Gun Control

[thegreatkazoo]

How exactly do we expect gun control to work when we can't even pull the hand of the gun lobby away from politicians.

Some Congressmen have been shown to kiss butt (and that is putting it nicely) and flat out flip flop and/or equivocate on policy just to get rave reviews from the NRA. Case in point: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-a-henigan/senators-choke-on-gun-lob_b_243816.html

 

[pacmansays]

How exactly do we expect gun control to work when we can't even pull the hand of the gun lobby away from politicians.

Some Congressmen have been shown to kiss butt (and that is putting it nicely) and flat out flip flop and/or equivocate on policy just to get rave reviews from the NRA. Case in point: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/dennis-a-henigan/senators-choke-on-gun-lob_b_243816.html

Hope they'll end up killing each other in a Hamlet-esque ending??

 

[CStick]

they have flip-flopped since 1996, when they lost control of everything and pretty much handed it to the republicans. The 1994 Assault Weapons Ban was quoted by Bill Clinton as being why the Republicans controlled the house and senate for ten years.

Public opinion for gun control has pretty much dropped. Only half of the public supports an AWB, compared to 75% a few years ago. The representatives and senators have pretty much learned that gun control is way too hot an issue, and is a losing battle. Not only do they have to fight public opinion in the 45 states that are pretty much pro-gun rights, but then there is the fact that the NRA, GOA, etc. are pretty much spending 15 times more money than the Violence Policy Center and the Brady Campaign, and that the gun rights groups have picked up several strings of court victories that have pretty much destroyed any momentum for gun control.

 

[HawaiianJigglyPuff]

ok, it's really difficult to jump back in here, but I will throw out this counter to a point that is/has been used a lot.

It's the ol' "if guns are outlawed, only the outlaws will have them"
It's along the same lines as "why take away guns from law-abiding citizens because the criminals wont just hand over their guns?"

First of all, nearly 300,000 guns are stolen every year. If those "law-abiding citizens" hadn't bought the guns in the first place, then the "criminals" wouldn't have gotten those guns.
citation: http://www.bradycampaign.org/media/release.php?release=120
(Don't get on my case for a biased website or anything...I already knew this fact and just googled it and found the first thing that popped up.)

Second of all, I think what people don't realize is that most gun deaths are NOT from serial killers or gangsters walking in to a library and shooting everyone. Suicides are what the majority of gun deaths are. Additionally, you'd be surprised how many gun-related murder cases are man-slaughter or even murder in the second degree. People say, well if someone wants to kill someone, if they don't have a gun they'll do it some other way. Not true. In a heated argument with someone that leads to a fight, and a gun is drawn, that murder wouldn't have happened had there not been a gun.

In fact, there is evidence that trying to protect yourself with a gun statistically INCREASES your chances of being injured. (eg. you draw a gun and the other person draws they're gun in fear and shoots you first. another example is that you take out your gun and it's wrestled away from you)(let me find that source)

I'll just stick with those points for now. I don't want to write an entire essay

 

[Fuelbi]

I personally believe that there should be less gun control laws. Now bear with me here. Im one of those people who happen to take the constitution quite seriously. According to the second amendmant on the bill of rights it says that EVERY citizen has the right to bear arms. That means that age is no matter for gun ownership. That would also mean no test for gun usage and etc. That means that the need for a license is moot. Now to get across that whole issue I would suggest a bigger punishment on those who use guns for evil. Maybe bigger fine or more jail time. I just know that the person needs to suffer

 

[HawaiianJigglyPuff]

I personally believe that there should be less gun control laws. Now bear with me here. Im one of those people who happen to take the constitution quite seriously. According to the second amendmant on the bill of rights it says that EVERY citizen has the right to bear arms. That means that age is no matter for gun ownership. That would also mean no test for gun usage and etc. That means that the need for a license is moot. Now to get across that whole issue I would suggest a bigger punishment on those who use guns for evil. Maybe bigger fine or more jail time. I just know that the person needs to suffer

I'm honestly not trying to pick on you, but it frustrates me SO much when people say "the 2nd amendment says "I have the right to bear arms." No. The second amendment 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."

