SURVEY: Gun Control -- Is it time to curtail gun ownership in the US?

[bazza73]

5 hours ago, Time Traveller said:

Don't lie.

 

I lived in Australia before the 1996 Port Arthur incident. There were basically zero mass shootings in Australia before it. In fact I know of only one other before 1996.  Would you care to name all of these mass shootings that were so common in Australia before the strict gun laws ? 

And YES, there have been "gun massacres" in Australia recently, such as in 2014 a father shot and killed his wife + 3 children in Lockhart. (that one was just the 1st result that came up on internet search)

 

Essentially, you cherry picked the one country in the world that supports your argument - ignored that it never  even had a problem with firearms to begin with - then hold that up as proof ! 

There are dozens of countries to prove the opposite. 

Brazil - gun crime rampant

Venzuela - are you kidding ?

India - strict gun ownership laws but that didn't stop the Mumbai massacre did it?

France - see India

Mexico -  Some of the strictest gun ownership laws in the world, yet has firearm homicides rates so high they make Chicago look like a peaceful country town. 

 

My advice is stop wearing blinkers and to open your eyes. The laws themselves haven't changed anything about human behaviour

Between 1981 and 1996, there were 14 gun massacres in Australia. The most notorious were Frank Vitkovic, Julian Knight, and Martin Bryant, all armed with semi-automatic weapons. So yes, we did have a problem with semi-automatics. We don't have it now.

The "look over there" defence by Americans is wearing rather thin. You have a gun problem, and the ferals among you won't admit it. Obviously, you are one of them. Equally obviously, when you lived in Australia you weren't reading the local news.

It's fortunate for you Thai Visa protects your identity. Defamation laws here are very strict, and calling me a liar on a public forum is a good way for me to lighten your wallet.

My advice is stop wearing blinkers and to open your eyes.

 

[BTB1977]

Doctors kill way more people in the USA than guns. No one is up in arms about that. Non of my guns have ever killed anyone. 

[Grouse]

They just don't see it do they?

 

Currently watching the excellent documentary series on the Vietnam War (PBS).

 

Fascinating stuff - particularly the way it impacted within the USA. Last night covered the Kent State massacre of which 58% of Americans approved.

 

Nothing has changed over the last 50 years. Depressing frankly.

 

 

Edited October 23, 2017 by Grouse

[habanero]

1 hour ago, bazza73 said:

Between 1981 and 1996, there were 14 gun massacres in Australia. The most notorious were Frank Vitkovic, Julian Knight, and Martin Bryant, all armed with semi-automatic weapons. So yes, we did have a problem with semi-automatics. We don't have it now.

The "look over there" defence by Americans is wearing rather thin. You have a gun problem, and the ferals among you won't admit it. Obviously, you are one of them. Equally obviously, when you lived in Australia you weren't reading the local news.

It's fortunate for you Thai Visa protects your identity. Defamation laws here are very strict, and calling me a liar on a public forum is a good way for me to lighten your wallet.

My advice is stop wearing blinkers and to open your eyes.

 

He is calling an unknown person a liar. He has not identified you personally. So, in fact, there is no deformation.  Plus, I would love to see someone on this forum try and get a defamation suit through the courts.  My friends, that happen to be Thai and somewhat influential in their own right, routinely read this forum. When they are not feeling insulted, they laugh at the majority of the post. Just as I think a panel of judges would.  Sorry for going off topic. But, this threat by members of defamation suits is ridiculous.

Edited October 23, 2017 by habanero

[smotherb]

