America's bizarre reaction to mass shootings

[sirineou]

No state perhaps allowed +5 rounds magazine, but the 30 rounds AR-15 magazines are available online :

As example :

http://gunmagwarehouse.com/promag-ar-15-223-5-56-30-round-polymer-magazine-black-col-a18.html

The comment I replied to was about hunting. You can't take that gun hunting if it holds more than 5+1 rounds. California is the only state "I know of" that restricts legal magazines to a capacity of ten rounds. Elsewhere the 30 round magazine is legal afaik. It is where I am.

Please allow me to remind you that I don't own that gun for hunting. I own it for self defense. I make no apologies for the fact that it holds 30 rounds.

Cheers.

The only apologies you will need to make would be to the 30 people it kills if your gun get's in the hands of some one who should not have it

Why do you need a 30 round clip to defend yourself? do you expect 30 criminals to attack you? or are you to lazy to change clips

or are you NeverSure?

You don't know the very real difference between an ammo clip and an ammo magazine for a rifle yet you're the expert.

My guns and ammo are locked in a gun safe except for what is with me.

Yes if there are riots and burning of neighborhoods as do happen occasionally I'm going to protect myself and my home. I'll have some help from my neighbors. Riots, looting and burning aren't my imagination; they happen sometimes. Just not in my neighborhood, at least not for long.

There are going to be such riots and carnage in Europe during my lifetime and the people will be helpless. I can see it coming, and when it happens I'll feel really bad but all I'll be able to do is think "I told you so".

Cheers.

never claimed to be an expert not even a novice

but that does not stop me from knowing that by whatever name you call it 30 bullets are a lot of bullets.

Merry Christmas

hope the riots dont get you

[slipperylobster]

BBC just ran a story of a man who killed his wife with his gun while she was being attacked by a bear.

http://Canadian woman mauled by bear 'killed by husband's bullet'

How did the Canadian obtain a weapon? My opinion is that that he panicked or had no proper training. It was good that he had a firearm, but bad that he did not know how to use it correctly. A perfect case of why training/annual safety classes...should be mandatory in Canada (and elsewhere).

Edited December 25, 2015 by slipperylobster

[NeverSure]

BBC just ran a story of a man who killed his wife with his gun while she was being attacked by a bear.

http://Canadian woman mauled by bear 'killed by husband's bullet'

How did the Canadian obtain a weapon? My opinion is that that he panicked or had no proper training. It was good that he had a firearm, but bad that he did not know how to use it correctly. A perfect case of why training/annual safety classes...should be mandatory in Canada (and elsewhere).

"...training/annual safety classes...should be mandatory in Canada (and elsewhere)."

One more time. ("Elsewhere") in the US, owning a gun is a right, not a privilege. It can't be taken because I refuse to comply with your "training/annual safety classes". The courts have ruled that driving is a privilege, not a right, and therefore training, licensing, test passing, insurance and so on can be required.

Please don't confuse a constitutional right with a privilege and try to put conditions on it. If you succeeded it would no longer be a right but rather would be subject to your conditions which could tighten and change.

"...The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". (2A)

Cheers.

[impulse]

Except he can't buy assault rifles or handguns at a Tesco or Carrefour, or thousands of other locations.

Which is the main reason there are so many shootings.

Perhaps you're looking in the wrong direction.

http://www.cafe.com/6-times-a-good-guy-with-a-gun-stopped-a-mass-shooting-and-1450-times-a-bad-guy-with-a-gun-started-one/

You do recognize the problem compiling statistics on crimes that didn't happen, don't you?

Edited December 26, 2015 by impulse

[mopar71]

The only apologies you will need to make would be to the 30 people it kills if your gun get's in the hands of some one who should not have it

Why do you need a 30 round clip to defend yourself? do you expect 30 criminals to attack you? or are you to lazy to change clips

or are you NeverSure?

You don't know the very real difference between an ammo clip and an ammo magazine for a rifle yet you're the expert.

My guns and ammo are locked in a gun safe except for what is with me.

Yes if there are riots and burning of neighborhoods as do happen occasionally I'm going to protect myself and my home. I'll have some help from my neighbors. Riots, looting and burning aren't my imagination; they happen sometimes. Just not in my neighborhood, at least not for long.

There are going to be such riots and carnage in Europe during my lifetime and the people will be helpless. I can see it coming, and when it happens I'll feel really bad but all I'll be able to do is think "I told you so".

Cheers.

You can bet riots won't be happening in your neighborhood if the criminal-riot element knows you and your neighbors are well-armed.

There have already been and are riots in Europe. I think it was about 10 years ago that people rioted in 300 cities across France.

[slipperylobster]

BBC just ran a story of a man who killed his wife with his gun while she was being attacked by a bear.

http://Canadian woman mauled by bear 'killed by husband's bullet'

How did the Canadian obtain a weapon? My opinion is that that he panicked or had no proper training. It was good that he had a firearm, but bad that he did not know how to use it correctly. A perfect case of why training/annual safety classes...should be mandatory in Canada (and elsewhere).

"...training/annual safety classes...should be mandatory in Canada (and elsewhere)."

One more time. ("Elsewhere") in the US, owning a gun is a right, not a privilege. It can't be taken because I refuse to comply with your "training/annual safety classes". The courts have ruled that driving is a privilege, not a right, and therefore training, licensing, test passing, insurance and so on can be required.

Please don't confuse a constitutional right with a privilege and try to put conditions on it. If you succeeded it would no longer be a right but rather would be subject to your conditions which could tighten and change.

"...The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". (2A)

Cheers.

I understand. However, safety classes do not, in my opinion, take away the right to bear arms. I don't see it as infringing upon that right. Wouldn't you want your neighbor (pretend you had a weird neighbor) to have some kind of safety class before he ran down and bought himself a weapon?

Plenty regulation already.....mental illness, Violent Misdemeanors, Federal Convictions...etc.

