someone with a gun don't blame the community blame the person.The only one responsible for your actions is you,not the other millions of gun owners just you.Also the video was about teaching your kids to be safe with dangerous things,teach them how to handle and be safe with them.People that want to ban guns want to make the world a safe place by taking away dangerous things.There are a lot of dangerous things that can kill or injure people and if someone doesn't use that object with precision and care someone may get killed and i'm not talking just about guns.Sports cars,motor cycles,knives,swimming pools are a few things that can be dangerous.Someone gets in a sports car and doesn't know how to handle it and goes off and races with it,he is liable to kill someone including himself.Swimming pools kill thousands of kids world wide because they fell in and drowned.

Should we ban those things because some idiot got behind the wheel and killed someone, should we ban swimming pools because some child died?

Well you could say the only purpose guns serve is to kill.Oh yeah? Well that maybe true but a gun doesn't make a person,I own several firearms and I never wanted to go out and kill someone.

Those that want to kill will do so regardless if guns are banned.If they can't get a gun they'll get a knife, if they can't get a knife they'll get a stick.People has been murdering each other since the dawn of time.Nothing is going to stop that, no law on the books will ever do that.A good example of that is a man in Canada killed another man with a crossbow.Guns aren't completely banned there but they are a lot harder to get so someone determined to kill is going to regardless.

Sorry got a little side tracked back to the videos point and my point as well.Dangerous things shouldn't be feared,governments that seek to ban dangerous things like guns do so in fear.We shouldn't fear dangerous things,instead we should teach our children how to use and respect dangerous things because they are dangerous.We should teach them how to safely use them.

I blame the parents,if a child accidently kills himself,if his parents would teach their children that pointing a gun at someone or themselves could kill them and teach them the proper techniques to use them then maybe things would change.

In todays society people blame the community for someones actions and not the parents.If people would go straight to the parents and ask them why didn't you teach him to handle a dangerous thing.lay the blame on the teacher because the student is only as good as he is tought.But instead we blame gun owners because of what one individual did.


If we ban guns whats next?It wont end until the government has us in a padded cell figuratively speaking.And yet a lot of you people agree with that.

Bring back personal responsibility.

I haven't even scratched the surface of the gun debate. 

I mean then theres the whole self defense, believe it or not there are people out there that want to do you harm and may even want to kill you.A gun may give me a better chance of surviving an encounter.I'd rather have one than not have one if a situation like that ever occurred.I could go on and on.


And on to the whole,U.S has so much defensive power we don't need guns.Well gun owners in themselves are part of the defense.
I'm just glad none of you have any influence or it would be a bloody day in the U.S because me and i'm sure millions of other gun owners would not give up our firearms without a fight.
« Last Edit: 04/01/2011 00:25:03 by CGNFOREVER »
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #128 on: 04/01/2011 01:39:43 »
You're right in that Europeans come because of the chance of a better life. America still have a lot of resources Europe doesn't. But that is 'land' me man :) And some went because of repression from society etc. I agree to all those things. But times change, mostly, western Europe works in a democratic fashion today, and we seem to do alright without all those guns.

It may come to a point where every home will need its own, but before that point will be reached a whole society needs to go down in flames, valid for any society I'm saying now, not only USA. And if a democratic society reached that point its f*ed anyway. Former Yugoslavia was a good 'eastern' example of that recently.

A democratic country is not tested by its ability to have guns, but by the way its citizens have a right to make them selves heard, and by the way the government and bureaucracy listen and adapt to their peoples 'voice'. But I can't swear to this, it's how I look at it :)

==

I can tell you this, due to former Yugoslavia, and other wars in the east, we now see an increasing illegal import of heavy weaponry here in Sweden. People sell them cheap there as they need the cash, and we don't like it. The bobbies in England made do a long time without guns, now they need it too. In Canada they don't lock their front door. In the States they would call you a moron if you did the same. I'm not discussing weapons per se, or sport shooting but the more weapons there is in circulation the more probable that someone will get shot. And mostly those that get so are the victims, not the perpetrators.
« Last Edit: 04/01/2011 01:55:49 by yor_on »
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #129 on: 04/01/2011 01:41:54 »
So you're a expert on the U.S Constitution??? the Constitution means exactly what it says.

If the Constitution means exactly what it says, why would Graham, or anyone else come to that, need to be an expert to understand it?
 