It is always so quaint to hear the naivety of non-US citizens make statements of what the US should do about gun control—like simply take them away when there are over 300 million guns in the US.  You should know, but maybe you don’t, that owning guns is the constitutional right of all Americans—2^nd Amendment to the US Constitution--and the amendment neither limits the type of arms we can own nor who among us can own them. Therefore, there is legal precedence to keep guns no matter what can be said or what has happened. Further complicating any legal restriction is the fact that there is slim chance for a change to the 2^nd amendment. Since the 2^nd amendment is part of the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution, an actual new amendment which supersedes the 2^nd amendment would need to be proposed by 2/3 of both houses of Congress or by 2/3 of all State legislatures and then ¾ of all State legislatures would have to ratify that new amendment for it to go in effect. Therefore, even the slightest gun control laws fall in direct opposition to the Constitution, and suffer constant legal argument by pro-gun lobbyists. Some gun laws have already been passed. However, not all are enforced and many have loopholes which allow otherwise prohibited individuals to buy guns. You see, the gun industry is big business and has a very strong gun lobby, like the NRA, with deep pockets and influential donations to conservative political groups. However, those are not the only reasons. Unlike so many foreign nations; the US has a very strong gun heritage. We won our independence in large part because we owned guns and knew how to use them; that is why the 2^nd amendment exists. So, you would need to change the mindset of Americans toward gun ownership.  I own over 40 guns, some handed-down from my grandfathers. I was given a .22 rifle at six years of age, I gave that same rifle to my son at six and hope he gives it to his son at six. I took my guns to high school twice a week, I was a member of the school shooting team. No one was ever harmed on the shooting team or in my gun-owning family and friends circle, perhaps because we all were trained in firearm safety and respected human life. Guns are sport; from hunting to collecting to simple plinking to skeet/trap/sporting clays to local and national marksmanship contests. Guns are our heritage, our sport, our protection, but many innocents are killed by miscreants with guns and many gun-carrying yayhoos are involved in crimes. Gun-control is an important matter, but it is not a simple matter as so many of you seem to think.   

[boomerangutang]

50 minutes ago, BTB1977 said:

Doctors kill way more people in the USA than guns. No one is up in arms about that. Non of my guns have ever killed anyone. 

you reminded me:  Pharma drugs kill more Americans than illegal drugs.

 

As for your statement, "Non (sic) of my guns have ever killed anyone."

 

Same could be said of the Vegas murderer, "None of his 53 guns ever killed anyone before the day he opened fire."

 

That's akin to saying, 'The US's nukes aren't dangerous because they're all in silos and subs, and none have killed anyone, .........yet.'

[anon467367354]

16 hours ago, William T said:

So the vast majority of gun killings are suicide. So what, does that make mass killings using automatic weapons accectable. Regarding the 2nd Amendment I enclose:-

what mass killing? Las Vegas was a false flag drill, call the hospitals and ask about shooting victims, they don't have any. When the 2nd Amendment was written all weapons were war weapons. You obviously have no clue what the 2nd amendment stands for so best to not just copy and paste other people's memes that mean nothing.

[ilostmypassword]

2 minutes ago, gr8fldanielle said:

what mass killing? Las Vegas was a false flag drill, call the hospitals and ask about shooting victims, they don't have any. When the 2nd Amendment was written all weapons were war weapons. You obviously have no clue what the 2nd amendment stands for so best to not just copy and paste other people's memes that mean nothing.

Another Newtown!

[anon467367354]

17 hours ago, duanebigsby said:

Both England and Australia curtailed gun ownership. Where was the mass slaughter?

Americans own more guns than anybody else and have the most mass shootings. It's not rocket science.

"If everyone carried a gun there would be no crime," ...what an imbecile.

When gun ownership goes up, crime goes down, can't you do you own research. Most people seem to know this. https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/cnsnewscom-staff/more-guns-less-gun-violence-between-1993-and-2013

Maybe you should learn something about a free society and the myths created by those that wish to enslave them. Don't act like an imbecile with knee jerk reactions to something you obviously know nothing about. Cheers mate!

 

[Peterw42]

12 minutes ago, smotherb said:

2^nd Amendment to the US Constitution--and the amendment neither limits the type of arms we can own nor who among us can own them

 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

 

Its the right to bear arms in a militia for the security of the state, That is a restriction on who can bear arms.

Its the right to bear arms when arms meant a single shot musket, when it was written there was only "one" type of arms. 

If someone invents a gun that fires nuclear warheads or nerve gas tomorrow, is that automatically covered by a literal interpretation of the 2nd amendment ?

 

[Grouse]

58 minutes ago, habanero said:

He is calling an unknown person a liar. He has not identified you personally. So, in fact, there is no deformation.  Plus, I would love to see someone on this forum try and get a defamation suit through the courts.  My friends, that happen to be Thai and somewhat influential in their own right, routinely read this forum. When they are not feeling insulted, they laugh at the majority of the post. Just as I think a panel of judges would.  Sorry for going off topic. But, this threat by members of defamation suits is ridiculous.

No deformation? Definitely bent out of shape!

[anon467367354]

3 minutes ago, Peterw42 said:

 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

 

Its the right to bear arms in a militia for the security of the state, That is a restriction on who can bear arms.

Its the right to bear arms when arms meant a single shot musket, when it was written there was only "one" type of arms. 