However...I see safety classes as a pretty mild (and sensible) "duty" of an owner of a firearm.

Anyway you look at it.....it is better to concede to "safety" and "mental capacity" before drawing a line. I am sure there are other requirements (permanent address, background check..etc).

I am actually fine with people owning guns. I do want to know that crazy neighbor of mine had some training. The "bear story" might have had an happier ending if the man could have practiced some "B.R.A.S.S"

Edited December 26, 2015 by slipperylobster

[thaibeachlovers]

The comment I replied to was about hunting. You can't take that gun hunting if it holds more than 5+1 rounds. California is the only state "I know of" that restricts legal magazines to a capacity of ten rounds. Elsewhere the 30 round magazine is legal afaik. It is where I am.

Please allow me to remind you that I don't own that gun for hunting. I own it for self defense. I make no apologies for the fact that it holds 30 rounds.

Cheers.

The only apologies you will need to make would be to the 30 people it kills if your gun get's in the hands of some one who should not have it

Why do you need a 30 round clip to defend yourself? do you expect 30 criminals to attack you? or are you to lazy to change clips

or are you NeverSure?

You don't know the very real difference between an ammo clip and an ammo magazine for a rifle yet you're the expert.

My guns and ammo are locked in a gun safe except for what is with me.

Yes if there are riots and burning of neighborhoods as do happen occasionally I'm going to protect myself and my home. I'll have some help from my neighbors. Riots, looting and burning aren't my imagination; they happen sometimes. Just not in my neighborhood, at least not for long.

There are going to be such riots and carnage in Europe during my lifetime and the people will be helpless. I can see it coming, and when it happens I'll feel really bad but all I'll be able to do is think "I told you so".

Cheers.

never claimed to be an expert not even a novice

but that does not stop me from knowing that by whatever name you call it 30 bullets are a lot of bullets.

Merry Christmas

hope the riots dont get you

If you think one bullet= one kill you have been watching too many movies. How many bullets does it take to kill one man in any of the wars going on? I have no idea, but a lot more than what you appear to believe.

So, in a home invasion by 4 or more thugs, even 30 bullets would not be enough. Then there is the rioting he refers to- probably need 30 magazines full for that.

I prefer a shotgun myself. Much more likely to incapacitate someone without having to aim. Only problem is limited number of cartridges they take.

[sirineou]

The only apologies you will need to make would be to the 30 people it kills if your gun get's in the hands of some one who should not have it

Why do you need a 30 round clip to defend yourself? do you expect 30 criminals to attack you? or are you to lazy to change clips

or are you NeverSure?

You don't know the very real difference between an ammo clip and an ammo magazine for a rifle yet you're the expert.

My guns and ammo are locked in a gun safe except for what is with me.

Yes if there are riots and burning of neighborhoods as do happen occasionally I'm going to protect myself and my home. I'll have some help from my neighbors. Riots, looting and burning aren't my imagination; they happen sometimes. Just not in my neighborhood, at least not for long.

There are going to be such riots and carnage in Europe during my lifetime and the people will be helpless. I can see it coming, and when it happens I'll feel really bad but all I'll be able to do is think "I told you so".

Cheers.

never claimed to be an expert not even a novice

but that does not stop me from knowing that by whatever name you call it 30 bullets are a lot of bullets.

Merry Christmas

hope the riots dont get you

If you think one bullet= one kill you have been watching too many movies. How many bullets does it take to kill one man in any of the wars going on? I have no idea, but a lot more than what you appear to believe.

So, in a home invasion by 4 or more thugs, even 30 bullets would not be enough. Then there is the rioting he refers to- probably need 30 magazines full for that.

I prefer a shotgun myself. Much more likely to incapacitate someone without having to aim. Only problem is limited number of cartridges they take.

That's because you,others,and Neversure are not as good a shot as I am! One shot, boom!! and the bad guy is down,

if I line it up right I can get two or even three with one shot, so instead of wasting your money on buying so many bullets I would suggest you guys improve your shooting skills,

Practice practice practice.

if there are no riots in your own neighborhood, always one happening some place, and ofcourse there is always France, as some one said they happen with frequent regularity there

if you dont want to travel, you can always watch old John Wayne movies, I understand he was pretty good.

No need to thank me for all this great advise, all done in the giving spirit of christmas

[casualbiker]

BBC just ran a story of a man who killed his wife with his gun while she was being attacked by a bear.

http://Canadian woman mauled by bear 'killed by husband's bullet'

How did the Canadian obtain a weapon? My opinion is that that he panicked or had no proper training. It was good that he had a firearm, but bad that he did not know how to use it correctly. A perfect case of why training/annual safety classes...should be mandatory in Canada (and elsewhere).

"...training/annual safety classes...should be mandatory in Canada (and elsewhere)."

One more time. ("Elsewhere") in the US, owning a gun is a right, not a privilege. It can't be taken because I refuse to comply with your "training/annual safety classes". The courts have ruled that driving is a privilege, not a right, and therefore training, licensing, test passing, insurance and so on can be required.

Please don't confuse a constitutional right with a privilege and try to put conditions on it. If you succeeded it would no longer be a right but rather would be subject to your conditions which could tighten and change.

"...The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". (2A)

Cheers.

quote from wiki: In United States v. Cruikshank (1876), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that, "The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence" and limited the applicability of the Second Amendment to the federal government.[9] In United States v. Miller (1939), the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government and the states could limit any weapon types not having a "reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia"

[sirineou]

BBC just ran a story of a man who killed his wife with his gun while she was being attacked by a bear.

http://Canadian woman mauled by bear 'killed by husband's bullet'

How did the Canadian obtain a weapon? My opinion is that that he panicked or had no proper training. It was good that he had a firearm, but bad that he did not know how to use it correctly. A perfect case of why training/annual safety classes...should be mandatory in Canada (and elsewhere).

"...training/annual safety classes...should be mandatory in Canada (and elsewhere)."