Offline CGNFOREVER

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #130 on: 04/01/2011 01:59:40 »
So you're a expert on the U.S Constitution??? the Constitution means exactly what it says.

If the Constitution means exactly what it says, why would Graham, or anyone else come to that, need to be an expert to understand it?
What I mean by that is, is he a lawyer schooled in constitutional rights.But my guess is he's not because usually they fight to keep the constitution intact and not misinterpret it.
 

Offline yor_on

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 11993
  • Thanked: 4 times
  • (Ah, yes:) *a table is always good to hide under*
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #131 on: 04/01/2011 02:03:46 »
Futher anecdotal evidence:

Not long after we moved from the UK to the USA, I was chatting with a church minister, and I brought up the subject of guns. I was rabbiting on about how bad I thought it was that so many people in the US felt the need to own hand guns.

After a bit, I realized he wasn't exactly in full agreement with what I was saying, then he mentioned that he always kept a loaded revolver in his bedside table. Put a bit of a damper on the conversation, let me tell you.

A reverent situation where you suddenly saw the priesthood in a whole new light? :)
Someone should have tipped Jesus to it, then he might had a chance huh ??
I know, my jokes just went to a new all high low
Heh :)
==

Can't help it, I keep seeing that reverend talking to his mirror

"You talking to me, huh! You talking to me,  punk.."
« Last Edit: 04/01/2011 02:15:44 by yor_on »
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #132 on: 04/01/2011 05:08:00 »
So you're a expert on the U.S Constitution??? the Constitution means exactly what it says.

If the Constitution means exactly what it says, why would Graham, or anyone else come to that, need to be an expert to understand it?
What I mean by that is, is he a lawyer schooled in constitutional rights.But my guess is he's not because usually they fight to keep the constitution intact and not misinterpret it.

I not sure I understand. I think you are saying that my right to bear arms is guaranteed by the US Constitution.

If, as you say, the Constitution means exactly what it says, then there can be no ambiguity about it, so why would we need lawyers to interpret it for us. Or, are you really saying that the US Constitution is a bit vague on the subject, and open to different interpretations by artful lawyers?
 

Offline Marnaz

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #133 on: 04/01/2011 06:12:55 »
As Admiral Yamamoto famously said "You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a man with a rifle behind every blade of grass."

This is the reason. America will always be a country for itself because the majority of citizens, even in times of difference, would stand and fight together as one people under the Unites States to protect their individual interests. We are "United States" but are still individual States, none the less. The constitution governs over all states and ensures the personal safety of all based on ones own means from the bill of rights for safety. The laws and times may be different, but the constitution is still important because they are baseline laws. The forefathers knew what they were doing. Sometimes there has to be a necessary evil to protect something that is already malleable enough. We're supposed to always be wary of our government as well because sometimes power gets into the wrong hands.

I'm not saying that guns are good and we should just shoot people, all I'm saying is that it is a good threat to anyone who wants to take the power away from the people. A threat and that only, but sometimes people take it too far and use their guns unnecessarily and it is sad to see this happen. But if the times ever get serious, people will at least have some kind of personal defense against tyranny.
« Last Edit: 04/01/2011 06:16:19 by Marnaz »
 

Offline graham.d

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2208
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #134 on: 04/01/2011 10:27:31 »
There is quite a good discussion of the meaning on the 2nd amendment in Wikipedia:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_Amendment_to_the_United_States_Constitution

CGNF, I'm all for personal responsibility but I don't think it follows that the collective responsibility, as represented by a constitutionally elected government, should not limit the actions of individuals where there is serious endangerment to other members of the society. To use your analogy with ownership of cars; these are very useful, and today necessary, forms of transport and vital to the national economy. Their use is certainly controlled and people have restricted rights (age limits, use under the influence of drugs/alcohol, speed limits, police supervision to see that rules are obeyed). It would clearly not be sensible to ban driving - at least not while there is no alternative and if there were alternatives the need to ban them may never arise. Going the other way, I don't think an individual is permitted to buy and own (say) Surface to Air Missiles are they? I may be wrong about this so I would be interested to know. The point is that all societies agree on rules which, to some extent, limit individual freedoms in favour of some advantages to the whole society. The statistics show a very high percentage, per capita, of fatalities resulting from the use of firearms in the US. It would seem to be a good idea to think of ways to reduce this. I have heard it argued that the people killed usually deserve it, and it is true that many teenage deaths (which is very high in the US) are often gang and/or drug related. However it does not seem that this problem is being overcome by use of firearms either and it is also not a very civilised approach to law enforcement.