If someone invents a gun that fires nuclear warheads or nerve gas tomorrow, is that automatically covered by a literal interpretation of the 2nd amendment ?

 

all weapons were war weapons when the 2nd amendment was written. Most guns back then fired 70 caliber slugs, anything over 50 cal today is illegal. The Kentucky long rifle could fire three 60 caliber slugs per minute accurate up 300 yards. That gun would be illegal today. This leftish pseudo logical argument that guns were for hunting only is ridiculous. The 2nd amendment is so we can protect ourself from criminals and tyrannical governments. If governments create war weapons, we use them too, common sense. Do a search on 18th century weapons, there were far more than muskets.

[Becker]

1 hour ago, habanero said:

He is calling an unknown person a liar. He has not identified you personally. So, in fact, there is no deformation.  Plus, I would love to see someone on this forum try and get a defamation suit through the courts.  My friends, that happen to be Thai and somewhat influential in their own right, routinely read this forum. When they are not feeling insulted, they laugh at the majority of the post. Just as I think a panel of judges would.  Sorry for going off topic. But, this threat by members of defamation suits is ridiculous.

Kudos to your "influential Thai friends" that are able to laugh at their own country. Not many Thai that I have met during the last two and a half decade have had that ability.

PS. Do they own guns too?

[ilostmypassword]

42 minutes ago, gr8fldanielle said:

When gun ownership goes up, crime goes down, can't you do you own research. Most people seem to know this. https://www.cnsnews.com/commentary/cnsnewscom-staff/more-guns-less-gun-violence-between-1993-and-2013

Maybe you should learn something about a free society and the myths created by those that wish to enslave them. Don't act like an imbecile with knee jerk reactions to something you obviously know nothing about. Cheers mate!

 

Of course, the big problem with this is that it doesn't address differential rates; rates of homicide in state with stricter gun control laws vs. states with less strict gun control laws.

"Firearm deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48)."

https://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2011/01/the-geography-of-gun-deaths/69354/

Here's an international study:

Evidence from 130 studies in 10 countries suggests that in certain nations the simultaneous implementation of laws targeting multiple firearms restrictions is associated with reductions in firearm deaths. Laws restricting the purchase of (e.g., background checks) and access to (e.g., safer storage) firearms are also associated with lower rates of intimate partner homicides and firearm unintentional deaths in children, respectively.

https://academic.oup.com/epirev/article/38/1/140/2754868/What-Do-We-Know-About-the-Association-Between

 

[VegasExpat]

Two objections regarding the poll question.

1. Only Americans should be polled as it is an American issue where other country's cultural values should be involved

2. There are only 3 choice available while the is a strong support for two others A) "Constitutional Carry" meaning that if one is approved to "carry" in one state they should be approved to carry in all 50 states and   "gun free zones" should be outlawed as they are an open door to evil people to do harm if they know that now good guys are armed

The other misunderstanding most don't comprehend that the right to bear arms as stated in the 2nd amend was not for hunting as the Left likes to say but as a protection of a Tyrannical government.  Lots more to say on this issue 

 

[Grouse]

OK, here's what I think ( I've lived and worked in the USA 3 times)

 

Jim Jeffries is correct; the only good reason to own a gun is because you like guns. I get it.

 

I like Land Roves, guitars and class A valve amps!

 

But that's not the real reason so many American males have guns now is it?

 

Yes, I've watched all the Rawhide and Laramie stuff. I know about the civil war and the Indians and the Wild West. But it's not about that now is it?

 

Think on this. A majority of American women want their dates to be clean shaven (I'm not talking about beards) manicured, groomed and sweet smelling; I am reliably informed. Drinking and smoking is frowned upon. Contact sports involve massive body armour for "protection".

 

The whole idea of the military is to avoid boots on the ground so men don't get shot. Drones are the thing.

 

So here's my theory and the way I recommend dealing with it.

 

Guns are for softies

 

Real men don't need artillery to protect their wives, girlfriends and kids! 

 

Guns are a substitute for manhood.

 

I can just about imagine a girl carrying a small hand gun in her bag instead of pepper spray  or Taser.

 

But a man keeping a gun in his "man bag". ?

 

It's pathetic and about time your women called you on it!

 

I think many American males would be scared to come into a real British pub armed only with a sharp wit and testicular fortitude!

 

So, in conclusion, hang up your Winchester rifles, your Colt .45s and machine guns and take your girls out on the town. Manicure or not ?

