Americans Fight For Right To Bear Arms - At Work

[jpinx]

These aren't my thoughts but best sum up the differences in the mindset between many Americans and the rest of the world.

Yet another one who claims to speak for 6.7 billion people across the planet. Well, Americans care what "the rest of the world" thinks as much as "the rest of the world" cares what Americans think. Americans won't look to "the rest of the world" to tell them what laws they should have be it gun control or anything else.

A couple of things.

All I meant by that quoted line should be attributed to another source/article which I had read (though I can't remember the article). But good to see you are insecure enough to think that I am claiming the role of global spokesperson.

As for what the rest of the world think, they care plenty. Just because you couldn't give a rats arse about anyone else doesn't mean others don't. The recent massacre wouldn't be front page two days in a row if people didn't care.

You are still trying to speak for the rest of the world with, "As for what the rest of the world think, they care plenty.". You can type it a thousand times, doesn't make it true.

Being on the front page of a newspaper has zero to do with "caring" and everything to do with selling papers and/or pushing a position. In this case, as we see on these forum pages, most non-Americans aren't saying how much they care, but are saying how bad laws and people are in America. Go through the posts and count for yourself if you don't believe me.

Oh come on dude -- read the posts in this and the other thread and you will see that many of us have spoken about how much we care.

Not giving a rats about other humans opinions and feelings is an attitude which promotes the ultimate selfishness - - killing.

[Scott]

I think we can stop the discussion about the US being persecuted in this thread. If you believe a post violates the rules, you can report it. Remember that it needs to violate a rule, not just be personally offensive to you. Many posts have been deleted, although the overriding reason has not been anti-American sentiment.

People are profoundly affected by events such as this. I remember very well the Dunblane killings--I remember exactly where I was and what I was doing at the time I heard it. It had absolutely nothing to do with me, but it was shocking.

I am sure some posters felt the same when they heard this.

It might also be wise to remember that sorrow and sadness will next turn to anger.

Please stay on topic.

[jpinx]

Tragedies are traumatic to any feeling human being. I remember well having to sit down and hold hands with my good lady while we watched the events of 9/11 unfold. CT has shaken domestic USA to the core, as Dunblane did to UK. If nothing comes of this in terms of reform many people will be asking themselves some searching questions about "normal" life in USA -- my cousins included.

[metisdead]

A post containing derogatory comments and generalizations has been removed.

Edit: If your post was removed, it was removed for the reason above, do not repost again.

[Richard W]

And I disagree - McVeigh is entirely relevant. He was a mad man, but a mad man who thought he had a point under the law.

Your founding fathers actually broke the law of the land at the time. So what are they? Criminals or Heros?

The USA's founding fathers are both terrorists and heroes. At least, the US Code of Federal Regulations defines terrorism as "...the unlawful use of force and violence against persons or property to intimidate or coerce a government, the civilian population, or any segment thereof, in furtherance of political or social objectives", and British law is little better.

So again, when do we judge the act of a 'defender' legitimate? Or are you just relying on the 'vibe' of the situation to decide? Or, do you really have to win the war (like your war of independence) to provide justification for your inital actions? Otherwise, you might be lumped with the McVeigh's of the world.

I think victory is necessary. Isn't the American Civil War also an example?

Why the American people should be allowed to bear arms and why they individually want to are separate issues. Hunting and self-protection are sane reasons for possession possibly allowing the American people to rebel. Restricting use to possible rebellion against the state seems positively bizarre!

[puck2]

I agree with you that it's not just Republicans that defend the Second Amendment. As for the urban areas; It's more the self-serving politicians in the urban areas that keep wanting to refuse their citizens the right to defend themselves and to exercise their Second Amendment rights. For a long time it has been the areas with the most violent crime that have also had the most restrictive gun control laws. Most often it's one of the elite left-wing politicians demanding stronger and more restrictive gun laws for the common citizen while they manage to obtain their "specially issued" permit for concealed carry or have their own armed bodyguards.

It's high time that the US Americans discuss the weapon articel of their constitution in the same way as they had to discuss, amend and eliminate the slavery which was allowed, and not against the constitution, for many many years.