My views on this are somewhat reinforced by the fact that a friend of mine who lived close to San Hose (nr San Francisco) had his 5 year old stepson shot and killed, whilst playing in his own house, by someone driving by and randomly firing a gun out of the window. There are loonies everywhere but in the US they can get and use a gun easily; the consequences can be dire.

 

Offline Don_1

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6890
  • Thanked: 7 times
  • A stupid comment for every occasion.
    • View Profile
    • Knight Light Haulage
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #135 on: 04/01/2011 13:58:40 »
Regardless of the arguments for and against the of bearing arms and the individual's interpretation of the constitution and any evidence from around the world, it would take a very brave and very foolish president to take on the might of the gun lobby.
 

Offline graham.d

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2208
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #136 on: 04/01/2011 14:25:46 »
You mean... you mean... someone might try to shoot the president???

Surely it would never happen.
 

Offline Don_1

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6890
  • Thanked: 7 times
  • A stupid comment for every occasion.
    • View Profile
    • Knight Light Haulage
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #137 on: 04/01/2011 14:46:01 »
We may never know.

Please stop calling me Shirley.
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #138 on: 04/01/2011 19:37:00 »
Futher anecdotal evidence:

Not long after we moved from the UK to the USA, I was chatting with a church minister, and I brought up the subject of guns. I was rabbiting on about how bad I thought it was that so many people in the US felt the need to own hand guns.

After a bit, I realized he wasn't exactly in full agreement with what I was saying, then he mentioned that he always kept a loaded revolver in his bedside table. Put a bit of a damper on the conversation, let me tell you.

A reverent situation where you suddenly saw the priesthood in a whole new light? :)
Someone should have tipped Jesus to it, then he might had a chance huh ??
I know, my jokes just went to a new all high low
Heh :)
==

Can't help it, I keep seeing that reverend talking to his mirror

"You talking to me, huh! You talking to me,  punk.."

At least he'd be able to administer the coup de grâce * and the last rights almost simultaneously.


(* Not normally a French lawnmower)
 

Offline imatfaal

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2787
  • rouge moderator
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #139 on: 05/01/2011 09:57:00 »

Can't help it, I keep seeing that reverend talking to his mirror

"You talking to me, huh! You talking to me,  punk.."

I am not sure I could trust a supposed man of god who combined his Clint Eastwood and his Robert de Niro
 

Offline Variola

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 1063
  • Everyone should beware of The Pox...
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #140 on: 05/01/2011 10:53:26 »
Quote
I am not sure I could trust a supposed man of god who combined his Clint Eastwood and his Robert de Niro
   

I am not sure I could trust a man who would know a man of god was mixing up his famous lines...  ;)


On the subject of guns, don't ban guns, just ban ammunition  :)
 

Offline CliffordK

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6321
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #141 on: 05/01/2011 11:04:26 »
The first thing one would expect any conquering government to do is to get the guns out of the hands of the people, and the inability to do so is one of the reasons why the USA is having such a tough time in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Around the world there are many Military Coups, and Dictators taking and holding power by force.  An armed populace, while it does carry a risk of breeding radicals, can also prevent total collapse of the legitimate government.

Having half of the world's military controlled by the USA, I have to question whether there would ever be a fullscale ground assault on the USA.  No doubt if it happened, it would be bloody to the point of making WWI trench warfare look like child's play.

Nor can I imagine a single General having enough power for a military Coup, although it is possible that the military would someday question the orders given by the civilian government.

I do think of handguns as an "offensive" weapon, and don't believe they are necessary in our modern society.  Rifles and shotguns have much more sports&hunting applications, and are far more defensive around the house.

I do have to question whether the USA, China, and Russia should be exporting weapons to other countries.
 

Offline imatfaal

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2787
  • rouge moderator
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #142 on: 05/01/2011 12:12:16 »
Quote
I am not sure I could trust a supposed man of god who combined his Clint Eastwood and his Robert de Niro
  

I am not sure I could trust a man who would know a man of god was mixing up his famous lines...  ;)

I am absolutely certain you are correct on that point - to my shame...

Around the world there are many Military Coups, and Dictators taking and holding power by force.  An armed populace, while it does carry a risk of breeding radicals, can also prevent total collapse of the legitimate government.