[ilostmypassword]

3 hours ago, VegasExpat said:

Two objections regarding the poll question.

1. Only Americans should be polled as it is an American issue where other country's cultural values should be involved

2. There are only 3 choice available while the is a strong support for two others A) "Constitutional Carry" meaning that if one is approved to "carry" in one state they should be approved to carry in all 50 states and   "gun free zones" should be outlawed as they are an open door to evil people to do harm if they know that now good guys are armed

The other misunderstanding most don't comprehend that the right to bear arms as stated in the 2nd amend was not for hunting as the Left likes to say but as a protection of a Tyrannical government.  Lots more to say on this issue 

 

Nonsense. The Left definitely does not say it was for hunitng. Rather, it was for "a well regulated militia." So, not for hunting or for personal defense.

[bazza73]

5 hours ago, smotherb said:

It is always so quaint to hear the naivety of non-US citizens make statements of what the US should do about gun control—like simply take them away when there are over 300 million guns in the US.  You should know, but maybe you don’t, that owning guns is the constitutional right of all Americans—2^nd Amendment to the US Constitution--and the amendment neither limits the type of arms we can own nor who among us can own them. Therefore, there is legal precedence to keep guns no matter what can be said or what has happened. Further complicating any legal restriction is the fact that there is slim chance for a change to the 2^nd amendment. Since the 2^nd amendment is part of the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution, an actual new amendment which supersedes the 2^nd amendment would need to be proposed by 2/3 of both houses of Congress or by 2/3 of all State legislatures and then ¾ of all State legislatures would have to ratify that new amendment for it to go in effect. Therefore, even the slightest gun control laws fall in direct opposition to the Constitution, and suffer constant legal argument by pro-gun lobbyists. Some gun laws have already been passed. However, not all are enforced and many have loopholes which allow otherwise prohibited individuals to buy guns. You see, the gun industry is big business and has a very strong gun lobby, like the NRA, with deep pockets and influential donations to conservative political groups. However, those are not the only reasons. Unlike so many foreign nations; the US has a very strong gun heritage. We won our independence in large part because we owned guns and knew how to use them; that is why the 2^nd amendment exists. So, you would need to change the mindset of Americans toward gun ownership.  I own over 40 guns, some handed-down from my grandfathers. I was given a .22 rifle at six years of age, I gave that same rifle to my son at six and hope he gives it to his son at six. I took my guns to high school twice a week, I was a member of the school shooting team. No one was ever harmed on the shooting team or in my gun-owning family and friends circle, perhaps because we all were trained in firearm safety and respected human life. Guns are sport; from hunting to collecting to simple plinking to skeet/trap/sporting clays to local and national marksmanship contests. Guns are our heritage, our sport, our protection, but many innocents are killed by miscreants with guns and many gun-carrying yayhoos are involved in crimes. Gun-control is an important matter, but it is not a simple matter as so many of you seem to think.   

 

I don't think it's naivety. It's more like the rest of the world is watching a tragic version of Fawlty Towers. It's a comedy series of 12 episodes where the proprietor of a hotel, Basil Fawlty, starts off with a perfectly reasonable set of circumstances and progressively gets himself into the deepest doo-doo possible through his own incompetence and arrogance. If you haven't seen it, perhaps you should.

40 guns in your household says it all. Personally, I only ever needed two bolt action rifles when I went hunting in Australia. But perhaps you needed them all in case an elephant or lion escaped from the local zoo. Although I will grant the fact some pretty big boars breed up in some of your wilderness areas.

I have no doubt you are sincere in saying you are a responsible gun owner. Unfortunately, it happens too often that apparently stable individuals after the fact were anything but.

Sadly, I think you are right. The laws, constitution and lobby groups of America conspire against any meaningful reform.

I have never suggested America should take away all the guns. Australia didn't either. All that happened in 1996 was Australia banned all semi-automatics, pump action shotguns and automatics - those weapons whose sole purpose was to kill people as quickly and efficiently as possible. We have not had a gun massacre since; however, Americans with their gun culture and conditioning over 225 years are incapable of absorbing that lesson.