Having the constitutional "right" to bear arms is a very questionable right, because it makes everybody his own judge. This dubious right is about 250 years old. This doesn't mean that it should exist for ever if common sense (of the US majority) pleads for a change. Violence pruduces new violence. The clerics and the psychologists will confirm this fact. And it is already proven by the US citizens themselves.

Posted Today, 21:00 - from the other thread

fatwax, on 2012-12-15 18:42:45, said:

LAST YEAR, HANDGUNS KILLED:

48 PEOPLE IN JAPAN

8 PEOPLE IN GREAT BRITAIN

34 IN SWITZERLAND

52 IN CANADA

58 IN ISRAEL

21 IN SWEDEN

42 IN WEST GERMANY

10,728 IN UNITED STATES

It seems the US citizens use their guns a little bit more than the other civilised nations. And what will happen now when they use their "right" - at work? The above mentioned numbers will immensly rise.

I would like to ask the gun-lovers like koheesti and Baloo22. Situation:

You and your son have a job in the same company. Your son, a quick-tempered boy, calls someone an idiot. This guy - with the same impulsiveness like your son - is allowed by law to carry his gun at work, and he shoots your son. You saw this happen.

What would you then think about the "right" to have a gun - at work?

Edited December 16, 2012 by puck2

[Chicog]

I don't know about anyone else, but I'm more angry than anything else at the fact these children and their teachers died because REMOVED are so keen to cling on to their boys toys that they are willing to accept this kind of tragedy as part of the price.

I'm not sure that's what Washington had in mind when he said ”He who sacrifices freedom for security deserves neither.” Your freedom to obtain firearms and bullets so easily makes it less secure for everyone.

Edited December 17, 2012 by Rimmer
Inflammatory

[folium]

Can someone answer for me a simple question.

Why does a middle class mother in an affluent suburban area of CT need a semi-automatic, near military grade weapon? See below for an image of this suburban housewife accessory:

http://en.wikipedia....:Bushmaster.jpg

At least we should be grateful she did not possess a Barrett .50, beloved of military snipers in Iraq and Afghanistan, and also happily sold to IRA terrorists to murder police and soldiers in South Armagh, and more recently sold by the score to narco gangs in Mexico as it makes literal mincemeat of body armour and armoured vehicles used by the Mexican police and security forces, and this weapon is freely available in many states of the USA today. The .50 Barrett is only designed for one purpose and that is killing people at extreme ranges. Barrett openly admits on its website that it has no hunting function, perhaps it is just for picking off federal agents of an oppressive regime.

Bit of background on this great piece of kit:

http://en.wikipedia....iki/Barrett_M82

Edited December 16, 2012 by folium

[Baloo22]

These aren't my thoughts but best sum up the differences in the mindset between many Americans and the rest of the world.

Yet another one who claims to speak for 6.7 billion people across the planet. Well, Americans care what "the rest of the world" thinks as much as "the rest of the world" cares what Americans think. Americans won't look to "the rest of the world" to tell them what laws they should have be it gun control or anything else.

A couple of things. All I meant by that quoted line should be attributed to another source/article which I had read (though I can't remember the article). But good to see you are insecure enough to think that I am claiming the role of global spokesperson. As for what the rest of the world think, they care plenty. Just because you couldn't give a rats arse about anyone else doesn't mean others don't. The recent massacre wouldn't be front page two days in a row if people didn't care.

You are still trying to speak for the rest of the world with, "As for what the rest of the world think, they care plenty.". You can type it a thousand times, doesn't make it true.

Being on the front page of a newspaper has zero to do with "caring" and everything to do with selling papers and/or pushing a position. In this case, as we see on these forum pages, most non-Americans aren't saying how much they care, but are saying how bad laws and people are in America. Go through the posts and count for yourself if you don't believe me.

Koheesti is 100percent correct! I would like to add additional comment that is both valid and very pertinent but, alas, I already hear a Stuka diving!

[folium]

Koheesti is 100percent correct! I would like to add additional comment that is both valid and very pertinent but, alas, I already hear a Stuka diving!

You might find that people have become sickeningly resilient and resigned when it comes to mass killings in the USA. Initial shock and revulsion soon turns to questions such as "how many more times must this happen", "what's wrong with the USA" etc. Yes, it probably, and regrettably, is grist to the mill for America haters, but even for those of us who are huge fans of the country, it does beg the obvious questions about the scale and frequency of gun crime in the USA.

