I think they are not worried about tyranny because they have guns , I have no problem with amending the Constitution my disagreement is on weather or not it's necessary.

You are missing the point that the reason we don't have a government that needs to be overthrown with guns is because we have the guns to make sure it behaves itself well enough so we dont have to use them.

You think the crazy powerhungry nuts that run America would not need to be overthrown if we didn't have guns ?

I guess my point of view is that I prefer to have the crazies and the occational mass killings than an out of controll Government and no citizens with arms to solve the problem.

And like I said before your solution would not stop the crazies anyhow just empower the government to stomp all over the people at will with no fear of revolution

I think you miss the part about who it is your dealing with here ....... You are dealing with a government that attacks and takes over pretty much anyplace it finds something of value enough to do it , a government who gives people smallpox and venerial disease's as a form of attack, floods inner citys with crack cocaine to fund illegal wars in South America , systematicly bankrupts it's own people ....... I would go on but you get the point ..... and I am supposed to not want to have guns to protect myself from these people ?

The people running america are NOT nice people out to benefit everyone they are greedy self serving wackos ..... the exact kind of people you need guns to protect yourself from

I think you miss the part about who it is your dealing with here ....... You are dealing with a government that attacks and takes over pretty much anyplace it finds something of value enough to do it , a government who gives people smallpox and venerial disease's as a form of attack, floods inner citys with crack cocaine to fund illegal wars in South America , systematicly bankrupts it's own people ....... I would go on but you get the point ..... and I am supposed to not want to have guns to protect myself from these people ?

The people running america are NOT nice people out to benefit everyone they are greedy self serving wackos ..... the exact kind of people you need guns to protect yourself from

I hate to tell you, but guns are almost ineffective against smallpox.

I don't have a gun, but I've never felt the need to overthrow a government. It sounds to me like you would like to overthrow your government, and yet you have a gun, but are not doing so.

SC

I suppose the writers of the US Constitution were thinking about tyranny when they added the bit about citizens owning firearms. But do you think modern Americans are worried about tyranny? Yes, tax laws they grumble about, but not the sort of dictatorship you would need guns to fight.

Some people's attitude seems to be, The Constitution is set in stone. Well, it's already been amended a number of times; why shouldn't it be amended again, if necessary? After all, the Constitution dates from 1776, before the French Revolution, and when genuine democracy did not exist anywhere.

Somehow, somewhere, the US has to find some way of lowering the number of firearms-related homicides. 3.7 per 100,000 pop in one year is just too many. If you can accept that as a fair price for your current gun laws, I could not. If there's another way of reducing the death toll, out with it. Yes, control the crazies, but that's easier said than done.

Americaa already has tyranny and very few seem to care at all. It wasn't brought about by a dictatorial government and won't be thwarted by a well armed militia. Money is the new weapon of mass destruction. If you want to free America from tyranny, amend campaign finance laws. Sane gun policies should be a "no brainer", but unfortunately defenders of people's right to own war weapons took the "no brain" stance first.

Many people refuse to travel to Australia because of the harsh attitude of the authorities there, and their heavy-handed immigration and security policies. It's people live as slaves in poverty under the yoke of tyranny

SC

You're absolutely right. We shouldn't be attacking guns or gun owners. We should be attacking Australia. They're completely unarmed.

Many people refuse to travel to Australia because of the harsh attitude of the authorities there, and their heavy-handed immigration and security policies. It's people live as slaves in poverty under the yoke of tyranny

SC

You're absolutely right. We shouldn't be attacking guns or gun owners. We should be attacking Australia. They're completely unarmed.

What's the use? They're "slaves in poverty under the yoke of tyranny". There's nothing in it for us.

God bless America! They need it.

Switzerland which has a higher population percentage of guns per capita? The Switzerland which requires all adult males of military service age to keep a fully automatic assault rifle in case of war? They have a lower gun death rate than the United States.

Makes sense to have a lower gun death rate when everyone has a gun and knows how to use it.