[pegman]

6 hours ago, smotherb said:

It is always so quaint to hear the naivety of non-US citizens make statements of what the US should do about gun control—like simply take them away when there are over 300 million guns in the US.  You should know, but maybe you don’t, that owning guns is the constitutional right of all Americans—2^nd Amendment to the US Constitution--and the amendment neither limits the type of arms we can own nor who among us can own them. Therefore, there is legal precedence to keep guns no matter what can be said or what has happened. Further complicating any legal restriction is the fact that there is slim chance for a change to the 2^nd amendment. Since the 2^nd amendment is part of the Bill of Rights, the first ten amendments to the Constitution, an actual new amendment which supersedes the 2^nd amendment would need to be proposed by 2/3 of both houses of Congress or by 2/3 of all State legislatures and then ¾ of all State legislatures would have to ratify that new amendment for it to go in effect. Therefore, even the slightest gun control laws fall in direct opposition to the Constitution, and suffer constant legal argument by pro-gun lobbyists. Some gun laws have already been passed. However, not all are enforced and many have loopholes which allow otherwise prohibited individuals to buy guns. You see, the gun industry is big business and has a very strong gun lobby, like the NRA, with deep pockets and influential donations to conservative political groups. However, those are not the only reasons. Unlike so many foreign nations; the US has a very strong gun heritage. We won our independence in large part because we owned guns and knew how to use them; that is why the 2^nd amendment exists. So, you would need to change the mindset of Americans toward gun ownership.  I own over 40 guns, some handed-down from my grandfathers. I was given a .22 rifle at six years of age, I gave that same rifle to my son at six and hope he gives it to his son at six. I took my guns to high school twice a week, I was a member of the school shooting team. No one was ever harmed on the shooting team or in my gun-owning family and friends circle, perhaps because we all were trained in firearm safety and respected human life. Guns are sport; from hunting to collecting to simple plinking to skeet/trap/sporting clays to local and national marksmanship contests. Guns are our heritage, our sport, our protection, but many innocents are killed by miscreants with guns and many gun-carrying yayhoos are involved in crimes. Gun-control is an important matter, but it is not a simple matter as so many of you seem to think.   

 

Machine guns are banned so I guess that makes you full of BS.

[bazza73]

6 hours ago, habanero said:

He is calling an unknown person a liar. He has not identified you personally. So, in fact, there is no deformation.  Plus, I would love to see someone on this forum try and get a defamation suit through the courts.  My friends, that happen to be Thai and somewhat influential in their own right, routinely read this forum. When they are not feeling insulted, they laugh at the majority of the post. Just as I think a panel of judges would.  Sorry for going off topic. But, this threat by members of defamation suits is ridiculous.

You may be right. I guess we will never know, will we? I can't identify him, he can't identify me.

Having said that, I object to be called a liar by some pinheaded peabrain poxhead who is too lazy to check out the facts before keying in a BS response.

[bazza73]

4 hours ago, VegasExpat said:

Two objections regarding the poll question.

1. Only Americans should be polled as it is an American issue where other country's cultural values should be involved

2. There are only 3 choice available while the is a strong support for two others A) "Constitutional Carry" meaning that if one is approved to "carry" in one state they should be approved to carry in all 50 states and   "gun free zones" should be outlawed as they are an open door to evil people to do harm if they know that now good guys are armed

The other misunderstanding most don't comprehend that the right to bear arms as stated in the 2nd amend was not for hunting as the Left likes to say but as a protection of a Tyrannical government.  Lots more to say on this issue 

 

Sorry, I forgot. The US Immigration Department ( or whatever it is called nowadays ) refers to us Australians, Brits, Kiwis with a common ancestry with Americans as aliens. Of course we should not vote in this poll.

The term aliens has always puzzled me, though. Do Americans think we came from another planet, or mutated while they weren't looking?

[selftaopath]

On 10/22/2017 at 2:36 PM, bazza73 said:

Click bait for the anti-gun and pro-gun lobby. It's too late - taking guns away from Americans would be like asking them to submit to root canal therapy on every tooth in their mouths.

They've had Australia's  cause-effect example in front of them for 21 years now. If it wasn't going to happen after Sandy Hook, it won't happen now. A few centuries from now, there will be people submitting PhD theses on how an entire nation was brainwashed.

Oh how naive I was. I felt confident America was not corrupt. lol Now I know better and especially b/c of the regime that is in charge. 

 

Maybe guns are necessary b/c 45 is doing everything he can to avoid punishment for past deeds by becoming a dictator. He loathes rule of law and his defenders seem willing to go the way of Russia primarily out of hatred for "others."  45 is totally corrupt.... totally. They all will take the NRA's money without hesitation. SHAME.