One more time. ("Elsewhere") in the US, owning a gun is a right, not a privilege. It can't be taken because I refuse to comply with your "training/annual safety classes". The courts have ruled that driving is a privilege, not a right, and therefore training, licensing, test passing, insurance and so on can be required.

Please don't confuse a constitutional right with a privilege and try to put conditions on it. If you succeeded it would no longer be a right but rather would be subject to your conditions which could tighten and change.

"...The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". (2A)

Cheers.

quote from wiki: In United States v. Cruikshank (1876), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that, "The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence" and limited the applicability of the Second Amendment to the federal government.[9] In United States v. Miller (1939), the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government and the states could limit any weapon types not having a "reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia"

a quick google search "gun rights supreme court decisions" many returns

"In District of Columbia v. Heller, 54 U.S. 570 (2008), the U.S. Supreme Court weighed in on gun ownership rights, ruling that the U.S. Constitution protects an individual's right to own a gun for personal use."

http://www.nolo.com/legal-encyclopedia/right-own-gun-under-heller-30295.html

[casualbiker]

My point was that was a recent case possibly connected to the rise in funding in the NRA. Previous to that there were clear indications of the opposite. Also I'm pretty sure they DIDN'T say that guns couldn't be regulated. Jeez even in some Wild West towns guns were banned from being carried!

[MiKT]

BBC just ran a story of a man who killed his wife with his gun while she was being attacked by a bear.

http://Canadian woman mauled by bear 'killed by husband's bullet'

How did the Canadian obtain a weapon? My opinion is that that he panicked or had no proper training. It was good that he had a firearm, but bad that he did not know how to use it correctly. A perfect case of why training/annual safety classes...should be mandatory in Canada (and elsewhere).

"...training/annual safety classes...should be mandatory in Canada (and elsewhere)."

One more time. ("Elsewhere") in the US, owning a gun is a right, not a privilege. It can't be taken because I refuse to comply with your "training/annual safety classes". The courts have ruled that driving is a privilege, not a right, and therefore training, licensing, test passing, insurance and so on can be required.

Please don't confuse a constitutional right with a privilege and try to put conditions on it. If you succeeded it would no longer be a right but rather would be subject to your conditions which could tighten and change.

"...The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". (2A)

Cheers.

Constitutional right, constitution, constitution, constitution.

Why is the US constitution any more valid than the latest attempt by the current junta?

Answer - it is NOT.

It is just a piece of paper no more valid than the one Nevil Chamberlain waved about declaring "Peace in our Time". Something a bunch of politicians made up to suit the mood of the moment. Breaks your little US hearts to hear that, but if you recognised the truth you might be able to make a start on SENSIBLE gun control.

Its just a piece of paper written a long time ago and to use it to keep on justifying the RIGHT to keep guns is actually symbolic of a very backward society.

Move with the times, the earth is not flat, women have the vote, men fly through the air, the moon is not made of cheese, get rid of stupid outdated ideas.

[sirineou]

BBC just ran a story of a man who killed his wife with his gun while she was being attacked by a bear.

http://Canadian woman mauled by bear 'killed by husband's bullet'

How did the Canadian obtain a weapon? My opinion is that that he panicked or had no proper training. It was good that he had a firearm, but bad that he did not know how to use it correctly. A perfect case of why training/annual safety classes...should be mandatory in Canada (and elsewhere).

"...training/annual safety classes...should be mandatory in Canada (and elsewhere)."

One more time. ("Elsewhere") in the US, owning a gun is a right, not a privilege. It can't be taken because I refuse to comply with your "training/annual safety classes". The courts have ruled that driving is a privilege, not a right, and therefore training, licensing, test passing, insurance and so on can be required.

Please don't confuse a constitutional right with a privilege and try to put conditions on it. If you succeeded it would no longer be a right but rather would be subject to your conditions which could tighten and change.

"...The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". (2A)

Cheers.

Constitutional right, constitution, constitution, constitution.

Why is the US constitution any more valid than the latest attempt by the current junta?

Answer - it is NOT.

It is just a piece of paper no more valid than the one Nevil Chamberlain waved about declaring "Peace in our Time". Something a bunch of politicians made up to suit the mood of the moment. Breaks your little US hearts to hear that, but if you recognised the truth you might be able to make a start on SENSIBLE gun control.

Its just a piece of paper written a long time ago and to use it to keep on justifying the RIGHT to keep guns is actually symbolic of a very backward society.

Move with the times, the earth is not flat, women have the vote, men fly through the air, the moon is not made of cheese, get rid of stupid outdated ideas.

"Why is the US constitution any more valid than the latest attempt by the current junta?"

because we actually adhere to it we don't change it to fit our mood.People can depend on it and make long term plans and investments.

Our adherence to it is evident in our success, as the lack of adherence to theirs by successive juntas evident in the success of their country.

I am pro gun control, but not the abolition of guns, it is in my constitution, and I would defend it with my last breath.

The constitution can only be changed by a countrywide democratic process not tanks. Unless the majority of people have agreed on it, it is a worthless paper.

[sirineou]

My point was that was a recent case possibly connected to the rise in funding in the NRA. Previous to that there were clear indications of the opposite. Also I'm pretty sure they DIDN'T say that guns couldn't be regulated. Jeez even in some Wild West towns guns were banned from being carried!

You are absolutely right, though there is a right, it does not mean that that right can not be regulated.

For instance there is the right to free speech, but you can't cant falsely yell fire in a crowded movie theater.

I guess I misunderstood you

You did not have to go as far back as you did to make that point, a decision concerning that was handed down a couple of weeks ago

"A divided U.S. Supreme Court steered clear of the politically charged fight over gun rights, turning away a challenge to a law banning semi-automatic assault weapons and large-capacity magazines in a Chicago suburb.

The justices left intact a federal appeals court decision that said the Highland Park, Illinois, restrictions don’t infringe on the constitutional right to bear arms. The appeals court said residents have plenty of legal self-defense options, including handguns and other types of long guns."