CK
I appreciate the sentiment behind your post and agree with much of it; I have one question - has a legitimate government really ever been defended by a gun holding populace?  My history is pretty lamentable so I ask merely for information rather than in a rhetorical way.  The UK exports a ridiculous amount of weapons and the promised ethical policy to constrain this practice is now 13 years overdue from its manifesto promise

Matthew
« Last Edit: 05/01/2011 12:13:57 by imatfaal »
 

Offline graham.d

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2208
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #143 on: 05/01/2011 12:31:42 »
Matthew, I would say the answer is probably yes, at least in part. I mentioned Israel as a case in point where they have a system where a large part of the population are conscripted at periods through their life for military training and retraining. The Kibbutz system was not set up just for picking fruit - they were intended as a first line of defence against attack by ground forces. To what extent they are a deterrent and to what extent they have been effective in the past I am not sure. Of course this does not mean a large number of Israelis carry handguns, though some do.
 

Offline CliffordK

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6321
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • Site Moderator
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #144 on: 06/01/2011 09:39:57 »
Unfortunately my US History around the Revolutionary War period, Articles of the Confederation, and early constitution period is a bit weak.  I would assume that the British tried to take the guns away from the American Citizens.  But, perhaps you could argue the the British were the legitimate government, and the revolutionaries were just a coup.

I suppose our American Forefathers were a bit radical... 

Quote from: United States Declaration of Independence   http://en.wikisource.org/wiki/United_States_Declaration_of_Independence
When in the course of human Events, it becomes necessary for one People to dissolve the Political Bands which have connected them with another, and to assume among the Powers of the Earth, the separate and equal Station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature’s God entitle them, a decent Respect to the Opinions of Mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the Separation.
[...]
Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just Powers from the Consent of the Governed, that whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these Ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or abolish it, and to institute a new Government, laying its Foundation on such Principles, and organizing its Powers in such Form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
[...]
it is their Right, it is their Duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future Security.

As far as history...
If you look at WWII, many European countries including France and Italy celebrate a group of individuals called Partisans, Resistance Fighters, or Freedom Fighters.  I suppose one might question whether guns, or military intelligence was their major contribution to the war effort.  Perhaps both.  Perhaps it was just never fully accepting being conquered.

The problem that the USA had with our invasion of Vietnam was the it was impossible to tell the difference between the Vietcong, and the general population. 

When Russia invaded Afghanistan, they ran into the same issue.  An armed population that didn't want them there.  I suppose you may ask whether the arms were held internally, or supplied by an external force.  Does it really matter?  The people who drove the Russians out weren't trained in fancy government training camps.

Iran & Iraq just got out of a bloody 10-year war...  that really resolved nothing.

You would think that the American Politicians would have read their history books, but apparently an "A" in History isn't required to become president of the USA.  Within days of the Iraq invasion, the Iraq army officially fell.  The government has been toppled...  yet 8 years later, and we're still fighting....  that damn stubborn population that just won't give up.  Are they "Insurgents" or "Resistance Fighters", or perhaps a bit of both.

And, no, I never supported the invasion of Iraq, although I had always believed that it would lead to Muslims fighting Christians, rather than Muslims fighting Muslims. 

The only way to truly win the war is to disarm the people.  Although, perhaps that is a bit imperialistic thinking.  One really needs to win their hearts, and one can't do that by marching tanks down the streets.

Having guns out in the population with people who know how to use them makes it that much harder for the population to be conquered.

Single shot & semi-automatic against fully automatic guns?  I don't know, most hunting rifles have very good scopes...  which counts for a lot.  And, one may not have enough ammunition to indiscriminately fire.
 

Offline Richard88

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 1
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #145 on: 06/01/2011 13:33:46 »
The citizens of the United States of America believe in absolute freedom.  It is guaranteed to the people, by LAW, that you have an INHERENT RIGHT THAT NOBODY CAN TAKE AWAY.

The purpose of the 2nd amendment is to allow the general populace to overthrow the government, should it become tyrannical and oppressive.

I'm all for personal responsibility but I don't think it follows that the collective responsibility

I read all of what you wrote, but this is the part that chilled me to the bone.

I can think of another group that viewed the collective at a higher level than the individual.


[Image resized to 'sensible' - Mod]

As of late, it appears the UK has been using "Nineteen Eighty Four" as an instruction manual.  How's the whole CCTV network thing working out for you?  Has the minitrue been put together yet?  Yes, I do speak at the extreme.