[boomerangutang]

7 hours ago, smotherb said:

 You should know, but maybe you don’t, that owning guns is the constitutional right of all Americans—2^nd Amendment to the US Constitution--and the amendment neither limits the type of arms we can own nor who among us can own them. Therefore, there is legal precedence to keep guns no matter what can be said or what has happened.

The 2nd amendment was written re; smooth bore, single shot guns, and it specified for a 'well-regulated militia.'

 

Imagine this:  there was an Amendment that stated, "....shall have the right to own and take pills for ailments."  ....when the only commercially available pills at the time of the writing, were aspirin made from willow tree bark.

 

Then all the pills made since then, including fentanyl and oxycotin, would be allowed to be taken by anyone, any time, for any reason.  People could make pills made from heroin or carfentanyl (look it up) and say it was allowable anytime to anyone.

 

That's how the 2nd amendment looks to sensible people like myself, and the majority of Americans.    What was written in the 18th century to apply to smoothbore single shot guns, cannot with any sense or logic - be applied to rifles and semi- or fully automatic weapons of war, fabricated over 200 years later.  According to 2nd Amenders (Trump's term for people who love all guns and will shoot anyone who doesn't)....  all Americans should be allowed to own and use grenade launchers.  It's a gun, isn't it?  It's got a projectile, a barrel, and you pull a trigger to fire it.

[notmyself]

1 hour ago, bazza73 said:

I have never suggested America should take away all the guns.

 

This error (?) is down to years and years of NRA propaganda poisoning the minds of people and is sadly all too frequent. Comedian Jim Jefferies highlighted it with his 'DON'T TAKE MY GUNS' observation during a show some years back showing it was based on a slippery slope fallacious argument. This same basis of illogic has been successfully used by some states to allow blind people to have a gun!

 

On the whole, it's a damning indictment on our species as it really does show just how gullible we are and therefor how easily led. I gave another example of this mental malpractice earlier with reference to the 'guns don't kill people, people kill people' by simply using 'nukes don't kill people, people kill people'. Not the same logical fallacy granted, but it is an example of how easily led we are even in the face of absurdity.... how willing we are.... how susceptible we are.... how able we are to believe all manner of things (which in this case is NRA propaganda) while looking into the eyes of preposterousness

[boomerangutang]

What's the NRA's stance on gatling guns?  

Here's one currently for sale, legally, for $124,000

gunbroker.com/Gatling-Gun/Browse.aspx?Keywords=Gatling+Gun

 

Here's a grenade launcher, also legally for sale, $799.99

gunbroker.com/All/BI.aspx?Keywords=grenade+launcher&Sort=13

and another on same page:  $1,499

 

Want to buy a grenade - legally in the USA, no problem.....

gunbroker.com/All/BI.aspx?Keywords=grenade&Sort=13

 

NRA love these guys.  The more mass-killing weapons, the better.  Every house should have its own armory.  You never know when a 17 year old punk will pry the gate to your back yard.  You want to be ready with a cannon to blow the kid's head clean off.

 

"Much lighter than the military rifles it replaced, the AR15 soon became the top rifle choice for US forces and their allies. It was also very popular among civilian shooters in the 1970s and 80s, although its popularity exploded after the expiration of the 2004 assault weapon ban. " 

sportsmansoutdoorsuperstore.com/category.cfm/sportsman/ar-15-rifles, around $500.  As easy as buying a used TV online.  Bump-stocks also available, for $99.99.  Turn your semi-automatic into an automatic for $100 !   Wow, Las Vegas here we come!

Need ammo for an AR-15?  no problem, you semi-automatic guys and gals, here it is....

ammoforsale.com/best-ammo/ammo-ar15

 

 

 

 

 

[smotherb]

7 hours ago, Peterw42 said:

 

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

 

Its the right to bear arms in a militia for the security of the state, That is a restriction on who can bear arms.

Its the right to bear arms when arms meant a single shot musket, when it was written there was only "one" type of arms. 

If someone invents a gun that fires nuclear warheads or nerve gas tomorrow, is that automatically covered by a literal interpretation of the 2nd amendment ?

 

What good is a militia without arms? That is why every US citizen has the right to bear arms, because they are eligible to be called up to a militia. No where in the Constitution does it limit what types of arms a  citizen can bear. That is the problem; did you not read what I said?

 

I am in favor of doing something to stop all the gun killing and gun violence; however, it is not so easy as to just pass a law. 