Read more at:http://www.bloomberg.com/politics/articles/2015-12-07/gun-advocates-rejected-by-u-s-supreme-court-on-assault-weapons

[MiKT]

BBC just ran a story of a man who killed his wife with his gun while she was being attacked by a bear.

http://Canadian woman mauled by bear 'killed by husband's bullet'

How did the Canadian obtain a weapon? My opinion is that that he panicked or had no proper training. It was good that he had a firearm, but bad that he did not know how to use it correctly. A perfect case of why training/annual safety classes...should be mandatory in Canada (and elsewhere).

"...training/annual safety classes...should be mandatory in Canada (and elsewhere)."

One more time. ("Elsewhere") in the US, owning a gun is a right, not a privilege. It can't be taken because I refuse to comply with your "training/annual safety classes". The courts have ruled that driving is a privilege, not a right, and therefore training, licensing, test passing, insurance and so on can be required.

Please don't confuse a constitutional right with a privilege and try to put conditions on it. If you succeeded it would no longer be a right but rather would be subject to your conditions which could tighten and change.

"...The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed". (2A)

Cheers.

Constitutional right, constitution, constitution, constitution.

Why is the US constitution any more valid than the latest attempt by the current junta?

Answer - it is NOT.

It is just a piece of paper no more valid than the one Nevil Chamberlain waved about declaring "Peace in our Time". Something a bunch of politicians made up to suit the mood of the moment. Breaks your little US hearts to hear that, but if you recognised the truth you might be able to make a start on SENSIBLE gun control.

Its just a piece of paper written a long time ago and to use it to keep on justifying the RIGHT to keep guns is actually symbolic of a very backward society.

Move with the times, the earth is not flat, women have the vote, men fly through the air, the moon is not made of cheese, get rid of stupid outdated ideas.

"Why is the US constitution any more valid than the latest attempt by the current junta?"

because we actually adhere to it we don't change it to fit our mood.People can depend on it and make long term plans and investments.

Our adherence to it is evident in our success, as the lack of adherence to theirs by successive juntas evident in the success of their country.

I am pro gun control, but not the abolition of guns, it is in my constitution, and I would defend it with my last breath.

The constitution can only be changed by a countrywide democratic process not tanks. Unless the majority of people have agreed on it, it is a worthless paper.

Yes, the point is it can be changed - with or without tanks.

Gun control does not mean banning guns, it means limiting access to various types of guns - eg amost nobody in the US needs an assault rifle at home; controlling storage, properly licencing All weapons and stronger penalties for missuse and miss-selling.

Unlike the UK and most of Europe there are places in the US where it is actually necessary for civilians to have a gun; but these probably only account for a tiny fraction of the population and all could be licenced as could all legitimate hunters and target shooters and it is these "responsible" shooters that should be pressing for more controls not advocating a free for all because of a 200+ year old amendment to a constitution that can be amended again to suit the needs of todays population - which are incomparably different to those when the amendment was framed.

In this day and age databases listing all guns are a practical proposition and it cannot be any more an infringement of peoples rights to list their guns, their balistic characteristics and way they are stored than it is to list their phone numbers.

Lots of practical problems to overcome to get the data into the databases (a good start would be to ensure that from a certain date all manufactures and importers had to detail the balistic signiture of each weapon and then over the years slowly get every gun tested or deactivated/destroyed - many beautiful guns to be saved- I love guns) but what is missing at the moment is the will to take the first steps so many people will continue to die unnecessarily.

One thing that really makes me sick is the blatent hypocrisy of those who try to whip up anti muslim, anti-terrorist, etc fears when only one or two incidents of real terrorism occour in the US every year just to make money selling guns.

If for instance the IRA had started a real bombing campaign in the US as they did in the UK, having a gun at home would not do you any good, only the police/ armed forces can deal with terrorism.

[sirineou]

Constitutional right, constitution, constitution, constitution.

Why is the US constitution any more valid than the latest attempt by the current junta?

Answer - it is NOT.

It is just a piece of paper no more valid than the one Nevil Chamberlain waved about declaring "Peace in our Time". Something a bunch of politicians made up to suit the mood of the moment. Breaks your little US hearts to hear that, but if you recognised the truth you might be able to make a start on SENSIBLE gun control.

Its just a piece of paper written a long time ago and to use it to keep on justifying the RIGHT to keep guns is actually symbolic of a very backward society.

Move with the times, the earth is not flat, women have the vote, men fly through the air, the moon is not made of cheese, get rid of stupid outdated ideas.

"Why is the US constitution any more valid than the latest attempt by the current junta?"

because we actually adhere to it we don't change it to fit our mood.People can depend on it and make long term plans and investments.

Our adherence to it is evident in our success, as the lack of adherence to theirs by successive juntas evident in the success of their country.

I am pro gun control, but not the abolition of guns, it is in my constitution, and I would defend it with my last breath.

The constitution can only be changed by a countrywide democratic process not tanks. Unless the majority of people have agreed on it, it is a worthless paper.

Yes, the point is it can be changed - with or without tanks.

Gun control does not mean banning guns, it means limiting access to various types of guns - eg amost nobody in the US needs an assault rifle at home; controlling storage, properly licencing All weapons and stronger penalties for missuse and miss-selling.

Unlike the UK and most of Europe there are places in the US where it is actually necessary for civilians to have a gun; but these probably only account for a tiny fraction of the population and all could be licenced as could all legitimate hunters and target shooters and it is these "responsible" shooters that should be pressing for more controls not advocating a free for all because of a 200+ year old amendment to a constitution that can be amended again to suit the needs of todays population - which are incomparably different to those when the amendment was framed.

In this day and age databases listing all guns are a practical proposition and it cannot be any more an infringement of peoples rights to list their guns, their balistic characteristics and way they are stored than it is to list their phone numbers.