That's completely different.



Also, I'm pretty sure the Bill of Rights applies to adults. *trying to find some sort of source for that*


Here's the source for the other thing in my last post.
"The use of a firearm to resist a violent assault actually increases the victim's risk of injury and death"
FE Zimring, Firearms, violence, and public policy, Scientific American, vol. 265, 1991, p. 48

 

[Fuelbi]

I'm honestly not trying to pick on you, but it frustrates me SO much when people say "the 2nd amendment says "I have the right to bear arms." No. The second amendment 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."

That's completely different.



Also, I'm pretty sure the Bill of Rights applies to adults. *trying to find some sort of source for that*


Here's the source for the other thing in my last post.
"The use of a firearm to resist a violent assault actually increases the victim's risk of injury and death"
FE Zimring, Firearms, violence, and public policy, Scientific American, vol. 265, 1991, p. 48

Actually what you said there about the Bill of Rights applying to adults is right. But before it was applying to white men. Then it switched to white and black men. Then it switched to any adult meaning that women got thrown in to that meaning. So who the Bill of Rights is meant for is always subject to change. But right now I think that it is BS how nobody seems to pay attention to people ages 1-18 although 1-3 can barely talk but other than that those other ages should be able to have some recognition. I am tired of of living in a society that thinks that since children are "stupid" it doesnt mean that alot of us can be smart. Hell I know that children are immature and what not, but the fact that children are citizens too and dont have much rights just pisses me off. Why cant 10-18 vote? Yes I know that I may be contradicting myself there but I would recommend a few years of Social Studies. A lot of the children of this generation are way smarter than they were a few hundred years ago. Hell I saw this one kid on the television who was a smart kid. I think given all the knowledge he knew he would have voted for the right president. Also Im sure that if children could vote I think they would consult it witht their parents first before doing the vote. And Im also sure that before they go into the voting booth people would tell the kids how to operate the booth. So sorry for getting off topic there but seeing that one sentence kind of how do you say it "frustrated me" on how minors under 18 dont get any appreciation at all. It is sometimes because of them that good things happen. These kids near my neighborhood had organized a day for picking up ALL the garbage that was polluting the neighborhood. They had done something not even the adults had even thought of doing. If you ask me with a little bit of more knowladge they wouldve made a good vote and couldve been good citizens (yes im saying they are not nontechnically citizens yet as the Bill of Rights pertains to "adults") Well there goes my rant sorry.

 

[Shade613]

I'm honestly not trying to pick on you, but it frustrates me SO much when people say "the 2nd amendment says "I have the right to bear arms." No. The second amendment 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."
That's completely different.



Also, I'm pretty sure the Bill of Rights applies to adults. *trying to find some sort of source for that*


Here's the source for the other thing in my last post.
"The use of a firearm to resist a violent assault actually increases the victim's risk of injury and death"
FE Zimring, Firearms, violence, and public policy, Scientific American, vol. 265, 1991, p. 48

To the bold: People would need to have guns in the first place to set up a militia for a revolution. If people are speaking about revolution socialists like Osama Obama will take away are guns so we can't revolt.

@roacherman:
The children will just vote the same thing their parents vote and that could cause people to keep having children to keep who ever they want in the whitehouse.

 

[Aposl]

Roacher man you said that the freedom to vote started with white men, almost right. It started with white men 25 years of age who owned land. Now the owning land part is crucial because it means any joe blow could not vote. This was important because they hada stake in the country, they paid taxes. Nowadays a person who doesnt even make enough money too pay taxes, for example: a bum, a college student, or just a poor person, can vote to get free money, medical etc... Kids 1- 18 (even though I think you not a child after you about 15- 16) cant really contribute to society so there rights are limited.

Now to adress this topic, in the declaration of INdependance, the precursor to the constitution, it is stated that we are endowed by our creator with the rights we receive. Now, wether or not you beleive in God, you should beleive that we dont get rights from the governemnt, the government just protects them. We get our rights from something greater, I personally beleive that to be God. The point being is the government has no authority, it may have the power, but might does not make right, to limit or regulate our rights.