Many people refuse to travel to Australia because of the harsh attitude of the authorities there, and their heavy-handed immigration and security policies. It's people live as slaves in poverty under the yoke of tyranny

SC

So that's what attracts all those boat people...reminds them of home.

I think they are not worried about tyranny because they have guns , I have no problem with amending the Constitution my disagreement is on weather or not it's necessary.

You are missing the point that the reason we don't have a government that needs to be overthrown with guns is because we have the guns to make sure it behaves itself well enough so we dont have to use them.

You think the crazy powerhungry nuts that run America would not need to be overthrown if we didn't have guns ?

I guess my point of view is that I prefer to have the crazies and the occational mass killings than an out of controll Government and no citizens with arms to solve the problem.

And like I said before your solution would not stop the crazies anyhow just empower the government to stomp all over the people at will with no fear of revolution

David Koresh! Ruby Ridge!

It's not that big of a stretch to imagine our gov't in the USA trying to impose things on an unarmed population that they wouldn't dare nowadays with 300 million guns in private hands. The country is changing fast and you never know what the future will bring. I mean, if the Feds are training for a zombie apocalypse it's hard to rule anything out.

http://dailycaller.com/2012/12/05/homeland-security-grants-went-to-zombie-apocalypse-training/

Well, this article shoots holes through the argument that the UK has less gun violence due to stricter gun laws...

Perhaps their strongest talking point is that Britain has stronger gun control laws than the United States and lower murder rates.

But, if you look back through history, you will find that Britain has had a lower murder rate than the United States for more than two centuries-- and, for most of that time, the British had no more stringent gun control laws than the United States. Indeed, neither country had stringent gun control for most of that time.

In 1954, there were only a dozen armed robberies in London but, by the 1990s-- after decades of ever tightening gun ownership restrictions-- there were more than a hundred times as many armed robberies.

There is innocent ignorance and there is invincible, dogmatic and self-righteous ignorance. Every tragic mass shooting seems to bring out examples of both among gun control advocates.

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2012/12/18/invincible_ignorance__116451.html

The article also addresses gun laws in other countries as well.

Another quote from that article:

"Guns are not the problem. People are the problem-- including people who are determined to push gun control laws, either in ignorance of the facts or in defiance of the facts."

As the article says, and as I have said in this thread, people are the problem. But what options do we have? There are all sorts of other lines of approach, such as drugs, inner-city unemployment, mental health "controls" (how you control mental health, I just don't know) and so on, all of which are long-term and extremely difficult and expensive to deal with.

As for the difference between different countries, I posted the latest figures I could get (actually RabC found them for me) in post #52, I think. The figures of firearms-related homicides in the US are 100 times worse than those in the UK. I have never said that the UK gun control laws were responsible for this; what I did say was that the easiest 'quick fix' for the problem of school shootings was some tightening of the gun control laws. Most obvious lines of approach are banning of assault weapons (a better law than the one which expired in 2004!) and handguns with magazines holding more than one round.

I don't know the answers, and I don't pretend to. I just ask Americans, instead of shooting down any suggestion of tightening the gun laws, to say what else, practically, can be done.

I just ask Americans, instead of shooting down any suggestion of tightening the gun laws, to say what else, practically, can be done.

I'm pro-gun, but support gun owners going through at least what car owners do.To get a license in America you need to take a written and driving test. You have to register you car on a yearly basis (almost got a ticket last month for an expired tag). You need to have car insurance. When ever you buy or sell a car the registration is passed from one owner to the next (you can't just sell one without documentation). Do the same for guns.

Increase or do more in depth background and mental health checks. Sane people living with crazy people can't keep a gun in their residence.

Stronger penalties for criminals who use a gun while committing a crime. As marijuana becomes legal, that'll free up a lot of space in our prisons for the SOBs who really deserve to be there.

Another quote from that article:

"Guns are not the problem. People are the problem-- including people who are determined to push gun control laws, either in ignorance of the facts or in defiance of the facts."