Lots of practical problems to overcome to get the data into the databases (a good start would be to ensure that from a certain date all manufactures and importers had to detail the balistic signiture of each weapon and then over the years slowly get every gun tested or deactivated/destroyed - many beautiful guns to be saved- I love guns) but what is missing at the moment is the will to take the first steps so many people will continue to die unnecessarily.

One thing that really makes me sick is the blatent hypocrisy of those who try to whip up anti muslim, anti-terrorist, etc fears when only one or two incidents of real terrorism occour in the US every year just to make money selling guns.

If for instance the IRA had started a real bombing campaign in the US as they did in the UK, having a gun at home would not do you any good, only the police/ armed forces can deal with terrorism.

as you can see if you have read my previous posts in the subject and more specifically post # 257 we are not too far away in our thinking as far as gun regulation is concerned, i

You say :"in the US where it is actually necessary for civilians to have a gun; but these probably only account for a tiny fraction of the population " the problem is how do you define need? is need strictly utilitarian or is need recreational or a combination of both, and the need might not be present today, but present tomorrow, who decides when, where , and how?

That is why we have a constitution, a constitution that is accepted by all not forced upon all. and regulations , one shoe size does not fit all

Yes it can change, but by consensus not force, any change that occurs under force it is null and void. After all the constitution is nothing more than a contract, and anyone who knows anything about contracts knows that any contract signed under duress is null and void and is not worth the paper it is written on. A concept not recognised in Thailand and resulting in political chaos.

As of now it is constitutionally right for citizens to own guns. Government has the right to impose regulations as long as those regulations do not render the constitutional right moot.

As you said the constitution could be changed but until such time ..........

[MiKT]

Constitutional right, constitution, constitution, constitution.

Why is the US constitution any more valid than the latest attempt by the current junta?

Answer - it is NOT.

It is just a piece of paper no more valid than the one Nevil Chamberlain waved about declaring "Peace in our Time". Something a bunch of politicians made up to suit the mood of the moment. Breaks your little US hearts to hear that, but if you recognised the truth you might be able to make a start on SENSIBLE gun control.

Its just a piece of paper written a long time ago and to use it to keep on justifying the RIGHT to keep guns is actually symbolic of a very backward society.

Move with the times, the earth is not flat, women have the vote, men fly through the air, the moon is not made of cheese, get rid of stupid outdated ideas.

"Why is the US constitution any more valid than the latest attempt by the current junta?"

because we actually adhere to it we don't change it to fit our mood.People can depend on it and make long term plans and investments.

Our adherence to it is evident in our success, as the lack of adherence to theirs by successive juntas evident in the success of their country.

I am pro gun control, but not the abolition of guns, it is in my constitution, and I would defend it with my last breath.

The constitution can only be changed by a countrywide democratic process not tanks. Unless the majority of people have agreed on it, it is a worthless paper.

Yes, the point is it can be changed - with or without tanks.

Gun control does not mean banning guns, it means limiting access to various types of guns - eg amost nobody in the US needs an assault rifle at home; controlling storage, properly licencing All weapons and stronger penalties for missuse and miss-selling.

Unlike the UK and most of Europe there are places in the US where it is actually necessary for civilians to have a gun; but these probably only account for a tiny fraction of the population and all could be licenced as could all legitimate hunters and target shooters and it is these "responsible" shooters that should be pressing for more controls not advocating a free for all because of a 200+ year old amendment to a constitution that can be amended again to suit the needs of todays population - which are incomparably different to those when the amendment was framed.

In this day and age databases listing all guns are a practical proposition and it cannot be any more an infringement of peoples rights to list their guns, their balistic characteristics and way they are stored than it is to list their phone numbers.

Lots of practical problems to overcome to get the data into the databases (a good start would be to ensure that from a certain date all manufactures and importers had to detail the balistic signiture of each weapon and then over the years slowly get every gun tested or deactivated/destroyed - many beautiful guns to be saved- I love guns) but what is missing at the moment is the will to take the first steps so many people will continue to die unnecessarily.

One thing that really makes me sick is the blatent hypocrisy of those who try to whip up anti muslim, anti-terrorist, etc fears when only one or two incidents of real terrorism occour in the US every year just to make money selling guns.

If for instance the IRA had started a real bombing campaign in the US as they did in the UK, having a gun at home would not do you any good, only the police/ armed forces can deal with terrorism.

as you can see if you have read my previous posts in the subject and more specifically post # 257 we are not too far away in our thinking as far as gun regulation is concerned, i

You say :"in the US where it is actually necessary for civilians to have a gun; but these probably only account for a tiny fraction of the population " the problem is how do you define need? is need strictly utilitarian or is need recreational or a combination of both, and the need might not be present today, but present tomorrow, who decides when, where , and how?

That is why we have a constitution, a constitution that is accepted by all not forced upon all. and regulations , one shoe size does not fit all

Yes it can change, but by consensus not force, any change that occurs under force it is null and void. After all the constitution is nothing more than a contract, and anyone who knows anything about contracts knows that any contract signed under duress is null and void and is not worth the paper it is written on. A concept not recognised in Thailand and resulting in political chaos.

As of now it is constitutionally right for citizens to own guns. Government has the right to impose regulations as long as those regulations do not render the constitutional right moot.

As you said the constitution could be changed but until such time ..........

Ok point made and agreed by at least one sane person thank you. So hopefully it will get changed one day.

Not holding my breath or trying to force anybody to do anything, just making the point that things (laws, constitutions, etc) made by man can always be changed; and usually should be, over a long time.

By need I meant those people who really do live in the wild parts (no not Dallas) and need a gun to survive. eg Alaska.

I fact if ever go back to visit the US again, after reading some of the posts here I shall be sure to go 2 armed

[sirineou]

Ok point made and agreed by at least one sane person thank you. So hopefully it will get changed one day.

Not holding my breath or trying to force anybody to do anything, just making the point that things (laws, constitutions, etc) made by man can always be changed; and usually should be, over a long time.

