Another shooting in america

[SWP's back]

Just out of curiosity, roughly what are the gun laws in England at this time?

<a class="postlink" href="http://www.gunrunner.cc/firearms_laws.htm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://www.gunrunner.cc/firearms_laws.htm</a>

Cheers for that

No worries, thought it easier to post a link than summarise.

I used to have a firearms license and had a few shotguns and a .22 bolt action but my dad sold his fish farm so I had no where to play (pest control) and got rid of everything.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

they need a judicial review on the term "the right to bear arms"

the original constitution was written in a day when everyone had to carry weapons

Exactly this.

It is astonishing that a clause in a document that was drafted before the steam locomotive was invented is allowed to stand by some as irrefutable proof in this debate. It is almost too comical for words. As is the fact that the gun lobby stand so steadfastly against amending something that itself is an amendment to the original document. Like it is some immutable law of the universe.

Echo what Gaylord said earlier in this thread. The terror those poor children must have felt is truly heartbreaking.

Bollocks, for the reasons I stated above. The founders were right. The constitution is right. It's just not being followed.

That sounds remarkably similar to other people saying that another ancient text is being misinterpreted.

Isn't the fact that it always seems to be rather the point?

 

[Skashion]

That sounds remarkably similar to other people saying that another ancient text is being misinterpreted.

Isn't the fact that it always seems to be rather the point?

Where did I say it was misinterpreted? I said it isn't being followed. This isn't misinterpretation, it is a deliberate course of action brought on by special interests. They are the impediment. Not some garbage about a document (which was proven correct) being irrelevant because it's outdated. It is supremely relevant because it was absolutely correct. The founders outlined the dangers of a standing army in the Federalist Papers and were completely correct.

I'm not even in agreement with you basic premise, and I've come across this a few times now. We've talked about theories being misinterpreted on a few occasions now. What is your answer? That they not be espoused because idiots exist?

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

That sounds remarkably similar to other people saying that another ancient text is being misinterpreted.

Isn't the fact that it always seems to be rather the point?

Where did I say it was misinterpreted? I said it isn't being followed. This isn't misinterpretation, it is a deliberate course of action brought on by special interests. They are the impediment. Not some garbage about a document (which was proven correct) being irrelevant because it's outdated. It is supremely relevant because it was absolutely correct. The founders outlined the dangers of a standing army in the Federalist Papers and were completely correct.

I'm not even in agreement with you basic premise, and I've come across this a few times now. We've talked about theories being misinterpreted on a few occasions now. What is your answer? That they not be espoused because idiots exist?

The difference between something being misinterpreted and not being followed leads to the same outcome, which renders your point to be an academic one.

My answer is that all theories are shackled by the limitations that human nature and vested interest invariably places upon them. It is called living in the real world. It's not that idiots exist, rather that human beings exist.

 

[Skashion]

The difference between something being misinterpreted and not being followed leads to the same outcome, which renders your point to be an academic one.

My answer is that all theories are shackled by the limitations that human nature and vested interest invariably places upon it. It is called living in the real world. It's not that idiots exist, rather that human beings exist.

Earlier, you were in agreement with the need for a judicial review and implied the constitution needs to be updated because it was written before the steam locomotive. As if the constitution was the problem, when it isn't. Now, you say it's that human beings exist that is the problem. Yes, the fucking gun lobby and the military-industrial complex, oh, and the Supreme Court, which are to blame. Not a document, which was written by great minds, who were right.

This was exactly my point in the first place. It's nothing to do with the constitution and everything to do with a section of America which is either beholden to guns or economically dependent on them, against the wishes and intentions of the founding fathers to opt for a well-regulated militia over a standing army. This was in the constitution and the Federalist Papers.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

The difference between something being misinterpreted and not being followed leads to the same outcome, which renders your point to be an academic one.

My answer is that all theories are shackled by the limitations that human nature and vested interest invariably places upon it. It is called living in the real world. It's not that idiots exist, rather that human beings exist.