As the article says, and as I have said in this thread, people are the problem. But what options do we have? There are all sorts of other lines of approach, such as drugs, inner-city unemployment, mental health "controls" (how you control mental health, I just don't know) and so on, all of which are long-term and extremely difficult and expensive to deal with.

As for the difference between different countries, I posted the latest figures I could get (actually RabC found them for me) in post #52, I think. The figures of firearms-related homicides in the US are 100 times worse than those in the UK. I have never said that the UK gun control laws were responsible for this; what I did say was that the easiest 'quick fix' for the problem of school shootings was some tightening of the gun control laws. Most obvious lines of approach are banning of assault weapons (a better law than the one which expired in 2004!) and handguns with magazines holding more than one round.

I don't know the answers, and I don't pretend to. I just ask Americans, instead of shooting down any suggestion of tightening the gun laws, to say what else, practically, can be done.

There are many things that require "fixing" in order for America to be safer from gn violence. Banning automatic and semiautomatic weapons is just one of the more obvious and rational ones. More important and more difficult to manage will be to instill a sense of humility and less of hubris. To teach people we are responsible for each others care and safety. To make people feel a part of something larger than themselves. None of that can be legislated.

I just ask Americans, instead of shooting down any suggestion of tightening the gun laws, to say what else, practically, can be done.

I'm pro-gun, but support gun owners going through at least what car owners do.To get a license in America you need to take a written and driving test. You have to register you car on a yearly basis (almost got a ticket last month for an expired tag). You need to have car insurance. When ever you buy or sell a car the registration is passed from one owner to the next (you can't just sell one without documentation). Do the same for guns.

Increase or do more in depth background and mental health checks. Sane people living with crazy people can't keep a gun in their residence.

Stronger penalties for criminals who use a gun while committing a crime. As marijuana becomes legal, that'll free up a lot of space in our prisons for the SOBs who really deserve to be there.

While we appear to come at this issue from very different angles, in the true sense of debate we have actually found some common ground, namely sorting out the ludicrous drug laws that are so patently counter-productive.

In the spirit of "make love, not war", all very Christmassy, my approach would be to legalise all drugs and ban most weapons (apart from licensced, monitored hunting weapons). Kill 2 birds with 1 stone. Obviously given the scale of gun ownership in the USA this will take awhile, but remove handguns, semi-auto and sniper rifles and that would address the most obvious area of concern. In the meantime there needs to be a proper debate about the Second Amendment and this truly bizarre attitude about government hss to be rectified once and for all, unless the US wants a repetition of this incident and more seriously an Oklahoma City type event. As all TV posters have seen with NeverSure or whatever he calls himself,and you can bet your bottom $, he is a he, probably white, young middle-aged, with family issues, and a history of frustration related events....ie someone who if separated from playing Call of Duty etc might be of serious concern.

No government is perfect but we do elect them, and I have always had an aversion to the "Armalite not the ballot box" approach.

Rev. Jim Jones murdered or caused the suicides of 912 people using Kool Aid.

Should we have outlawed Kool Aid then?

Rev. Jim Jones murdered or caused the suicides of 912 people using Kool Aid.

Should we have outlawed Kool Aid then?

Only kool aid? According to the information gleaned from my thirty seconds' research, the fatal ingredient was the cyanide, rather than the kool aid. I can see there might be wisdom in controlling the sale of cyanide.

According to the wikipedia article, Congressman Ryan, shot by Jones' sidekicks / militia, is the only Congressman to have been killed in the line of duty, which suggests that your laws enshrining the right to rise up against government are woefully rarely used for their intended purpose.

As I understand, America has more or less exclusively replaced armed rebellion with ballot box democracy as a means of changing government, rendering civilian ownership of military equipment redundant.

SC

As I understand, America has more or less exclusively replaced armed rebellion with ballot box democracy as a means of changing government, rendering civilian ownership of military equipment redundant.

You actually misunderstand.