This Newtown incident is the equivalent of the UK's Dunblane in terms of the age group and numbers involved.

Post-Dunblane action was taken, which while on its own will never eliminate such incidents as we saw with the shotgun rampage in Cumbria in 2010, at least handguns are now only available on the black market, and as the comparative figures for gun related deaths show, the frequency of gun crime in the UK is a fraction that of the USA's.

On a more flippant note, historically the worst things about the UK according to overseas visitors were the weather, food and level of dentistry. We have largely fixed the last two and the first is out of our control (so far). Is the level of gun crime and related deaths in the USA not in need of being addressed? As I previously noted exceptionalism in this respect is hardly something to be proud of.

[F430murci]

On top of the guns, what the hell does anyone need full body armor for other than robbing a bank or planning a full stand off with police. Well, I suppose at this rate we will have to send our children to elementary school in full body armor.

I mean seriously, what good would a rent a cop at a school do with his little 9mm or 380 against a guy in body armor with an assault rifle. I could seriously take a gun from most rent a cops at close range just from a few years of martial arts and due to the fact these poor guys getting paid $ 10.00 an hour are not exactly well trained, especially to deal with body armor and assault weapons.

[F430murci]

Truth is, anyone living in US buying body armor and assault weapons has got a screw loose. Normal professional family men and housewife soccer moms don't want assault weapons or guns anywhere in there house, around their children, or even in their neighborhood. Why, because you never know when someone might snap and go postal. Then you and your children could be in danger from direct fire or stray bullets.

The father that just got shot by his young son from leaving a gun in the truck that his son could reach should get thrown in jail. Screw his injuries, the poor child is now traumatized and lost some of his childhood innocence all because dear old dad just had to have a gun in his truck.

Haha, some dudes leaving a gun show today accidentally discharged a weapon shooting dude in backseat through the hand and bullet traveled through seat and shot dude in front seat in the butt.

Yep, so glad gun dealers are selling guns to morons like these who cannot make it out of the parking lot with shooting themselves.

[Daewoo]

I hate John Howard - IMHO he is typical of the ultra conservative, holy than thou, christian fundamentalists, who purport Christian Charity but act without conscience...

but he nailed it here;

Just as a late edit - an article written by the former (conservative) Australian Prime Minister on the topic back in August

http://www.smh.com.a...0731-23ct7.html

Good mates with 'W' or '41'.

And not a hint of gloating.

The Second Amendment, crafted in the immediate post-revolutionary years, is more than 200 years old and was designed to protect the right of local communities to raise and maintain militia for use against external threats (including the newly formed national government!). It bears no relationship at all to the circumstances of everyday life in America today. Yet there is a near religious fervour about protecting the right of Americans to have their guns - and plenty of them.

The second amendment was crafted at a time of great conflict between states, and a time of great suspicion of the newly forming federal government... the second amendment was put forward by the individual states to allow them to defend themselves against those threats... even the ACLU do not support the argument that the second amendment is to do with individual rights... The NRA and their kin have hijacked the constitution for their own gain, and the American public allow them to...

By all means, argue and debate Gun Control on it's merits, and come to a decision that is supported democratically - but don't rely on a false link to the constitution...

[puck2]

Some people use their mouth, their tongue, their brain and the control of their emotions to solve a problem between each other.

The same kind of people go to the judge if they cannot tackle the issue between them.

There are also many people - and specially in the US - who would like to use their gun ("constitutional right") to solve a problem of security ... at home, at work and everywhere they feal a threat to life or physical condition. This is a violent behavior, it is biased, uncivilised, Neandertal like and confirms Darwin's theory of surviving. As far as I know we live now in the 21.century. I'm sorry to repeat it, the US citizen grow up with this violent behavior. Like or like it not. They are getting used to violence. The gun (and not the brain) gives them the feeling of power; very primitive.

There is another, maybe the main factor supporting this cruel behaviour, the lobbying. A giant number of US people don't recognise that they fall victim to this weapon lobby and repeat the prayers of the lobbyists.

The most cynical and inhuman policy, perverting all human values, is opened now by this moneygrubbing lobby. To sell more weapons (great idea ..) they would like to convince the people: take your gun at work. They make them belive to be more safe.

