Flare Sci-Fi Forums: Repeal the 2nd Ammendment

This is topic Repeal the 2nd Ammendment in forum The Flameboard at Flare Sci-Fi Forums.

To visit this topic, use this URL:
https://flare.solareclipse.net/ultimatebb.php/topic/11/91.html

Posted by Charles Capps (Member # 9) on :

Violence is on the rise.

Young people are getting guns from their parents houses and killing people with them.

This can't be stopped, because we are given the right in the Constitution to bear arms.

Solution: Repeal the second ammendment, which would then permit the states and/or the federal government to severely restrict or even totally ban guns.

Not like it will ever happen.

------------------
"Okay, so I'm not "SANE" so to speak, but uh... I'm the lovable kind of psycho"
http://solareclipse.net/

Posted by Jeff Raven (Member # 20) on :

You think after 200+ years of our right to bear arms, that they'd repeal it? Didn't think so either. I highly doubt it'll change. One point being, there are too many guns already out there...plus, most of the nation wouldn't stand for it either.

------------------
Jeff Raven - Having more fun than any human being should be allowed to have

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

First-Amendment Bug Removed From Bill Of Rights 2.0

------------------
"I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die."
--
They Might Be Giants

Posted by LB4747 on :

While I personally would not be opposed to repealing the 2nd Amendment, that simply is not going to stop violence in schools, or anywhere else. Criminals will always find other ways to hurt and kill people.

I mean, these students in Denver didn't just have guns, they had explosives too -- bombs.

And stabbings in schools happen even more often than shootouts -- but unless someone dies, you usually don't hear about it on the evening news.

Sadly, even if guns were to be banned tomorrow, a teenager or an adult intent on committing violence is going to find a way to do it.

And as you said, a repeal isn't going to happen. That's why we need to concentrate on finding a realistic solution to all of this -- assuming there is a solution, which I'm not convinced there is. Sorry for being cynical.

------------------
Lawrence Boucher
"Learn from yesterday, live for today, hope for tomorrow.
The important thing is not to stop questioning."--Albert Einstein

[This message was edited by LB4747 on April 21, 1999.]

Posted by Jubilee (Member # 99) on :

We cannot stop the fact that violence exists. We cannot stop the fact that guns exist. We cannot change the way these things happen.

We can't take the guns away from the murders. The only thing we can do is try to stop the intent behind it.

When there is peace in this world, such things will not be needed. When there is no hatred, there will be no reason to fire a gun at anyone. Where there is love, and respect, and tolerance, there is no room for these things.

We can only kill it with kindness. It's the only power we have.

And isn't it funny .... that it's the strongest?

------------------
There are people who one loves immediatly and forever. Just to know that you exist in the same world together is sufficient. Till I loved, I never lived - enough.

Posted by Curry Monster (Member # 12) on :

A lot of crimes are poverty driven. You should start to focus on how to alleviate poverty. Which would atuomatically bring down the crime rates.

------------------
I drink therefore I am.

-Descartes

Posted by Montgomery (Member # 23) on :

I thought we'd already had this argument.
I guess recent events have made it resutrface.

------------------
"I AM THE SPIDER!!!!"
- Vic Reeves

Posted by RW (Member # 27) on :

NUKE THE U.S.!

(kidding!)

Posted by Saltah'na (Member # 33) on :

Re: Second amendment- The second amendment was put in place because the US did not have an army at the time, and needed volunteers to stand up to defend the country. Now that they do, this amendment is not only outdated, it is DANGEROUS.

Re: Poverty driven crimes- This one does not seem to be the case. Columbine High appears to be an affluent High School, tennis courts, baseball diamond, etc. May I remind you that a great deal of crimes are also driven by hatred. Last week, in Ottawa, a former transit employee walked into a transit garage, and murdered 4 employees. He apparently was angry about people teasing him about his stuttering.

As of now, the newspaper says that the police have not established a motive for this. As well, these wackos were so vengeful that they were laughing while they killed people, and even killed those who were begging for their lives.

Bottom line: you can't massacre people with a knife.

------------------
I can resist anything.......
Except Temptation

[This message was edited by Tahna Los on April 21, 1999.]

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

You can do it with bombs, though, which ARE illegal. And yet they had them. Curious.

------------------
"I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die."
--
They Might Be Giants

Posted by Chimaera on :

As I understand it, changing the American constitution is even harder than changing the Canadian one, which makes it almost impossible. Especially when you consider how wealthy and powerful the gun lobby is in the US. Repealing the second amendment is, in my opinion, a very sensible thing to do, but it won't be done because the American government isn't interested in doing sensible things a lot of the time, only popular things.

Tahna Los: that's interesting about the origin of the second amendment, kind of makes sense, especially when you consider that back then it was damned impossible to get Americans to volunteer anything (a tendency which brought on the war for independence by the way, but that's kind of a long, off topic, piece of history). Of course, now the US does have an army....

------------------
"Sometimes you get the bear, and sometimes the bear gets you."
-Commander Riker, USS Enterprise

Posted by Jeff Raven (Member # 20) on :

Its so much easier to criticize other governments when one doesn't have to live by them.