By need I meant those people who really do live in the wild parts (no not Dallas) and need a gun to survive. eg Alaska.

I fact if ever go back to visit the US again, after reading some of the posts here I shall be sure to go 2 armed

If you visit the US , not necessary yo be armed or worried, the US is a very big place with a lot of different people and different communities. One hears statistics and one gets alarmed, but break down the statistics by communities and the picture changes.

I have never owned a gun, never being the victim of violent crime, don't really know anyone who has, I leave the keys in my car parked in my driveway so I will know where to find them.

When visiting in Europe I took my then 8 year old daughter to a soccer/football game I thought it would be a good experience for her.

There were spiked fences to prevent the spectators from rioting in the field , the different team fans were separated so they would not kill each other, some of the players were black, the racial episodes yelled at them were embarrassing. I was glad my daughter did not understand the language.

Go to a game in the US, we all sit together and engage in good natured banter , anyone acting like they did in Europe would be at the very least be thrown out of the game or even arrested. Spectators in the front rows can reach over and touch the players, talk to them , get autographs.

I got to tell you , as much as I love Thailand, no place I rather live in than the good old USA, a few months in thailand where, as in an other thread, I cant even sell barbecue, are enough for me

So come to the US, but leave your guns at home, I promise you you will not need them.You would be pleasantly surprised how safe it is.

"Forget what you saw in the movies. You are safe in the USA. Learning a little about our cultural differences is the only "weapon" you'll need for trouble-free travel. Despite the news reports about tourist troubles on Florida highways and the availability of handguns, the United States is a relatively safe place. Remember: the "horror stories" make interesting news because they are unusual events.

The typical crime victim in the USA is not a sweet little grandmother or a European tourist. Most crime victims are single, unemployed, young men. Members of their own families usually kill murder victims. Our gun crimes scare people. Some people even avoid a trip to the USA for fear of a bullet. Don't worry, you will find little danger. All cities have "good" and "bad" areas. Talk to locals to get an idea of where the "bad" areas are located and avoid them especially at night. "Drive-by" shootings only occur in the neighborhoods full of gang conflicts. Most Americans have never seen a shooting except in the movies.:"

http://www.usatourist.com/english/traveltips/travel-safety-tips.html

[MiKT]

Ok point made and agreed by at least one sane person thank you. So hopefully it will get changed one day.

Not holding my breath or trying to force anybody to do anything, just making the point that things (laws, constitutions, etc) made by man can always be changed; and usually should be, over a long time.

By need I meant those people who really do live in the wild parts (no not Dallas) and need a gun to survive. eg Alaska.

I fact if ever go back to visit the US again, after reading some of the posts here I shall be sure to go 2 armed

If you visit the US , not necessary yo be armed or worried, the US is a very big place with a lot of different people and different communities. One hears statistics and one gets alarmed, but break down the statistics by communities and the picture changes.

I have never owned a gun, never being the victim of violent crime, don't really know anyone who has, I leave the keys in my car parked in my driveway so I will know where to find them.

When visiting in Europe I took my then 8 year old daughter to a soccer/football game I thought it would be a good experience for her.

There were spiked fences to prevent the spectators from rioting in the field , the different team fans were separated so they would not kill each other, some of the players were black, the racial episodes yelled at them were embarrassing. I was glad my daughter did not understand the language.

Go to a game in the US, we all sit together and engage in good natured banter , anyone acting like they did in Europe would be at the very least be thrown out of the game or even arrested. Spectators in the front rows can reach over and touch the players, talk to them , get autographs.

I got to tell you , as much as I love Thailand, no place I rather live in than the good old USA, a few months in thailand where, as in an other thread, I cant even sell barbecue, are enough for me

So come to the US, but leave your guns at home, I promise you you will not need them.You would be pleasantly surprised how safe it is.

"Forget what you saw in the movies. You are safe in the USA. Learning a little about our cultural differences is the only "weapon" you'll need for trouble-free travel. Despite the news reports about tourist troubles on Florida highways and the availability of handguns, the United States is a relatively safe place. Remember: the "horror stories" make interesting news because they are unusual events.

The typical crime victim in the USA is not a sweet little grandmother or a European tourist. Most crime victims are single, unemployed, young men. Members of their own families usually kill murder victims. Our gun crimes scare people. Some people even avoid a trip to the USA for fear of a bullet. Don't worry, you will find little danger. All cities have "good" and "bad" areas. Talk to locals to get an idea of where the "bad" areas are located and avoid them especially at night. "Drive-by" shootings only occur in the neighborhoods full of gang conflicts. Most Americans have never seen a shooting except in the movies.:"

http://www.usatourist.com/english/traveltips/travel-safety-tips.html

Thanks for your lovely post at this time of the year I am glad someone is happy with the US. Not to carp on boxing day, but my post did say go back to the US. I agree with what you say and had a fantastic time when I was there.

But I am very sorry that you had a bad experience in Europe with your daughter I only hope it was not in the UK because racism is really clamped down on at UK football matches now. The old days of the 80s with huge gang fights between rival gangs is long over and they were all white gangs. Given that many of the old football gangs were very racist; actually despite what you read here real racism in the UK is much less than it is in the US sorry to say. I guess we need to remember this is a thread about gun control and that is definately a worrying problem and I think breeds a bad attitude to guns. You may think this is funny, but I was out of the UK for over 10 years (on two seperate occasions) without going back once and the last time I went back in 2005 I simply could not believe all the police being armed and stalking round like Robocop all due to terrorist threats. It makes for a terrible atmosphere of suspicion and exhaberates racism. Unfortunately this is what the terrorists want, but I really dont believe that the US will ever have as much of a terrorist threat as we have in Europe, so ordinary people having guns at home is not justified and as we have seen loose gun control only puts the guns into the hands of the nuts more easily.

Have a good new year.

PS American football is not a real game.

Sorry the smiley has got out of control and should be at the end. I can't edit it out.