When the first deadly shot is done the life is gone. Where is the safety then? The next shot (from the gun at work) will not make the victim alive, but will produce the next dead person.

Some TV-members don't seem to have the required IQ to see through this obnoxiuos and subtle lobby policy. They refer to the outdated, perverse and inhuman "constitutional right" to have a gun.

I own several guns legally in the U.S. only to protect my home and property. I wish I could do the same in Thailand and not have the Thai wife do it for me.

Sent from my LG-MS770 using Thaivisa Connect App

Crazy, all my life I didn't own a gun to protect "my home and property", but I'm still alive (maybe not in the US).

Edited December 17, 2012 by puck2

[Bwanatickey]

Documentry programs American Guns (Gunsmoke). Ted Nugents Gun Country. Family Guns (National Geographic) Sons of Guns(Red Jacket) www.redjacketfirearms.com

Have been removed from broadcasting on the documentry channels in the U.K Why,the complainers have won.

If the complainers do not like the content of these U.S.A documentries,don't watch them. Why stop others.

[Bwanatickey]

Documentry programs American Guns (Gunsmoke). Ted Nugents Gun Country. Family Guns (National Geographic) Sons of Guns(Red Jacket) www.redjacketfirearms.com

Have been removed from broadcasting on the documentry channels in the U.K Why,the complainers have won.

If the complainers do not like the content of these U.S.A documentries,don't watch them. Why stop others.

Great , Americans have the right to have guns. Land of the free. I am denied a simple pleasure of watching American gun enthusiasts enjoying themselves on My T.V

Nannie whinging Stukas have denighed My right to watch an American Family enjoy their way of life.

[DocN]

Documentry programs American Guns (Gunsmoke). Ted Nugents Gun Country. Family Guns (National Geographic) Sons of Guns(Red Jacket) www.redjacketfirearms.com

Have been removed from broadcasting on the documentry channels in the U.K Why,the complainers have won.

If the complainers do not like the content of these U.S.A documentries,don't watch them. Why stop others.

Great , Americans have the right to have guns. Land of the free. I am denied a simple pleasure of watching American gun enthusiasts enjoying themselves on My T.V

Nannie whinging Stukas have denighed My right to watch an American Family enjoy their way of life.

Move to America!

There you can see a woman, taking here mentally unstable son to a shooting range!

She is enjoying her life so much, because fear- mongering has brought her to the believe, that the USA will be overrun by pillaging hordes after the total collapse of the world economy, that she is armed with several guns.

Unfortunately now, she is dead, because her mentally unstable son, was so good at shooting now and decided to kill her and some others.

And the great thing is: you can watch on TV RIGHT NOW, what the outcome is, of that American family, enjoying their everyday life!

Happy watching!

[canman]

I agree with you that it's not just Republicans that defend the Second Amendment. As for the urban areas; It's more the self-serving politicians in the urban areas that keep wanting to refuse their citizens the right to defend themselves and to exercise their Second Amendment rights. For a long time it has been the areas with the most violent crime that have also had the most restrictive gun control laws. Most often it's one of the elite left-wing politicians demanding stronger and more restrictive gun laws for the common citizen while they manage to obtain their "specially issued" permit for concealed carry or have their own armed bodyguards.

It's high time that the US Americans discuss the weapon articel of their constitution in the same way as they had to discuss, amend and eliminate the slavery which was allowed, and not against the constitution, for many many years.

Having the constitutional "right" to bear arms is a very questionable right, because it makes everybody his own judge. This dubious right is about 250 years old. This doesn't mean that it should exist for ever if common sense (of the US majority) pleads for a change. Violence pruduces new violence. The clerics and the psychologists will confirm this fact. And it is already proven by the US citizens themselves.

Posted Today, 21:00 - from the other thread

fatwax, on 2012-12-15 18:42:45, said:

LAST YEAR, HANDGUNS KILLED:

48 PEOPLE IN JAPAN

8 PEOPLE IN GREAT BRITAIN

34 IN SWITZERLAND

52 IN CANADA

58 IN ISRAEL

21 IN SWEDEN

42 IN WEST GERMANY

10,728 IN UNITED STATES

It seems the US citizens use their guns a little bit more than the other civilised nations. And what will happen now when they use their "right" - at work? The above mentioned numbers will immensly rise.