[Blackheart1916]

3 hours ago, Grouse said:

OK, here's what I think ( I've lived and worked in the USA 3 times)

 

Jim Jeffries is correct; the only good reason to own a gun is because you like guns. I get it.

 

I like Land Roves, guitars and class A valve amps!

 

But that's not the real reason so many American males have guns now is it?

 

Yes, I've watched all the Rawhide and Laramie stuff. I know about the civil war and the Indians and the Wild West. But it's not about that now is it?

 

Think on this. A majority of American women want their dates to be clean shaven (I'm not talking about beards) manicured, groomed and sweet smelling; I am reliably informed. Drinking and smoking is frowned upon. Contact sports involve massive body armour for "protection".

 

The whole idea of the military is to avoid boots on the ground so men don't get shot. Drones are the thing.

 

So here's my theory and the way I recommend dealing with it.

 

Guns are for softies

 

Real men don't need artillery to protect their wives, girlfriends and kids! 

 

Guns are a substitute for manhood.

 

I can just about imagine a girl carrying a small hand gun in her bag instead of pepper spray  or Taser.

 

But a man keeping a gun in his "man bag". ?

 

It's pathetic and about time your women called you on it!

 

I think many American males would be scared to come into a real British pub armed only with a sharp wit and testicular fortitude!

 

So, in conclusion, hang up your Winchester rifles, your Colt .45s and machine guns and take your girls out on the town. Manicure or not ?

Land Rovers, guitars and Class A amps? Are we related? 

[selftaopath]

On 10/22/2017 at 1:59 PM, Inepto Cracy said:

Don't know if I can post a link here but here is the article... search for    " 25 years murder-free in 'Gun Town USA'

US Gun Deaths, 1999-2015
Suicides, Homicides, Unintentional Deaths, Legal Intervention Deaths, Deaths from Undetermined Consequences

 

[bazza73]

1 hour ago, smotherb said:

What good is a militia without arms? That is why every US citizen has the right to bear arms, because they are eligible to be called up to a militia. No where in the Constitution does it limit what types of arms a  citizen can bear. That is the problem; did you not read what I said?

 

I am in favor of doing something to stop all the gun killing and gun violence; however, it is not so easy as to just pass a law. 

The Second Amendment IMHO is very similar to the Koran. Both are very specific in their form, which is not subject to change by true believers.

When you start interpreting both - the Koran in the hadith, or the Second Amendment by the pro and anti-gun movements, that's where the devil is in the detail.

For those who object to the comparison, explain to me how the Second Amendment has not assumed the status of a religion with some Americans.

[smotherb]

2 hours ago, bazza73 said:

I don't think it's naivety. It's more like the rest of the world is watching a tragic version of Fawlty Towers. It's a comedy series of 12 episodes where the proprietor of a hotel, Basil Fawlty, starts off with a perfectly reasonable set of circumstances and progressively gets himself into the deepest doo-doo possible through his own incompetence and arrogance. If you haven't seen it, perhaps you should.

40 guns in your household says it all. Personally, I only ever needed two bolt action rifles when I went hunting in Australia. But perhaps you needed them all in case an elephant or lion escaped from the local zoo. Although I will grant the fact some pretty big boars breed up in some of your wilderness areas.

I have no doubt you are sincere in saying you are a responsible gun owner. Unfortunately, it happens too often that apparently stable individuals after the fact were anything but.

Sadly, I think you are right. The laws, constitution and lobby groups of America conspire against any meaningful reform.

I have never suggested America should take away all the guns. Australia didn't either. All that happened in 1996 was Australia banned all semi-automatics, pump action shotguns and automatics - those weapons whose sole purpose was to kill people as quickly and efficiently as possible. We have not had a gun massacre since; however, Americans with their gun culture and conditioning over 225 years are incapable of absorbing that lesson.

 

The fact that I own forty guns is my right as an America; they are all legal and I hold a concealed weapons permit. I am not sure what it says to you, but I am sure I do not care. Several of those guns are from my grandfathers, some from my father, some from my time in Vietnam, some I bought to use for sport or just to collect. I have a 107 acre mountain top boundary of land which has bear, deer, raccoon, rabbit, turkey, duck and quail and there are five public hunting and fishing areas within a fifteen mile radius of my farm. Do you suggest I use the same gun to shoot the bear and the quail, or the deer and the rabbit?  In short, I enjoy my guns.