But many non Americans do

The first Presidential election of the USA was 1788-1789

The 2nd amendment was adopted December 1791

Rev. Jim Jones murdered or caused the suicides of 912 people using Kool Aid.

Should we have outlawed Kool Aid then?

Only kool aid? According to the information gleaned from my thirty seconds' research, the fatal ingredient was the cyanide, rather than the kool aid. I can see there might be wisdom in controlling the sale of cyanide.

According to the wikipedia article, Congressman Ryan, shot by Jones' sidekicks / militia, is the only Congressman to have been killed in the line of duty, which suggests that your laws enshrining the right to rise up against government are woefully rarely used for their intended purpose.

As I understand, America has more or less exclusively replaced armed rebellion with ballot box democracy as a means of changing government, rendering civilian ownership of military equipment redundant.

SC

I fail to see where I indicated it was only Kool Aid. Perhaps you could point that out to me?

The US government, or any other government, has never tried to take military control of the populace...YET.

Rev. Jim Jones murdered or caused the suicides of 912 people using Kool Aid.

Should we have outlawed Kool Aid then?

Only kool aid? According to the information gleaned from my thirty seconds' research, the fatal ingredient was the cyanide, rather than the kool aid. I can see there might be wisdom in controlling the sale of cyanide.

The major fatal ingredient in Newtown was the crazy kid. Without him, those guns would still be sitting in his house. The wisdom should be in controlling nuts like him.

According to the wikipedia article, Congressman Ryan, shot by Jones' sidekicks / militia, is the only Congressman to have been killed in the line of duty, which suggests that your laws enshrining the right to rise up against government are woefully rarely used for their intended purpose.

As I understand, America has more or less exclusively replaced armed rebellion with ballot box democracy as a means of changing government, rendering civilian ownership of military equipment redundant.

Just because we have elections now is no guarantee that we always will. Each presidential election the voters have less and less faith that they are fair and free from manipulation. Tyranny in the USA is probably closer today than any other time in the past 200 years. I don't mean to say that tyranny is right around the corner, but we are closer.

Can't they all trade in their guns for tinfoil hats........

Conspiracy R Us.........

Rev. Jim Jones murdered or caused the suicides of 912 people using Kool Aid.

Should we have outlawed Kool Aid then?

Only kool aid? According to the information gleaned from my thirty seconds' research, the fatal ingredient was the cyanide, rather than the kool aid. I can see there might be wisdom in controlling the sale of cyanide.

The major fatal ingredient in Newtown was the crazy kid. Without him, those guns would still be sitting in his house. The wisdom should be in controlling nuts like him.

According to the wikipedia article, Congressman Ryan, shot by Jones' sidekicks / militia, is the only Congressman to have been killed in the line of duty, which suggests that your laws enshrining the right to rise up against government are woefully rarely used for their intended purpose.

As I understand, America has more or less exclusively replaced armed rebellion with ballot box democracy as a means of changing government, rendering civilian ownership of military equipment redundant.

Just because we have elections now is no guarantee that we always will. Each presidential election the voters have less and less faith that they are fair and free from manipulation. Tyranny in the USA is probably closer today than any other time in the past 200 years. I don't mean to say that tyranny is right around the corner, but we are closer.

How about starting with gun control 1.01..

Weapons and ammunition are not left unsecured within a house or anywhere else for that matter. If this was enforced with annual inspections, a license system based on this requirement being adhered to ,and revocation of said license plus a hefty fine and jail time for persistent offenders...this would hopefully eliminate all the accidental discharges that so often involve kids and occasionally big kids, plus situations like the Lanza's could have been avoided.

Talking of the Lanza's the other issue is, IMHO, the notion of guns being seen as "toys" and a form of entertainment. Dress it up how you like, but weapons are designed for one purpose only and that is to kill...end of story.

Buy your kids (big or small) an XBox or whatever. Yes, they will become sad f'wits wasting hours on silly games, but at least there's little chance of them killing anyone for real. So make their Christmas present a copy of CoD Modern Warfare whatever rather than an AR-15, and everyone will have a very merry Christmas...."more f'wits less murderers", there's a nice festive jingle!