I would like to ask the gun-lovers like koheesti and Baloo22. Situation:

You and your son have a job in the same company. Your son, a quick-tempered boy, calls someone an idiot. This guy - with the same impulsiveness like your son - is allowed by law to carry his gun at work, and he shoots your son. You saw this happen.

What would you then think about the "right" to have a gun - at work?

To put the some of the quoted statistics in perspective the numbers work out as:

1 in 27,778 people in America will be killed by a gun

Japan - 1 in 2.67 million

UK - 1 in 7.5 million

Israel - 1 in 115,517

Sweden - 1 in 452,381

Sobering numbers to be sure.

[Chicog]

Documentry programs American Guns (Gunsmoke). Ted Nugents Gun Country. Family Guns (National Geographic) Sons of Guns(Red Jacket) www.redjacketfirearms.com

Have been removed from broadcasting on the documentry channels in the U.K Why,the complainers have won.

If the complainers do not like the content of these U.S.A documentries,don't watch them. Why stop others.

Maybe they can't find advertisers dumb enough to promote their products in them, so decided to broadcast something else instead.

[jpinx]

To put the some of the quoted statistics in perspective the numbers work out as:

1 in 27,778 people in America will be killed by a gun

Japan - 1 in 2.67 million

UK - 1 in 7.5 million

Israel - 1 in 115,517

Sweden - 1 in 452,381

Sobering numbers to be sure.

The statistics do not really do the situation justice. USA is (supposedly) the greatest nation on earth, but they appear to be dysfunctional in several ways - mostly associated with "machismo". This article http://www.aljazeera...3401092628.html might be a bit OTT in some of it's wording, but the basis for it's premis is sound. It's as if there are multiple standards in the world for what is acceptable. Human tragedy is more common in less developed african or asian countries, both natural disasters and human abberations cause death and suffering which those populations accept as normal. The "western" world is supposedly more civilised but still we seem to have a general caucasian view and the special american view. Canada does not seem to follow the USA pattern and the cultural roots are similar, so this is not specifically something that came across the Atlanic in the times of emigrations from the old world. Many of us struggle to understand "the american way" and see it as the poutings of a spoilt child, but since this specific "spoilt child" is carrying the biggest stick, the rest of the world wonders what to do.

Personally - I have a huge family of cousins, etc in USA and when we talk about this issue, they are as mystified as me. They long for the standards of civilisation which they know exist in their grandparents home countries, but there is a block against attaining them.

I pick my words carefully when I criticise the current interpretation of the constitution of USA, but at the same time - constructive critical analysis is always a good thing. There are many countries where there are constitutional or parliamentary problems, and they come in for much examination and sometimes there is outside action to enforce a policy on a population. Maybe now is a time of opportunity for USA to rise above all politics and set a standard which the rest of the world can really look up to. The will exists, the people are ready for change, but the drag of weighty culture is holding back progress.

[Gary A]

Figures don't lie but liars figure. Alcohol contributes to 27 percent of road accidents. That could be construed to mean that 73 percent of the accidents are caused by people who don't drink, meaning that you are safer being on the road with drunk drivers.

I am VERY pro gun, however I don't know of a single hunter or hobby target shooter who uses an assault weapon to do either. In fact, I never liked semi automatic rifles for target or hunting. I would support banning any weapon with extended clips or magazines that held more than five rounds for rifles or 12 rounds for handguns. Banning non sporting weapons means that it would be allowing the anti gun people from getting their foot in the door and going even further. That's the reason many pro gun people are afraid of a law like that. There are already many laws on the books that are not being enforced. Now they will be after even more laws that won't or can't be enforced. Start by enforcing the laws that already exist is the key.

[uptheos]

You might find that people have become sickeningly resilient and resigned when it comes to mass killings in the USA. Initial shock and revulsion soon turns to questions such as "how many more times must this happen", "what's wrong with the USA" etc. Yes, it probably, and regrettably, is grist to the mill for America haters, but even for those of us who are huge fans of the country, it does beg the obvious questions about the scale and frequency of gun crime in the USA.