Earlier, you were in agreement with the need for a judicial review and implied the constitution needs to be updated because it was written before the steam locomotive. As if the constitution was the problem, when it isn't. Now, you say it's that human beings exist that is the problem. Yes, the fucking gun lobby and the military-industrial complex, oh, and the Supreme Court, which are to blame. Not a document, which was written by great minds, who were right.

This was exactly my point in the first place. It's nothing to do with the constitution and everything to do with a section of America which is either beholden to guns or economically dependent on them, against the wishes and intentions of the founding fathers to opt for a well-regulated militia over a standing army. This was in the constitution and the Federalist Papers.

I was mainly agreeing with he second line of Shady's posts:

the original constitution was written in a day when everyone had to carry weapons

and didn't make that clear so apologies for that. That said, I also agree with the thrust of his first line, although Judicial Review would not be a constitutional way to deliver any such change in the USA.

My point is that the document was written without any conception of the gun lobby and the military-industrial complex. Why would it? The fact is that the second amendment is anachronistic and ill-equipped to deal with the rigours of a complex modern world punctuated with vested commercial interest and sophisticated political lobbying.

It is no good seeing it as a thing of virtue and blaming its shortcomings on the symptoms of the modern world (as you do) without recognising that it needs to adapt to reflect the very real challenges of that modern world, which we witnessed yesterday.

Or put another way:

 

[Skashion]

I was mainly agreeing with he second lines of Shady's posts:

the original constitution was written in a day when everyone had to carry weapons

and didn't make that clear so apologies for that. That said, I also agree with the thrust of his first line, although Judicial Review would not be a constitutional way to deliver any such change the USA.

My point is that the document was written without any conception of the gun lobby and the military-industrial complex. Why would it? The fact is that the second amendment is anachronistic and ill-equipped to deal with the rigours of a complex modern world punctuated with vested commercial interest and sophisticated political lobbying.

It is no good seeing it as a thing of virtue and blaming its shortcomings on the symptoms of the modern world (as you do) without recognising that it needs to adapt to reflect the very real challenges of that modern world, which we witnessed yesterday.

The Supreme Court has twice recently upheld the gun nut version of the constitution.

It was written knowing the full dangers of the problems of a standing army. This is not a matter of opinion but of historical fact. Go and read the Federalist Papers. The military-industrial complex is a result of a huge standing army. It isn't anachronistic in the slightest in that respect. They anticipated it fully, hence why they wanted a militia instead. They didn't anticipate the gun lobby because that was not the constitution they established. They established the right to bear arms in a well-regulated militia. If that was followed i.e. that guns were only available to those in a well-regulated militia, the gun lobby would be far less of an issue.

It's not a shortcoming to be ignored.

 

[leewill31]

we can talk about guns laws all day long but the reality is that if a person turns to such extremes they would find any way possible to achieve what they want to do surly?

how in hell could such a human being go and do what this guy did is beyond human, law or no law would not have stopped such a tragedy in my honest opinion.

 

[bluethrunthru]

when you watch some of the US newschannels it seems to be that the American "solution"n that "experts" ( ex law enforcement / NRA) always put forward its more secure public buildings. And armed cop on the door at EVERY school - razor wire fences etc etc. Gun ownership is far too engrained in the culture for things to ever change - presidents and presidential candidates get shot FFS - sadly this will all blow over in the next week or so.

I read a piece by Jeremy Clarkson a while back ( not the most ardent left winger ) and even he said he couldn't understand a people who won't let you light up a ciggie in a bar but thinks its a perfectly rational thing to aspire to own a fully armed helicopter gunship.

 

[mcmanus]

Just seen on Sky News the assistant librarian from the school explaining what she did when she realised there was a serious problem.

"We did as 'practised', locked the doors, closed the windows and got the children to the designated area and kept the children quiet."

Fuck me schools in the US, have 'nutter with gun' drills like we do for a fire.