I personally support everything in the Bill of Rights. Its worked for more than 200+ years, and we're the number one nation in the world, and as others have stated, its people that kill, not guns. We made a provision that everyone had the right to own a gun, whether it be for hunting or protection, and mistake or not, we live with it.

Outlaw guns, and then only outlaws will have them.

------------------
Jeff Raven - Having more fun than any human being should be allowed to have

Posted by Chimaera on :

Some reading courtesy of CNN, pertaining to the tragedy in Colorado:

quote:
In Hong Kong and New Delhi, the rampage that left at least 13 people dead was the top world news story. It was front-page news in major Japanese and Taiwanese newspapers for their evening editions.
South Korean TV stations carried it as urgent news. "The worst school shooting accident; The American continent jolted!" said an inside-page headline of the mass circulation Chosun Ilbo newspaper. Other papers carried analytical pieces blaming the tragedy on widespread gun ownership in the United States. In South Korea, gun possession is illegal.
"How sick is the gun society of America?" asked an article in the Yomiuri daily in Japan under the headline "Atrocity in an American high school."
"If we don't watch out, the same tragedy could happen in Japan," said education expert Itaru Arizono. "The No. 1 problem is that guns are so easy to get in the United States, even by youngsters."

It seems that the US is quickly becoming an example of what NOT to do with regards to gun policy. And people wonder why Americans are stereotyped as a violent, trigger happy society. The reason is that there's a grain of truth in the stereotype.

------------------
"Sometimes you get the bear, and sometimes the bear gets you."
-Commander Riker, USS Enterprise

Posted by Aethelwer (Member # 36) on :

(Guns don't kill people. People kill guns.)

------------------
http://frankg.dgne.com/
Quintesson: "You are the Autobot named Kup. You are Cybertron's chief of security."
Kup: "Nah, my name's Teaspoon, and I'm Cybertron's chief dishwasher."

Posted by The Excalibur (Member # 34) on :

Guns are not the problem here. The thing is that parents don't talk to their kids. I can not imagine something like this happening a few years ago, and I came from a racialy balanced school. From what I've seen in the paper, the kids were after blacks and athletes. I don't think there is an answer to racisum. That comes mostly from the way you were raised. I was lucky, I didn't pick up my fathers hatered of non whites, but a lot of kids do.
In school, I was a member of the non conforming low life outcast wannabe's. Smoked, Drank, took drugs. Even some of my more radical friends never came up with anything liked what happened yesterday, and we had guns or accses to guns. There were fights, but not that many. This kind of thing I just don't understand. Banning guns now would just mean 500million unregistered guns.

------------------
Down for Upgrade

Posted by Brigman on :

You know, I don't know what to think here. I tend to think that the guns themselves are not the problem, that it is the way people are using them. However I must agree that the easy access kids have to guns now eliminates the "cool-down" step that could occur in a heated moment. Of course, this latest incident was NOT a heated moment, it was pre-meditated.

I remember, way back in the dark ages, when I was in high school, I wasn't part of the "in" crowd and sometimes got pelted with trash walking down the dreaded "main hall of doom" where all the football players hung out. My solution was to enroll in martial arts classes, which gave me a new confidence in addition to the ability to defend myself. And yet I never had to use those skills, nor did I "go after" the people who had bothered me before. The enhanced confidence was enough that people did not mess with me.

Nowadays, when faced with a similar situation it appears our children's answer is to bring "a gat" to school and "put caps in 'em".

So what changed? There's got to be an underlying social issue here. The right to bear arms, or arm bears (Baloo), has been around a long time and it is only in the last ten years or less that this sort of occurance has become widespread. You did not hear about this sort of thing in the 1980's, much less in the 1960's or 50's.

------------------
Peace!
Brigs

Posted by Montgomery (Member # 23) on :

Tahna Los:

quote:
Bottom line: you can't massacre people with a knife.

"A thousand throats may be cut in one night, by a running man"

(Don't mean to get all morbid, but...)

------------------
"I AM THE SPIDER!!!!"
- Vic Reeves

Posted by Brigman on :

On a related subject, my wife and I are expecting our first child in July. We've just moved into a new house. My father asked me the other week, "Do you have a gun for the house? Do you want one?"

In the neighborhood where I live, it is not especially dangerous, and yet a few nights ago when I heard a noise in the house in the middle of the night, and tiptoed out into the dark hallway, the escrima stick I had in my hand felt awfully inadequate. I am no expert but I certainly know how to hurt somebody with it. But if the suspected intruder had a gun?

Turns out one of our rabbits had gotten loose from the cage and was happily munching on one of our still-unpacked boxes.

I had told my father "no" about wanting a gun for the house. My wife and I both feel that guns are bad. I certainly don't want my daughter finding it on some hypothetical day I'm not home and having a tragedy occur.

But still, that night, before I found Dapple munching away, I regretted my decision. It's a tough issue.

------------------
Peace!
Brigs

[This message was edited by Brigman on April 21, 1999.]

Posted by Elim Garak (Member # 14) on :

I would have to say that it's a really good idea, but it cannot happen over night.

It could reduce crimes like this, perhaps, and it's a lifestyle change, but people can live without carrying guns around.

(Just a side note: The U.S. is the number one country... I hope you don't mean in low crime rates!)

------------------
"Audaces fortuna juvat."
"Fortune favours the bold."

Posted by Simon on :

Well one of the only things the US really is first in is military power, which may explain why Americans are so afraid of losing their weapons.

Posted by Jeff Raven (Member # 20) on :

That's another thing!!!

The Unites States is far far diverse than any other nation in the world.

That's why countries like Japan and Korea can critize us, because they're populations are basically of all the same origins. Japan is far crowded than the US, but the people generally come from the same origins, so they don't have the problems we do.

The United States is made up of many many different nationalities. What you call yourself is how you associate yourself with groups. We have so many groups in the same place, and we still all have that fear of 'the other' or 'the different'. As the most diverse nation, there's a lot of fear here, and we're going to have problems.

And like I said, Chimaera, is it so much easier to criticize a nation you do not live in. Those people you quoted cannot be considered experts unless they have lived here and understand what its like, which I seriously doubt they have.

And, in this case, I highly doubt the guns would have mattered. They had explosives as well. If they couldn't kill with guns, they would have done it with more explosives, which, I might add, anyone could get the information to build from the internet. There are many recipes in the 'Anarchist's Cookbook'(which I might add I have only been able to find on Asian sites, interestingly enough).

I look forward to a day where people can look past skin color, 'race', and see people for what they really are; Human beings. Maybe, just maybe people will forget such trivialities, and then we wouldn't need such things as guns.
This is why I like Trek so much. They've gotten past this, and shows us a world united for one cause, and not the petty bickering and fighting and killing we see today.

*phew*

------------------
Jeff Raven - Having more fun than any human being should be allowed to have

[This message was edited by Jeff Raven on April 21, 1999.]

Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :

<RWspeak>Bah!</RWspeak>

Jeff: While ethnic crime gets a lot of coverage in the media, it makes up only a small portion of the shootings that happen. If the US were ethnically pure there would still be whackos, be they kids or adults, wanting to kill people.

First of all, I'm sick to death of this Yankee "Gun's don't kill people, people do" bullshit. You frickin' need both to pull off shit like what happened in Colorado! We have two options: Fix the guns or fix the people.

As Jubes said, fixing the people is the best solution. But it is damn hard. Many Westerners have become apathetic when it comes to issues like family violence and loony, desensitised kids. The NRA, an organization still livng in the 1760s, rants on about gun education. It's a load of shit. You can educate people so that they'll never point a gun at a human when all the marbles are in there and in place. But all the educating in the world won't stop on poor deranged bastard with the marbles slipped out of their spots from taking the gun that is found in more than half of American homes and going out shooting people, laughing all the time.

The other way is to fix the guns. Get rid of them. Regulate them. There is no way in hell those two kids could have killed 15 people without guns. In the same way those involved in the Cold War eventually realised that Nuclear weapons were so powerful they should be banned, we as a race have now developed guns that are far too dangerous because now it is easier than ever to walk in and kill people quickly, easily and from a great distance. Forget rocks and sticks and swords and battle axes and muskets. We're reached a technological threshhold. A teenager can now kill dozens without getting a scratch on them.

Gun ownership is a vicious circle. The more people who buy guns to defend themselves from robbery and hooligans, the more people who wake up one morning and decide to go postal we get. And is keeping a gun to kill a criminal really, really justified. If an unarmed thief threw a rock in your window, climbed in and started taking your stereo system, would they deserve to get shot on sight by the homeowner? The American legal system does not recognise that as murder. But it is, nonetheless. What if it's a family member you don't recognise in the dark and blow them away? That has happened on more than one occasion in the US. Most would-be criminals are normal American people who'd have bought a gun for "self-defence" once and are given the confidence for walking into that 7-11 and taking that money because of the gun. "Guns for self-defence" ultimately get used to kill people, be they innocent, guilty of a serious crime or a minor one. Killing people is wrong. Anyone disagree here?

Then the hunting argument. Oh please. Automatic handguns to cut down a deer? Even up here in peacful little Canada there was a grassroots opposition to the C-47 (?) gun-control bill that required every firearm in the country to be registered because it was unfair the government control who can own a hunting rifle and who can't. Puh-leeeze... Pay the friggin' $50 and go kill some goddamn grouse.

The bullshitters at the NRA also keep on using this goddamn second amendment to keep guns in the hands of all people, be they sane or insane. For the final time, The Constitution is preventing the Government from taking away the muskets of the citizens so they would be unchallenged by the people in case of an insurrection. Times, attitudes, and technology have changed. It has to go.

quote:
...it won't be done because the American government isn't interested in doing sensible things a lot of the time, only popular things.

Well put. Reminds me of that Eamon de Valera quote I've misplaced about the majority not having the right to govern wrong.

And yeah, bombs are illegal but accessible because they are easy to make. Anyone on the forums want to volunteer to build an effective handgun out of hardware store components? And how many of these Denver-style massacres have been done with bombs as opposed to guns? Huh?

Jeff:

quote:
Outlaw guns, and then only outlaws will have them.

Outlaws are people too. Outlaw guns and the majority of shooting deaths would disappear.

Jeff:

quote:
I personally support everything in the Bill of Rights. Its worked for more than 200+ years, and we're the number one nation in the world

Bullshit. The US is not the number one nation in the world. Such crime rates should immediately disqualify any country, and even crime aside, the US has a dreadful healthcare system, enormous numbers of homeless, and a plague of ethnic violence. Canada (and I'm guessing Australia and Britain as well) have one quarter the crime per capita of the states. The rest of Europe is even lower. As for the Bill of Rights... you think it's still working? It looks like the right s of 13 innocent people were severely overlooked in Denver. While many of the things in the Bill of Rights still hold water today, gun control is not one of them. The framers had no idea that 200 years later we'd have such terrible weapons and misguided people that such a thing like this could happen, and happen regularly.

So yeah. Screw the second amendment. The problems with gun ownership by everyone far outweigh the benefits.

------------------
"......"
��-The Breen at Internment Camp 371

Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :

Er, the UK is a pretty ethnically diverse country as well. And if you compare the number of deaths a year by shootings in the US and UK, the results are pretty clear.

Also, about 'guns don't kill poeple, people kill people'. True, but without guns, they'd find it a lot harder.

'Outlawing guns means that just the outlaws would have them' This argument does not hold. FOllowing this logic, EVERYTHING should be legal so that ordinary citizens as well as criminals can have it. You ban guns, outlaws may still have them, but it'll be a damn site harder for two high-school students to get hold of them.

And Jeff, it may be easy to criticise a government that you don't live in. The same holds true for you. Have you lived in the UK, Australia, France? You say that we cannot make a fair judgement because we don't live there. You don't live here. You' don't know what its like to live in a country where you can walk down the street, and realise that even in relatively dangerous areas, you may get mugged, but you are unlikely to get shot.

And about the bombs. Bombs have to be made. They have to be planted. They have to have people nearby when they go off. They are directionless. They cannot be thrown without extremem risk. They are hard to make in any quantitity. You have to know how to make them. With a gun, anyone can kill anyone else, by accident, on purpose, at any time, with hardly any effort.

We do need to change things. We need to find out the causes of violence. Until then though, reducing the number of guns in the hands of civilians seems like a good step in the right direction.

Posted by bryce (Member # 42) on :

Bottom line: Even if the US government wanted to put tighter restrictions on guns it can't. In the type of government we have the gov't can't always do what it wants; it has to do what the ppl with the most influence wants.

------------------
Anyone remember how they felt the day after Rich Mullins died?

Posted by Jeff Raven (Member # 20) on :

http://www.nraila.org/research/rihbffs.html

And I will take the time to say I will rest a few days from this subject, as it has been a very sad week indeed.

------------------
Jeff Raven - Having more fun than any human being should be allowed to have

Posted by Baloo (Member # 5) on :

Guns aren't the problem.

This could not have happened without warning signs of some sort. Obvious ones.

The problem is people who are showing signs that they may be about to do something drastic, but everyone ignores it because it's "not my problem".

The problem is parents who don't know their kids well enough to see that they need help, or (more to their shame) see it, but don't act because "what will the neighbors think?"

When it becomes not only acceptable, but expected that each of us comes to the aid of others in distress, then this sort of thing will cease to happen. It will not happen even if there are piles of guns in every living room. The cause of deaths like these does not rest in a holster or gun cabinet. The evil that was done did not come from a holster. It came from the hearts of the men who performed these acts.

Until we are prepared to address the root of the problem, this sort of incident will continue to happen.

--Baloo

Posted by Ryan McReynolds (Member # 28) on :

Re: American government not doing sensible things, only popular things... isn't that the point of government by and for the people? If the government just made decisions on their own, no matter how sensible, it would be a far greater crime. The government's purpose is to do what the majority of people want, and if the majority of people want guns, then you can't blame the government, blame the voters.

------------------
-=Ryan McReynolds=-

Posted by Simon on :

The American people are as much to blame as the constitution. It is impossible to solve the problems of violence in the US without stricter controls on American society. It is possible to live in an Orwellian world with no Freedom and No Crime. It is also possible to live in total anarchy where there is unlimited freedom and unlimited crime. The US needs to decide where it wants to be on this scale, as most other developed nations have already.

Posted by First of Two (Member # 16) on :

The Second Amendment was created for a multifold purpose:
1: To keep the citizenry capable, since there was no standing army, to defend the nation against foreign agression.
2: Since the recent Revolution was fought against a oppressive government, who controlled the Army, the Framers understood the need for private citizens to be able to defend against (or rise up and overthrow, if necessary,) an oppressive government, should one arise in the new nation. Would-be oppressive types know that, too. why do you think Germany outlawed private ownership of guns after the National Socialists rose to power?
3: To provide personal protection against attacks by "savages" (yes, I know the Native Americans were justifiably angry), criminals, and other undesirables (remember, more than one colony in the US was started by folks the UK wanted to get rid of). These type of people still exist today.

I repeat, laws are totally ineffective against those determined to break them, and unafraid of punishment. Consider how many laws and rules were violated in the recent incident BEFORE anybody even started shooting. Up to and including everything from the manufacture of explosives to the carrying of weapons onto school property. Laws only work when they're obeyed.

Yes, it's true, neither laws nor education will stop a deranged person. But really, they should've been locked up before that. People don't just suddenly "become" deranged.

As for guns in the home... well, if you're a collector, there's always a safe. It's what my dad keeps most of his in. If you want one for quick defense, it's a bit harder, but there are trigger locks and lockable drawers (and you could always take the clip out and stash it separately), and now they're coming out with "smartguns" that require the proper computer chip to fire (worn on a ring).

Access to firearms does not make one a killer. from where I'm sitting, I could have my hands on a loaded gun in less than a minute. But the only warm-blooded creature I've ever shot was a rabid groundhog. (I shoot carpenter bees with a .22 rifle, but they don't count.)

The_Tom said that fixing the people was the better solution, but it's very hard, and therefore we should get rid of the guns.
*giggle* I've never heard a statement more typical of the very problem the US faces.. the desire to go with the quick fix and the easy solution.

>And is keeping a gun to kill a criminal really, really justified.

Yes.

>If an unarmed thief threw a rock in your window, climbed in and started taking your stereo system, would they deserve to get shot on sight by the homeowner?

Absolutely. People who don't respect other people's property will steal anything that is not nailed down. I worked very hard to earn my possessions, and unless you can show me some clear and pressing NEED they have for them, thay can't have them. Besides, living will just encourage them.

>The American legal system does not recognise that as murder. But it is, nonetheless.

No, it's vermin disposal. Not only should it be legal, it should be rewarded. I say that should a citizen slay a criminal, and the courts rule it justified, the state should pay that citizen's legal costs, plus a bounty. Something like 1/10 the cost it would have taken to keep the same person incarcerated for the full length of their sentence, plus a rough estimation of the amount they would have stolen during their criminal career, had they continued.

>What if it's a family member you don't recognise in the dark and blow them away? That has happened on more than one occasion in the US.

So have drunk driving accidents. Yet we continue to allow people to privately own cars. Your point? Accidents like these do NOT happen if you follow basic safety rules (so basic, I can remember them 5 seconds after being roused from a sound sleep at 3 AM). So can my father, or I'd be in a lot worse shape than I am now. If we can do it, so can everyone else.

Emotions always run high after an incident like what happened Tuesday. Very few people ever ask what might have happened if some of the potential VICTIMS had been armed, too.

------------------
*I only SEEM Normal*

Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :

*Reads the posts, shakes his head and says absolutly nothing. Stalks out.*

------------------
To make an apple pie from scratch, we must first invent the universe.

~Carl Sagan

Posted by Jubilee (Member # 99) on :

You can take the guns away, but you can't take away a persons inent to kill someone. Now, granted, taking guns away will make this task harder. But in the end, if the person wants it bad enough, it won't matter WHAT's at hand. I've seen PLAYING CARDS used as murder weapons. Don't think it can't be done.

It is not the weapons, but the hands USING them that have the problem.

And as for these people, there are many reasons why they may think this is right ... or may decide to do it even though they know it is wrong. It may have to do with the way it grew up. It may have to do with the society they live in, or thier parents. Maybe they weren't given enough attention growing up, and never learned about right and wrong .... maybe they were given too much attention and that festered inside them. I don't know. It is entirely possible that they thought what they were doing is right. Brainwashing occurs on many levels.
[Note:I am NOT condoning what happend. I am merely stating there are many things involved]

We don't know what drove those students to do what they did. They've shot themselves, so now we'll NEVER know. But the point is, i'm sure they had a reason. And whatever reason they might have given, could probably be traced back to the way they were brought up.

If we're going to take away the guns because they can be used as a weapon of destruction, we might as well take away knives, forks, spoons, pencils (there ARE 37 ways to kill people with pencils), medicines, medical supplies, rope, coat hangers, heavy objects, airplanes, cars, etc. ... see where i'm going with this?

It is not the things on this earth, but how one intends to use them, that is the problem.

------------------
"Telling the truth was his death sentence" - Maria Theresa Tula

Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :

Jubes: But often the ownership of a gun is what fosters the intent. And as most of us have agreed, guns are damn good at killing people; that is, after all, what they're designed to do. The playing-card argument isn't the greatest.

First of Two: I'm really really disgusted. It's OK to kill a petty thief without judge or jury? IMHO even with judge and jury it's wrong, but that's not what this thread is for. And bounties? That's the sort of sick argument that keeps guns accesible to people who are gonna kill others. Crooks may be troubled people, but they're not vermin.

Taking away guns is not the quick option out of two. It is the only possible option out of two. If you think you can get prevent any beserk people from using the guns they own, then you're NUTS. N-U-T-S. That said, if you could outline a way to do this, then I'd be glad to let the second amendment sit there.

------------------
"......"
��-The Breen at Internment Camp 371

Posted by Mycon on :

From the European point of view, the ways the U.S. handle their crime promblem is completely absurd.
It's a mistake to believe that crime can be prevented by allowing everyone to take a deadly weapon with him. A gun is first of all an instrument designed to hurt or kill someone. The simple presence of big numbers of guns raises criminality. When little childred are used to see or even handle guns from an early age on, they lose all respect. I think guns should better be stigmatized.

I know that not every American is a gun-lover and NRA member (uh, I think it's called like this), but it's funny and sometimes worrying for an European to see how large parts of the U.S. society is irrationaly fascinated by deadly pieces of steel, praising the right for self-defense, but only satisfying the childish and irrational love for arms.
Enough provocation for now.

------------------
Mycon

Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :

The argument that guns are safe if you follow an easy to remember set of rules:
Yeah, that works. I'm sure that if these kids had read the rules, I'm sure they wouldn't have shot anyone.
Likewise, I'm sure a 9 year old who finds his fathers gun knows all the rules.

Sure, youcan kill someone with a knife. It's a lot harder though. If those two kids had burst into the school armed with just knives, I'm sure they would have done a lot less damamge.

First: 'Laws are totally ineffective against those determined to break them'? By that logic, ALL laws are useless, as people would just do whatever they wanted anyway. If the law is enforced, properly, with strong punishments, then hopefully people will obey it.

Jeff's link a few posts up to the NRA site listing attempts to ban handguns and why it hasn't worked. It also shows how guns were banned in the UK, ina very confusing statement. It seems to be saying that guns were kept out of the masses hands and given to the king and his supporters, so that we could not revolt. Strange. When we don't like our government, we vote for another one. The masses don't take up arms and rise up, killing all who oppose us. This isn't France in the Revolution.

Montgommery said it best. Most people are idiots. Do you want idiots to be able to kill someone?

------------------
'Those are the headlines. Happy now?'
-Chris Morris.

[This message was edited by PsyLiam on April 22, 1999.]

Posted by Jeff Raven (Member # 20) on :

The point I and other have been trying to say is that if it wasn't guns, it would have been something else!!

Psychos are very smart these days, they can be creative. Take away guns, they'll find other means.

------------------
Jeff Raven - Having more fun than any human being should be allowed to have

Posted by Sol System (Member # 30) on :

I'd just like to point out that France during the Renaissance was a rather tranquil place, as long as you went to the right church.

Several centuries later, during the French Revolution, things got a bit uglier, yes.

------------------
"I'm sick, like Nixon was sick, my defeated heart keeps beating on. I won't die, like Chucky won't die."
--
They Might Be Giants

Posted by Antagonist (Member # 76) on :

Well first, gund do kill people, and people do kill people. Guns were made in the first place to kill, and the gatling gun, invented by Dr. Gatling was truly the first automatic weapon. He thought he'd be saving lives, HA!

Anyways, me and my art teacher had a very interesting debate in the classroom today. Since the news of the shooting, the teachers have been informed to give us lectures on what to do in case of a lock-down (unfortunately, the classes today are an hour and 15 minutes, so we had to sit through three times that long).

He said that when you travel to places like Australia (he was an exchange teacher there), people often view our nation as terribley violent (due to movies they see, which are extremly over exagerated, I swear), and the inhabitants gun-happy. This is true, we feel the need to isolate ourselves and arm ourselves with guns. people are much more friendluer there, he says, anyways.

The amendment explaining our rights to bear arms was created when the 13 states had no army, and they figures that the colonists, which were mostly farmers, had enough guns of their own, and they would defend it like a fiercely territorial dog. Though this amendment now has more meaning than that, it gives us the right to carry weapons should we see the need to revolt against a armed government that threatens our free-will and well-being.

Nowadays, there are automatic weapons everywhere, though illegal, people carry them. They claim-swear up and down-that they only would use it for hunting. But why the hell do you want a automatic weapon for HUNTING?! I thought the whole idea of hunting was to create a challenge! Don't you think that trying to kill a animal with one bullet is hard? Now think about having a automatic pistol, it would mean that your aim would be alot less acurate (because you wouldn't need to care about hitting the right area of the brain the first time).

I still think that when somebody owns a gun, every resident in that house should go through some type of hunters education. Doesn't it only make sense?

And a little bit of a gripe...
A friend of mine happens to wear a black trenchcoat. Oooh, big deal, he works in places were he'd need it. It just so happens he was wearing it WAY before this whole incident occured. Guess what? After news hit my school of the shootings a little nerd told the principal that the coat made him feel uncomfortable. Either that or the principal was afraid. Either way, it is bullshit. This friend of mine happens to have gone through SEVERAL hunters saftey classes, and is very sane. He doesn't view the world as a target range and has no need to. *sigh* I guess people are just idiots, huh?

------------------
"You can burn a man's house & possesions, you can kill his friends, his family, but the most dangerous man is one that has nothing left to lose."

Posted by Trinculo on :

On "World's Wildest Police Videos", a video was shown from Thailand. A mentally unhealthy man was brandishing a stick, threatening his neighbors. The police were called. They surrounded the man, attempted to calm him down, and even tried to restrain him. When this failed, a police office with bow and "arrow"-a projectile filled with sedative-was called in. He aimed and shot the suspect. After a few minutes, the suspect was groggy and was captured by the police.
In America, a women is experiencing spasms in her car. The police arrive. They attempt to help her. She appears to be grabbing for something in the car. The police open fire-22 bullets in her. She had no gun in the car, she was reaching for her wallet.

Posted by Antagonist (Member # 76) on :

Do you live in the U.S.? It is sometimes hard to understand the mentality of people who live in a country different from yours.

But still, I admit that the U.S. police are fuc'ed up. They are more quick to pull their gun than wait to see what happens. If that story about the lady in the car is true, then maybe the Unites States does need to crack down on gun MORE, and take some initiative to it.

Did you know that there's a fifteen day waitng period on handguns...but not rifles? And did you also know that automatics weapons can be sold to people legally (depending in the state) if it is in their"private collections"? yeah, we know how private those collections are.

------------------
"You can burn a man's house & possesions, you can kill his friends, his family, but the most dangerous man is one that has nothing left to lose."

Posted by Trinculo on :

I am an American.
And the story is true. There is another story I know and this is true-an immigrant from Africa was coming home, the police were waiting (they believed he may have information about a crime), he arrived at his door, something happen-a noise, a motion by the man, a minute later, the man had 44 bullets in him.
In this country, we have a very simple policy-shoot first then get answers. We were one of the first countries to practice ethnic cleansing-the native americans. 1492-100% native americans; 1890-10% native americans. we destroyed the culture, history, myths, etc of a people we didn't understand, were on valuable land, and in the way. based on population and the percentage mentioned above, the european settlers may have killed about 3 to 4 million people. this ranks our country second to hitler's germany in the mass number of people that were killed by genocide.

Posted by Jeff Raven (Member # 20) on :

Trinculo- May I note, that it was the Spanish Conquistadores that did much of the Native American killing in the beginning? And it was mostly disease that killed them off, something we couldn't help, actually.

The police in America are NOT all f***ed up, nor are most of them. There are millions of cities out in the US, and the only cases you here about police brutality are the ones that are most controversial. The media will only report controversy. You think this Colorado incident is bad? You should see what goes on in innercity schools. This is nothing. Everyday, some student dies in an innercity school as the result of a shootout, knife fight, etc. but you don't hear about it, because it isn't controversial. It happens everyday, so that's not interesting. It goes unheard.

PS. I do not take responsibility for what my 'ancestors' did way back when. I don't believe in collective guilt. Just because I'm white, does not mean I took part in the killing off of others that took place so long ago, nor I do feel bad if some nation gets bombed because of their misdeeds.

------------------
Jeff Raven - Having more fun than any human being should be allowed to have

Posted by The Excalibur (Member # 34) on :

Not that this has anything to do with this debate, but, I see in the paper today that the two kids had rigged a propane bomb in the kitchen of the school, meant to burn down the building.

------------------
Down for Upgrade

Posted by Blondie on :

I think that in the wake of such a tradegy we must find a solution. In my mind the first thing that we need to do is to open the doors of communication. The extremesits on both sides are only willing to hear their own side and not others. Instead of putting a taboo on the subject we need to get things out in the open and talk about them and listen to both sides.

I personally wouldn't mind if guns were banned, but I do not think that this will solve the problem. The problem lies in the people too. We must first and foremost treat each other with respect and love. Show that we are all in the same boat---life (a lifeboat I guess *grins*) and help each other through our endevors by valuing every person...differences or not. Imagine a world where there was no diversity...can you see how incredibly dull and pointless it would be? In our diversity lies our strength, it really does.

Another thing I have to say is that perhaps instead of a complete repeal of the 2nd Amendment it needs to be clarified...I'd like to point out that it says, "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." The Founding Father may very well have meant arms are necessary only for militia purposes... But who knows...

I think the only solution is to start at home...love each other more and be more concerned in the lives of children...they want attention more than anything...and we can give them that tiny thing. I also believe we need to talk about the 2nd Amend, so yeah Charles for starting this... Only after talking and being informed of both sides can we compromise and save us these terrible problems...

------------------
"I think my eyes are getting better. Instead of a big dark blur, I see a big light blur."
*laughs*

Posted by Trinculo on :

Jeff Raven:
Different patterns of settling
1. Spaniards-Slave labor
Assimilation of indians into spanish culture
Inter-marriage
Stayed largely in Latin America
2. French-Partners
Inter-marriage
Stayed in Canada
3. English (then American)-Extermination
Inter-marriage outlawed
"The only good Indian is a dead Indian"
All of America between Canada and Mexico
The crime of the past should not be forgotten. Nor can atonement be made.

As for the police incidents, one is too many. Every year, there are reports of police shootings that are out of hand.
Our country is violent. Never forget that. And never downplay or minimize the actions of a few rogue officers. This is a serious issue.

Posted by Jeff Raven (Member # 20) on :

The entire friggin human race is violent! We're aggressive creatures! Yes the US has citizens that kill each other, but so does every other nation! Oh, but we have the right to bear arms, you say! We have so many guns that kill people! Think about it. That would make every gun owner, every hunter or such, a potential homicidal maniac. They have a gun, and since GUNS kill people, by that logic it makes them far more likely to kill someone. I say bull***t.

And I didn't say to forget the crimes of the past, I am saying I don't take responsibility for them.

Say your father murders someone and gets away with it. The family of the murdered one comes knocking on your door. Do they have the right to punish you for what your father did? Didn't think so. That is my point.

And disease was the number one killing factor of the Native American population, period. Not this intermarriage or extermination. Yes, the killing off of people is atrocious. Yes, it was a very bad thing to do. Is it MY fault? NO. Period. I do not take responsibility for something someone who might have been related to me so long ago did.

------------------
Jeff Raven - Having more fun than any human being should be allowed to have

Posted by Coddman (Member # 10) on :

Oh come on, you people.
A mere 15+ lives were lost in this school shooting. That amount of people die, what, every day Elsewhere due to other causes? What attention do we give those deaths? And what about the situation in Kosovo? Yes, the situation CNN and all the other news sources have practically stopped providing coverage on. 15 deaths occur there daily! But the American public has all but forgotten about it; it was "Last Month's Flavour of the Month". Well, I hope I haven't offended anyone here.

��Cody��

Posted by Jay the Obscure (Member # 19) on :

Yeah, a cavalier attitude like that is just the way to end the culture of violence in the US.
Damn, people die all the time. Oh well, 15 people were just blown away just down the street from me.
Time to move on and increase my personal weapons cache.

Offened, no. Saddened, yes.

------------------
To make an apple pie from scratch, we must first invent the universe.

~Carl Sagan

Posted by Jeff Raven (Member # 20) on :

I take part of that back. Disease did most of the killing right up until the 1700s...Then delibrate killing started to occur after that.

------------------
Jeff Raven - Having more fun than any human being should be allowed to have

Posted by Trinculo on :

Jeff Raven:
I believe you have missed my point about the native americans. The native americans were among the first to experience ethnic cleansing. Ethnic cleansing is not done in intermarriage or assimilation. Both carry some aspect of the culture forward. Witness the Catholic rituals in Mexico-a little native american, a little Spanish.
We are one of the most violent countries in the world. To cite an example-5 of the 10 most dangerous cites in the world are in the US (a report published last year).

Not every person is violent. My mother is not violent, Mother Teresa was not violent. Either you are aware that you are violent or you are not aware.

As for the war in Kosovo, the war is lost. The leaders couldn't agree on a single policy-Clausewitz strategy, Powell strategy (after General Colin Powell-ex. Gulf War), parallel war. I don't blame Pres. Clinton, though I do believe he has hurt Vice Pre. Gore.

However, I will say this about my country. I am happy that we have moved past the days when blacks were rounded up, burned alive, and the white spectators took the charred skin home as a souvenor. Compared to this, the Colorada shootings are a minor act of violence.

Posted by Blondie on :

Yes, naturally there are guns and murders in other countries, but we cannot deny that America has a serious problem...in Europe where there are stricter gun laws there are less killings...in a few years back America had 10,000 deaths from handguns, and seeing as how France is about one fifth the size they should have about 2,000, then, but they only had 10 deaths from handguns. But, handguns aren't the only problem, certainly. I still believe that the problem lies in the fact that America doesn't have the community cohesion that other nations like in Europe have and people are more isolated and perhaps aren't raised as much to care about the lives of those within their community...that's where we should reform.

------------------
"I think my eyes are getting better. Instead of a big dark blur, I see a big light blur."
*laughs*

Posted by Jeff Raven (Member # 20) on :

Oh my my my my.....I'm glad this is the flame board.

First of all, ethnic cleansing has been going on since the dawn of civilization. Read Genesis 34. Complete and utter destruction of a tribe. does that not count as genecide?

Second, People, as a society, are violent. I did not say individuals. Any socialogist will tell you that people act quite differently in groups than by themselves.

Third, the atrocities of Europeans vs. Native Americans are no worse than the Germans vs. the Jews, or even Stalin vs. his own people. I think I've proved my point.

------------------
Jeff Raven - Having more fun than any human being should be allowed to have

Posted by Jeff Raven (Member # 20) on :

Blondie: Good point. US does lack community cohesion, which was one of my earlier points. We're so diverse, we can barely stick together without falling apart.

------------------
Jeff Raven - Having more fun than any human being should be allowed to have

Posted by The_Tom (Member # 38) on :

*notices this thread has cracked that other glass seiling, the 50 (loooong) posts limit.*

*whistles for the nearest padlock*
Here, boy... Here, boy....

*opens another thread*

------------------
"......"
��-The Breen at Internment Camp 371

Posted by Charles Capps (Member # 9) on :

*closes*

------------------
"Okay, so I'm not "SANE" so to speak, but uh... I'm the lovable kind of psycho"
http://solareclipse.net/