Also, the real American haters around the world (I don't need to say who they are) see all this stuff happening, massacre's of little kids, people at the movies etc.,......draw your own conclusion.

[RabC]

I don't have a comment on guns in glove boxes at work.

What seems to be getting lost in all the noise about guns is the fact that an employer has the right to search my private vehicle as a condition of employment.

If it's legal to possess, in my glove box, and never sees the light of day while I'm at work, it's none of their fricking business what's in my car.

Whether they find a gun or the bottle of wine I'm bringing to a dinner after work, if I don't touch it during work, they shouldn't have anything to say about what's locked up in my vehicle.

They can already make you pee in a cup on a whim, and fire you for what you post online- even if it's not related to their business.

What comes next?

You have a weapon on their property, therefore they have a say.

[Daewoo]

I don't have a comment on guns in glove boxes at work.

What seems to be getting lost in all the noise about guns is the fact that an employer has the right to search my private vehicle as a condition of employment.

If it's legal to possess, in my glove box, and never sees the light of day while I'm at work, it's none of their fricking business what's in my car.

Whether they find a gun or the bottle of wine I'm bringing to a dinner after work, if I don't touch it during work, they shouldn't have anything to say about what's locked up in my vehicle.

They can already make you pee in a cup on a whim, and fire you for what you post online- even if it's not related to their business.

What comes next?

You have a weapon on their property, therefore they have a say.

tick tick tick...

They aren't saying you can't take your gun in your car which you bring to work... they are saying you can't bring it onto their property - their secure carpark, which they provide for you to use... park outside if you are so concerned about them infringing upon your civil liberties...

[chiangmaikelly]

BRITISH HOST SLAMS AMERICANS FOR GUNS

Drudgereport headline.

Edited December 19, 2012 by chiangmaikelly

[chuckd]

BRITISH HOST SLAMS AMERICANS FOR GUNS

Drudgereport headline.

I watched part of this and turned it off when Morgan got completely out of line. Rude, discourteous, crass and typical of his interviews with anybody he disagrees with.

He now has the lowest rated show on cable television by viewer count, having lost 100,000 or so of Larry King's former audience.

When will CNN wise up and send him back across the big pond.

[mania]

BRITISH HOST SLAMS AMERICANS FOR GUNS

Drudgereport headline.

It is not funny but guys like this Piers Morgan

are the scariest of them all.

They remind me of the folks that blow up abortion clinics killing everyone

because they say they are pro life.

Edited December 19, 2012 by mania

[endure]

BRITISH HOST SLAMS AMERICANS FOR GUNS

Drudgereport headline.

I watched part of this and turned it off when Morgan got completely out of line. Rude, discourteous, crass and typical of his interviews with anybody he disagrees with.

He now has the lowest rated show on cable television by viewer count, having lost 100,000 or so of Larry King's former audience.

When will CNN wise up and send him back across the big pond.

That's why we got rid of him. Sorry he finished up in the US.

[samran]

BRITISH HOST SLAMS AMERICANS FOR GUNS

Drudgereport headline.

I watched part of this and turned it off when Morgan got completely out of line. Rude, discourteous, crass and typical of his interviews with anybody he disagrees with.

He now has the lowest rated show on cable television by viewer count, having lost 100,000 or so of Larry King's former audience.

When will CNN wise up and send him back across the big pond.

Gimme a break.

The regular massacre of innocents is the acceptsble price you pay for your precious second amendment, but an interviewer exercising his rights to free speech under the same constitution is unacceptable?

Duddums.

Me thinks your priorities are a little skewed.

[jpinx]

BRITISH HOST SLAMS AMERICANS FOR GUNS

Drudgereport headline.

I watched part of this and turned it off when Morgan got completely out of line. Rude, discourteous, crass and typical of his interviews with anybody he disagrees with.

He now has the lowest rated show on cable television by viewer count, having lost 100,000 or so of Larry King's former audience.

When will CNN wise up and send him back across the big pond.

Gimme a break.

The regular massacre of innocents is the acceptsble price you pay for your precious second amendment, but an interviewer exercising his rights to free speech under the same constitution is unacceptable?

Duddums.

Me thinks your priorities are a little skewed.

Careful -- I got seriously flamed for suggesting something like that,,,,,