I should add a rider to this post that in the UK we had real terrorism with IRA bastards blowing everything up in the 70s and not many mainland cops were armed then. It is horribly ironic that todays UK cops are armed to shoot dead suicide bombers.

Edited December 27, 2015 by MiKT

[sirineou]

Ok point made and agreed by at least one sane person thank you. So hopefully it will get changed one day.

Not holding my breath or trying to force anybody to do anything, just making the point that things (laws, constitutions, etc) made by man can always be changed; and usually should be, over a long time.

By need I meant those people who really do live in the wild parts (no not Dallas) and need a gun to survive. eg Alaska.

I fact if ever go back to visit the US again, after reading some of the posts here I shall be sure to go 2 armed

If you visit the US , not necessary yo be armed or worried, the US is a very big place with a lot of different people and different communities. One hears statistics and one gets alarmed, but break down the statistics by communities and the picture changes.

I have never owned a gun, never being the victim of violent crime, don't really know anyone who has, I leave the keys in my car parked in my driveway so I will know where to find them.

When visiting in Europe I took my then 8 year old daughter to a soccer/football game I thought it would be a good experience for her.

There were spiked fences to prevent the spectators from rioting in the field , the different team fans were separated so they would not kill each other, some of the players were black, the racial episodes yelled at them were embarrassing. I was glad my daughter did not understand the language.

Go to a game in the US, we all sit together and engage in good natured banter , anyone acting like they did in Europe would be at the very least be thrown out of the game or even arrested. Spectators in the front rows can reach over and touch the players, talk to them , get autographs.

I got to tell you , as much as I love Thailand, no place I rather live in than the good old USA, a few months in thailand where, as in an other thread, I cant even sell barbecue, are enough for me

So come to the US, but leave your guns at home, I promise you you will not need them.You would be pleasantly surprised how safe it is.

"Forget what you saw in the movies. You are safe in the USA. Learning a little about our cultural differences is the only "weapon" you'll need for trouble-free travel. Despite the news reports about tourist troubles on Florida highways and the availability of handguns, the United States is a relatively safe place. Remember: the "horror stories" make interesting news because they are unusual events.

The typical crime victim in the USA is not a sweet little grandmother or a European tourist. Most crime victims are single, unemployed, young men. Members of their own families usually kill murder victims. Our gun crimes scare people. Some people even avoid a trip to the USA for fear of a bullet. Don't worry, you will find little danger. All cities have "good" and "bad" areas. Talk to locals to get an idea of where the "bad" areas are located and avoid them especially at night. "Drive-by" shootings only occur in the neighborhoods full of gang conflicts. Most Americans have never seen a shooting except in the movies.:"

http://www.usatourist.com/english/traveltips/travel-safety-tips.html

Thanks for your lovely post at this time of the year I am glad someone is happy with the US. Not to carp on boxing day, but my post did say go back to the US. I agree with what you say and had a fantastic time when I was there.

But I am very sorry that you had a bad experience in Europe with your daughter I only hope it was not in the UK because racism is really clamped down on at UK football matches now. The old days of the 80s with huge gang fights between rival gangs is long over and they were all white gangs. Given that many of the old football gangs were very racist; actually despite what you read here real racism in the UK is much less than it is in the US sorry to say. I guess we need to remember this is a thread about gun control and that is definately a worrying problem and I think breeds a bad attitude to guns. You may think this is funny, but I was out of the UK for over 10 years (on two seperate occasions) without going back once and the last time I went back in 2005 I simply could not believe all the police being armed and stalking round like Robocop all due to terrorist threats. It makes for a terrible atmosphere of suspicion and exhaberates racism. Unfortunately this is what the terrorists want, but I really dont believe that the US will ever have as much of a terrorist threat as we have in Europe, so ordinary people having guns at home is not justified and as we have seen loose gun control only puts the guns into the hands of the nuts more easily.

Have a good new year.

PS American football is not a real game.

Sorry the smiley has got out of control and should be at the end. I can't edit it out.

I should add a rider to this post that in the UK we had real terrorism with IRA bastards blowing everything up in the 70s and not many mainland cops were armed then. It is horribly ironic that todays UK cops are armed to shoot dead suicide bombers.

Did not have a bad time in Europe, only at the soccer game, and used it as a contrast to the US

Glad to hear things have improved, As I said "my then 8 year old daughter" she just now turned 20 and a lovely young lady, so it was a long time ago.

I have family in Greece and Italy and friends all over Europe so I visit there often, though not in the past two years , too busy with work As soon as I retire, in four years me and my Thai wife plan to spend a considerable amount of time there.

For one to understand American Football , as with any other game, one ,not only needs to understand the basics but also needs to know the players, their capabilities, the teams.some of the history etc etc, it adds to the drama. When I was younger I was into baseball, I knew all about it. When a player got on first base. I knew if he was fast or slow, did he take a big lead from first base and was he going to try to steal second base, was the pitcher lefty or righty, did he have a good move to first and would he try to pick the runner of base, was the batter a home run hitter or a contact hitter etc etc

all adding to the drama. Now I know nothing, when ever I watch baseball I Fall asleep. I think your opinion concerning American football might have something to do with that. I know I rather watch fingernails grow than watch Cricket

Back to the subject at hand, Gun control . The issue has being politicised, and is being used as a wedge issue. Most people are reasonable and have a middle of the road opinion,but those who have a lot to gain, are disseminating a lot of misinformation.Divide and conquer is a true and history tested technique. The heck with all the people that are dying I guess.

In this forum it becomes a matter of sport , I have yet to hear a poster say " hey you are right I never thought of it that way". The law of average would suggest that since we have being wrong in the past there would be times that we will be wrong again, but not in this forum,

Of course that does not apply to me because I am a superior human being and I have never being wrong except for that one time that I thought I was wrong but I wasn't , so I was wrong to think I was wrong

[MiKT]

Ok point made and agreed by at least one sane person thank you. So hopefully it will get changed one day.

