Today's shooting in America thread

[idahoblues]

Thanks but no thanks. I don't think you got what it takes. Sorry.

No apologies needed

 

[Constantine]

Good day!

 

[idahoblues]

Indeed

 

[Slipper One]

Yeah, tell that to the NRA and gun-loving patriots to help clean the southern side of the border.

A meaningless statement, but............

I don't wish to tell the 'NRA and gun-loving patriots' anything and I doubt the weapons smugglers would take too much notice of me either.

It's up to the police to stop the smuggling of weapons and as with drugs, it's a fruitless job for them.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

2A is just 27 words, arranged into a massively ambiguous statement that can be read multiple ways. In fact, some state ratified versions of 2A had missing commas or different capitalisation.

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."

It's almost like a line from instruction manual for a washing machine that has been badly translated from Chinese.

Thing is, if individual citizens can’t lawfully possess (for example) surface to air missiles then their right to keep and bear arms is infringed. Given assault rifles weren’t invented by the 18th century then the argument around SAMs not constituting weapons when this legislative provision was devised carries no water, unless assault rifles are prohibited.

Furthermore, anything legal requirement limiting the right to walk around a school brandishing a gun could be said to be such an infringement

As could any cooling off period or background checks.

These are all infringements.

So by any objective measure, the amendment isn’t interpreted literally. A line of infringement is drawn somewhere.

Which (inter alia) shows the whole slavish adherence to this ridiculous constitutional provision to be utterly absurd.

It is actually insane.

 

[gordondaviesmoustache]

Licensing and tracking of firearms and ammunition.
Knowledge and safety education.
Police checks on the people applying for the licence before granting.

Great work, fellah!

 

[aguero93:20]

Thing is, if individual citizens can’t lawfully possess (for example) surface to air missiles then their right to keep and bear arms is infringed. Given assault rifles weren’t invented by the 18th century then the argument around SAMs not constituting weapons when this legislative provision was devised carries no water, unless assault rifles are prohibited.

Furthermore, anything legal requirement limiting the right to walk around a school brandishing a gun could be said to be such an infringement

As could any cooling off period or background checks.

These are all infringements.

So by any objective measure, the amendment isn’t interpreted literally. A line of infringement is drawn somewhere.

Which (inter alia) shows the whole slavish adherence to this ridiculous constitutional provision to be utterly absurd.

It is actually insane.

Nothing wrong with surface to air missiles, great for hunting pigeons.

 

[Slipper One]

Great work, fellah!

I saw you'd commented on a post of mine and immediately thought, "Fuck, I've made a spelling mistake again!!!" :)


As for those points, they work very well here and elsewhere, so that would be a place to start in the US.

 

[Slipper One]

Nothing wrong with surface to air missiles, great for hunting pigeons.

If only they weren't prohibited by Prince Trudeau, I could use them for those bloody crows!!!

I fancy some of those Javelin's against them murderous Coyotes as well, they'd do the job!!

It's all about being effective and efficient.

 

[mrbelfry]

I reiterate the point I made the other day, no civilian should be able to carry a firearm. They should be reserved for the military, police, and any other relevant security forces.

You don't understand America if you think that's ever going to happen. The threat of legislation is often used to power gun purchases. This is why I think Fogs solution of people voluntarily giving them up is the only workable solution but also one that is unrealistic.

The problem we have in the UK is that we approach gun ownership from a hugely different starting point. Our country isn't huge and full of dangerous animals like coyotes and poor people. We also are a lot less individualistic and self reliant and culturally display our masculinity by drinking too much and beating our wives. We also don't have armed government forces - if the TV licence guys were armed we'd feel the need to protect ourselves with something other than legal advice on bluemoon.

The problem won't be solved by using British reasoning but by understanding America where owning a gun is often times considered being a good American. In the UK a gun is essentially a signal that you're not right in the head but in the US it can be seen as a virtuous thing. @ChicagoBlue has articulated some of this in his posts. Ironically @FogBlueInSanFran has argued the most American solution - stop buying them and then capitalism takes care of the rest.