Annual inspections ! LOL

Thats not gona happen in America anytime soon ........ we have another amendment to protect from that as well.

But congrats for trying to eliminate 2 Amendments at once ! LOL

In case you were unaware it's against the Constitution to "inspect" without some reasonable cause a law is being broken , you can't just go around "inspecting" hopeing to find a law being broken.

The reason it's done in the workplace is because a workplace is not a home or a "citizen".

The few occations where it's allowed are on public property such as roads or schools or private property where the owner can inspect his own property such as a company locker search or drug testing.

I'm sure if we just elimineated all the Amendments and the Consitiution and let the Police do whatever they wanted we would all be as safe a the germans were in the 1940's.

Cars get inspected to make sure they comply with emissions laws. It's a helluva lot easy to see someone driving in a car and looking for a sticker than tracking down everyone and every gun in their homes though that's for sure.

Thats another public property thing ...... you simply can't under the law make random inspections in Americans homes looking for a law that might be being broken.

Lots of things are inspected even peoples homes on occation for tax purposes , however random inspections to make sure people are following the law is clearly aginst the 4th Amendment.

Sorry but it is.

However requireing people to have a gun safe and hold them responsible if they didnt and their guns were used in a crime would seem reasonable enough and not violate anything I can think of .

The gun safe part is ok , the random searches without any reasonable suspicion or just cause is not.

I was just discussing this issue with a friend and he said something which I think is a sign of what worries the pro-gun lobby...."some ammunition should be banned as well even though it wasn't used in the attack [Newtown]". Using the tragedy as an excuse to ban more things that had nothing to do with the tragedy. So while we ban some ammunition & weapons that weren't used...we ignore the fact that the two culprits of 2012's biggest mass shootings were young males, high intelligence, anti-social and on medication for psychiatric issues.

I have British friends who are gun-nuts and make their own ammunition. This would probably happen in the US if gun-laws were modified.

(My friends hunt in season, keep their guns in secure armouries and so on)

Plenty of people load their own amunition in the US ...... mostly because it's a lot cheaper

Over regulation of gunpowder is one of the gun rights peoples biggest fears for obvious reasons

And then you look at places like Switzerland where every adult male of military age is legally required to have a fully automatic assault rifle as a part of national defense. Very low crime rate, very low crimes committed with guns.

All those adult males have to have had military training before they're allowed to keep firearms at home. Since 2007 all ammunition (apart from that needed for daily work like airport guards) is kept in central arsenals. They are not allowed to keep any ammunition at home.

And then you look at places like Switzerland where every adult male of military age is legally required to have a fully automatic assault rifle as a part of national defense. Very low crime rate, very low crimes committed with guns.

All those adult males have to have had military training before they're allowed to keep firearms at home. Since 2007 all ammunition (apart from that needed for daily work like airport guards) is kept in central arsenals. They are not allowed to keep any ammunition at home.

Also we are talking about Switzerland which makes even Singapore feel like a go wild, hippy, off the chart place...! Breaking wind is an offence in most Swiss cantons, and there's a rule for everything which is obeyed to the letter.

And then you look at places like Switzerland where every adult male of military age is legally required to have a fully automatic assault rifle as a part of national defense. Very low crime rate, very low crimes committed with guns.

All those adult males have to have had military training before they're allowed to keep firearms at home. Since 2007 all ammunition (apart from that needed for daily work like airport guards) is kept in central arsenals. They are not allowed to keep any ammunition at home.

can you find any references that the Swiss even though they're allowed to have rifles at home, are not allowed to have ammo at their home? This makes no sense to me, and I've never heard that before.

http://www.stephenhalbrook.com/articles/guns-crime-swiss.html

Secondly, my thoughts are that it is not the military training that makes the difference, it's the mental health screening in order to be fit for the military that makes the difference. If someone is not mentally fit, not allowed to serve in the militia=no gun.