Not holding my breath or trying to force anybody to do anything, just making the point that things (laws, constitutions, etc) made by man can always be changed; and usually should be, over a long time.

By need I meant those people who really do live in the wild parts (no not Dallas) and need a gun to survive. eg Alaska.

I fact if ever go back to visit the US again, after reading some of the posts here I shall be sure to go 2 armed

If you visit the US , not necessary yo be armed or worried, the US is a very big place with a lot of different people and different communities. One hears statistics and one gets alarmed, but break down the statistics by communities and the picture changes.

I have never owned a gun, never being the victim of violent crime, don't really know anyone who has, I leave the keys in my car parked in my driveway so I will know where to find them.

When visiting in Europe I took my then 8 year old daughter to a soccer/football game I thought it would be a good experience for her.

There were spiked fences to prevent the spectators from rioting in the field , the different team fans were separated so they would not kill each other, some of the players were black, the racial episodes yelled at them were embarrassing. I was glad my daughter did not understand the language.

Go to a game in the US, we all sit together and engage in good natured banter , anyone acting like they did in Europe would be at the very least be thrown out of the game or even arrested. Spectators in the front rows can reach over and touch the players, talk to them , get autographs.

I got to tell you , as much as I love Thailand, no place I rather live in than the good old USA, a few months in thailand where, as in an other thread, I cant even sell barbecue, are enough for me

So come to the US, but leave your guns at home, I promise you you will not need them.You would be pleasantly surprised how safe it is.

"Forget what you saw in the movies. You are safe in the USA. Learning a little about our cultural differences is the only "weapon" you'll need for trouble-free travel. Despite the news reports about tourist troubles on Florida highways and the availability of handguns, the United States is a relatively safe place. Remember: the "horror stories" make interesting news because they are unusual events.

The typical crime victim in the USA is not a sweet little grandmother or a European tourist. Most crime victims are single, unemployed, young men. Members of their own families usually kill murder victims. Our gun crimes scare people. Some people even avoid a trip to the USA for fear of a bullet. Don't worry, you will find little danger. All cities have "good" and "bad" areas. Talk to locals to get an idea of where the "bad" areas are located and avoid them especially at night. "Drive-by" shootings only occur in the neighborhoods full of gang conflicts. Most Americans have never seen a shooting except in the movies.:"

http://www.usatourist.com/english/traveltips/travel-safety-tips.html

Thanks for your lovely post at this time of the year I am glad someone is happy with the US. Not to carp on boxing day, but my post did say go back to the US. I agree with what you say and had a fantastic time when I was there.

But I am very sorry that you had a bad experience in Europe with your daughter I only hope it was not in the UK because racism is really clamped down on at UK football matches now. The old days of the 80s with huge gang fights between rival gangs is long over and they were all white gangs. Given that many of the old football gangs were very racist; actually despite what you read here real racism in the UK is much less than it is in the US sorry to say. I guess we need to remember this is a thread about gun control and that is definately a worrying problem and I think breeds a bad attitude to guns. You may think this is funny, but I was out of the UK for over 10 years (on two seperate occasions) without going back once and the last time I went back in 2005 I simply could not believe all the police being armed and stalking round like Robocop all due to terrorist threats. It makes for a terrible atmosphere of suspicion and exhaberates racism. Unfortunately this is what the terrorists want, but I really dont believe that the US will ever have as much of a terrorist threat as we have in Europe, so ordinary people having guns at home is not justified and as we have seen loose gun control only puts the guns into the hands of the nuts more easily.

Have a good new year.

PS American football is not a real game.

Sorry the smiley has got out of control and should be at the end. I can't edit it out.

I should add a rider to this post that in the UK we had real terrorism with IRA bastards blowing everything up in the 70s and not many mainland cops were armed then. It is horribly ironic that todays UK cops are armed to shoot dead suicide bombers.

Did not have a bad time in Europe, only at the soccer game, and used it as a contrast to the US

Glad to hear things have improved, As I said "my then 8 year old daughter" she just now turned 20 and a lovely young lady, so it was a long time ago.

I have family in Greece and Italy and friends all over Europe so I visit there often, though not in the past two years , too busy with work As soon as I retire, in four years me and my Thai wife plan to spend a considerable amount of time there.

For one to understand American Football , as with any other game, one ,not only needs to understand the basics but also needs to know the players, their capabilities, the teams.some of the history etc etc, it adds to the drama. When I was younger I was into baseball, I knew all about it. When a player got on first base. I knew if he was fast or slow, did he take a big lead from first base and was he going to try to steal second base, was the pitcher lefty or righty, did he have a good move to first and would he try to pick the runner of base, was the batter a home run hitter or a contact hitter etc etc

all adding to the drama. Now I know nothing, when ever I watch baseball I Fall asleep. I think your opinion concerning American football might have something to do with that. I know I rather watch fingernails grow than watch Cricket

Back to the subject at hand, Gun control . The issue has being politicised, and is being used as a wedge issue. Most people are reasonable and have a middle of the road opinion,but those who have a lot to gain, are disseminating a lot of misinformation.Divide and conquer is a true and history tested technique. The heck with all the people that are dying I guess.

In this forum it becomes a matter of sport , I have yet to hear a poster say " hey you are right I never thought of it that way". The law of average would suggest that since we have being wrong in the past there would be times that we will be wrong again, but not in this forum,

Of course that does not apply to me because I am a superior human being and I have never being wrong except for that one time that I thought I was wrong but I wasn't , so I was wrong to think I was wrong

Sorry I like your posts too much, but must point out you don't know much about British humour.

Good luck with your daughter I have 6 and sometimes I am glad I have no real guns in Thailand! Easy to get one but I would probably shoot all the motorists.

PS try 20/20 for action.

Ooops, allegedly easy to get.

Edited December 27, 2015 by MiKT

[chuckd]

You two guys need to get a room.

[MiKT]

You two guys need to get a room.

Yes thank you ducky, bin there done that now wearing the teeshirt.