But, the entirety of the UK is disarmed.  Should the government become oppressive, what would you use to stop them?  Harsh language?

The rights of the individual trump that of the collective always.  There is no collective.  Only the many to serve the few.

Throughout history, there is a repeating cycle.  That is that all governments can and will turn oppressive.  It's a matter of whether of not you will have the proper agent to dispatch of those who wish ill upon all that is good.

Hitler, Mao Zedong, Kim Jong-Il, Pol Pott, Mehmed V Reshad, and Stalin all agree : Gun control works.

There will always be the deaths of the innocent.  Whether a gun, knife, car, your hands, or even free speech (loose lips, sink ships).  Whether caused by irresponsibility, or with criminal intent.  They will continue to happen and no amount of legislation will stop that.  People have been killing each other through irresponsibility and murder since the dawn of time.  No words on a piece of paper is going to stop that.
« Last Edit: 06/01/2011 16:14:34 by peppercorn »
 

Offline JP

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 3366
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #146 on: 06/01/2011 15:13:25 »
The purpose of the 2nd amendment is to allow the general populace to overthrow the government, should it become tyrannical and oppressive.

I suspect that become an impossibility somewhere before or during the cold war.  Military technology is just too far beyond civilian guns for this to be a real possibility anymore. 

Interestingly, this is one of the reasons that the American civil war lasted so long.  The South had a lot more guns and people trained to use them, so they had a big advantage early on.  The North, however, had most of the industry so eventually their production ramped up enough to counter this advantage.

By the way, I'm also curious why this thread is attracting so many first-time posters?  Are people lurking on the forums to post about this, or are people Googling for gun threads and finding this one to post on?
 

Offline graham.d

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 2208
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #147 on: 06/01/2011 15:51:58 »
It depends on what you mean by "oppressive". I can see a situation where a substantial minority can be come oppressed by the majority for example. You make take taxation as an example; the more well off members of society already pay a higher amount in tax. If this became punitive they may say enough is enough and decide to take direct action if they found that their government (elected by a majority) decided not to change things. Not so different from how the American revolution started. This is effectively allowing the power of the gun to attempt to overthrow an elected government. Another example, more recently, would be the demands for equal rights by black people in the southern states. You probably would agree that resorting to armed insurrection today (in either case) would not be a good idea. On the other hand if you are speaking of oppression of the majority then this is decided by the ballot box isn't it? All the examples you gave are totalitarian states. Democracies have their problems, but the constitution permits changing them via the ballot box and that this be tested on a regular basis. The constitutions of most democracies prevent governments from taking absolute power on an indefinite basis.

You may not like the word "collective" because of past associations with Orwell's 1984 or with its use associated with communism, (or maybe you are thinking of the "Borg" in StarTrek) but it is just describing the whole population which agree on a set of rules to live together. All societies do this from primitive tribes to sophisticated democracies - they all have agreed rules of acceptable and unacceptable behaviour. This agreement is best reached "collectively" and generally this is accepted by the majority of law abiding citizens. The alternative is anarchy.

You may think you are "free" but you are conditioned by your upbringing and surrounding influences all the time. And you are rightly controlled by the laws imposed upon you by your government. This is not unreasonable but it is good to be aware of it, especially by how much influence is wielded by the media, your own government and, indirectly, from powerful lobby groups. You have to think why a large number of Americans think differently about gun laws than the vast majority of Brits. I don't think there is so much difference in our cultural heritage to affect this, but there is a huge difference (whoever is right or wrong). Another example is why a majority of Canadians do not believe in human influenced global warming. I would not debate that one way or another here, but would point out that such a view would probably not be expected from the very ecologically minded Canadian culture until you realise that Canada is huge exporter of oil; the US is is its biggest customer and Canada is the USA's largest supplier. I would not expect individual Canadians to be influenced by the net benefit of this to their country, but they are pursuaded that the science behind the idea is flawed by the media they view and/or read. But this is another subject.
 

Offline Geezer

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8328
  • "Vive la résistance!"
    • View Profile
Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #148 on: 06/01/2011 21:34:16 »
If I did get a gun, I wouldn't have anywhere to keep it. Our house doesn't have a gun lobby.
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Why aren't guns banned in the USA?
« Reply #148 on: 06/01/2011 21:34:16 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums