ColchesterFC
Journeyman Pro
If only all the other teachers had been armed they would've been able to stop the armed teacher. :thup:
Children of America
- Thread starter bobmac
- Start date
If only all the other teachers had been armed they would've been able to stop the armed teacher. :thup:
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
Exactly. Try not to in future.See what happens when you bring Religion into discussions?:ears::thup:
MegaSteve
Tour Winner
Well, here's hoping he doesn't have another change of mind...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43235969
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-43235969
user2010
Challenge Tour Pro
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
I think it is important to see how Trump has spun pandering to his support in the evangelical Christian right into his response speeches. There should be support in that constituency for gun control measures - measures that will upset his NRA constituency. However I suspect that there is a significant overlap between these two constituencies, and this is where knowing what is right comes in - especially for the reasons I have mentioned, but will not repeat, in respect of the former - as that constituency listens to what the children are saying. Which is what this thread is about.
SwingsitlikeHogan
Major Champion
I agree :thup:
Ye Olde Boomer
Well-known member
I am a rarity among American progressive liberals in that I strongly support the Second Amendment to our Constitution which guarantees the right of private ownership of firearms.
You Brits strongly disagree with me. Fair enough. It's not that you don't make strong arguments.
But as I explained, the problem can't be addressed by mere statute. Whether for better or worse, it still requires striking down the 2nd Amendment.
And amending the Constitution for any reason is completely impossible in polarized America.
It would like be easier to overthrow the United states government altogether than to amend the US Constitution.
Overthrowing the US government would be the same as ending the Soviet Union...a replacement nation within the same borders would not result.
Partition would result.
And what are now the "red states" would still have private ownership of firearms. You can be certain of that.
The only way anybody is going to take away privately owned firearms in America is to invade us from outside.
When they do that, they'll find that both our military AND our civilians are well-armed, the latter perhaps better than the former where is comes to small arms.
So good luck with that.
You Brits strongly disagree with me. Fair enough. It's not that you don't make strong arguments.
But as I explained, the problem can't be addressed by mere statute. Whether for better or worse, it still requires striking down the 2nd Amendment.
And amending the Constitution for any reason is completely impossible in polarized America.
It would like be easier to overthrow the United states government altogether than to amend the US Constitution.
Overthrowing the US government would be the same as ending the Soviet Union...a replacement nation within the same borders would not result.
Partition would result.
And what are now the "red states" would still have private ownership of firearms. You can be certain of that.
The only way anybody is going to take away privately owned firearms in America is to invade us from outside.
When they do that, they'll find that both our military AND our civilians are well-armed, the latter perhaps better than the former where is comes to small arms.
So good luck with that.
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
https://edition.cnn.com/2018/05/21/us/school-shooting-us-versus-world-trnd/index.html
Yep -that “right to bear arms” must be worth it when you consider the level of school shootings within the US. Whilst it continues to be easy to own a weapon innocent children will continue to be killed.
Fade and Die
Medal Winner
So because its hard its not worth doing? I thought you yanks were made of tougher stuff than that?
30.000 Killed by guns in the US last year. Its a disgrace that you are so easy with that. (not just you personally, all the pro gun types.)
Ye Olde Boomer
Well-known member
I hate the violence as much as anybody.
And I differ greatly from most pro-gun types in a couple of ways.
I'm liberal in my other views.
And I favor the abolition of assault weapon private ownership which would not contradict our 2nd Amendment.
But I believe in civil liberties as well. Private ownership of sporting and self-defense arms--not military arms--is an important civil liberty.
We won't give it up as easily as you did.
I don't think America would accept a blanket ban. To go from A to Z without small steps is just too radical. Here's a few off the cuff thoughts. Stop the sale of assault type rifles. Limit magazine capacity. Reduce calibre and ft/lb power. Restrict the carrying of guns, e.g. no more than 2 unless you've cleared it with the local police dept. And it doesn't have to be implemented all in one go.
There's probably a good number of interim steps that won't see the 2nd amendment removed from the statutes. I'm all for a blanket ban, like in the UK, but its naïve to expect it and its America's choice.
There's probably a good number of interim steps that won't see the 2nd amendment removed from the statutes. I'm all for a blanket ban, like in the UK, but its naïve to expect it and its America's choice.
bobmac
Major Champion
[QUOTE="Ye Olde Boomer, post: 2100059, member: 27266"
Private ownership of sporting and self-defense arms--not military arms--is an important civil liberty.
[/QUOTE]
Why?
Because it said so in 1791?
Private ownership of sporting and self-defense arms--not military arms--is an important civil liberty.
[/QUOTE]
Why?
Because it said so in 1791?
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
it will never change imo - the gun lobbies etc are far too powerful and the gun industry is very lucrative it’s just not going to change
Imo they all hide underneath the “right to bear arms” but we all know it’s nonsense , they want to have guns , they want the power that comes with having a game that can kill. For a country that is supposed to the most forward thinking there is a plenty of if that is backwards beyond belief.
Ye Olde Boomer
Well-known member
Assault weapons and large magazines___agree totally. It only makes sense.
Reduce caliber and ft / lb power? Makes no sense, I'm afraid. Our children are not murdered with large game hunting calibers. You can't conceal a .375 H&H Magnum.
People own more than 2 guns but rarely if ever carry more than two--or even one. If you hunt deer (I wouldn't do it, but it's necessary as they're over populated in America and would starve), shoot skeet and trap, and target shoot at a club pistiol range, well, that's three firearms right there.
But not being able to carry them all on your person makes perfect sense. You're up to no good if you're transporting an arsenal.
Universal background checks for violent felony convictions certainly make sense as well. You didn't mention that one!
Why are you for a general ban, though? It seems Draconian and an assault on civil liberties to me. That's what dictatorships do.
Ye Olde Boomer
Well-known member
I believe that private ownership of certain, appropriate kinds of firearms is an important civil liberty. Rural Americans hunt, for one thing.
But suggesting that America is a forward thinking country is absolutely ridiculous.
The UK has a National Health Service, not America.
What was the last Western nation to abolish slavery? That's right, America.
America is the most socially regressive nation in the developed Western World...and it's not even close.
Where did you ever get the idea that we're a forward thinking nation?
An assault on civil liberties; is it an assault on civil liberties to have speed limits, especially in towns? Is it an assault on civil liberties to have laws about dropping litter or jaywalking? Is it an assault on civil liberties to have laws against riding the metro or the buses without paying a fair? Govts make plenty of laws that no one shouts dictatorship about, so why with this one? Don't get me wrong, I'm ambivalent about the dictatorship thing, just asking you to question it for yourself.
Blanket ban is probably too simplistic; a rifle or hand gun for hunting or target shooting, fine. But why would you need a gun living in NYC? Self-defence? The likelihood is its in a desk drawer or a wardrobe.
Ye Olde Boomer
Well-known member
I wouldn't have any knowledge about why your government thinks that it's OK to prevent you from hunting (even if it's elsewhere in the world), target shooting, or even defending yourself.
Mind you, I have tremendous respect for the United Kingdom, but people don't agree on everything.
To me, though, it is indeed a flagrant assault on your civil liberties. Maybe it's because I've been raised in America.
People in New York City, by the way, have very serious municipal restrictions on hand gun ownership. You have to have a permit, and there's no promise of getting it.
The criminals with guns are just that-criminals--and their possession of their guns is in itself criminal...under current law.
And therein lies the problem that people don't want to discuss.
Guns are inanimate objects. It's the people who are dangerous,
In America, where there is no universal healthcare,
no universal access to education,
no jobs for people displaced from their employment by new technology or the global economy,
where racism, xenophobia, misogyny, homophobia, religious fervor, and all the other human shortcomings are so widespread
that a despicable cretin like Donald Trump can be elected president,
people are going to be scared, angry, and violent.
That--and not our gun laws--is the reason for our widespread violence.
Mind you, I have tremendous respect for the United Kingdom, but people don't agree on everything.
To me, though, it is indeed a flagrant assault on your civil liberties. Maybe it's because I've been raised in America.
People in New York City, by the way, have very serious municipal restrictions on hand gun ownership. You have to have a permit, and there's no promise of getting it.
The criminals with guns are just that-criminals--and their possession of their guns is in itself criminal...under current law.
And therein lies the problem that people don't want to discuss.
Guns are inanimate objects. It's the people who are dangerous,
In America, where there is no universal healthcare,
no universal access to education,
no jobs for people displaced from their employment by new technology or the global economy,
where racism, xenophobia, misogyny, homophobia, religious fervor, and all the other human shortcomings are so widespread
that a despicable cretin like Donald Trump can be elected president,
people are going to be scared, angry, and violent.
That--and not our gun laws--is the reason for our widespread violence.
Bunkermagnet
Journeyman Pro
And everyone wonders why Americans are seen the way they are....
Ye Olde Boomer
Well-known member
I was under the impression that nobody with any cosmopolitan sophistication at all had any doubt why Americans are seen the way they are.
The only caveat is that Americans are not identical. America is not a monolith. The ideological differences between us are HUGE and presently causing great consternation.
Bunkermagnet
Journeyman Pro
And yet you espouse the carrying of firearms, in the 21st Century.
