The Official Gun Control Debate thread

[irul&ublo]

a few interesting perspectives:

The Hidden History of the Second Amendment
By Professor Carl T. Bogus
Roger Williams University School of Law
as published in the U.C. Davis Law Review
http://www.vpc.org/fact_sht/hidhist.htm

Synopsis
James Madison wrote the Second Amendment to assure the southern states that Congress would not undermine the slave system by disarming the militia, which were then the principal instruments of slave control throughout the South.
...
Madison's concern, Professor Bogus argues, was not hunting, self-defense, national defense, or resistance to governmental tyranny—but slave control.

The "hidden history" of the Second Amendment is important for two reasons. First, it supports the view that the amendment does not grant individuals a right to keep and bear arms for their own purposes; rather it only protects the right to bear arms within the militia, as defined within the main body of the Constitution, under the joint control of the federal and state governments. At the time, the southern states extensively regulated their militias and prescribed their slave control responsibilities. Second, the hidden history is important because it fundamentally changes how we think about the right to keep and bear arms. The Second Amendment takes on an entirely different complexion when instead of being symbolized by a musket in the hands of the minutemen, it is associated with a musket in the hands of the slave holder.

...

Condaleeza Rice, Slavery and the Second Amendment
http://www.blackcommentator.com/142/...ink_condi.html
...

Second Amendment Rooted in Southern States' Control of Slavery, Academic Experts Say
http://www.vpc.org/press/9805bog.htm

Interesting stuff. Although there is at least one member of the Supreme Court who appears to believe that the Second Amendment confers personal rights. See, Pritz v United States, 521 U.S. 898, 938-939, fn. 1,2 (Thomas, J., concurring).

There was a case recently decided by the DC Circuit, striking down local DC gun control laws on the basis of the Second Amendment. It will be interesting to see if the case makes it to the Supreme Court.

[Steven S. Dallas]

I think we should keep guns out of the hands of psychos, but I am comfortable admitting that I have no idea how to obtain this goal.

Um... by getting rid of guns.

I'm not anti-gun, but I think this is a situation where the bad guys ruin it for the rest of us.

[f2f]

no worries, video games are to blame. fox just said so (no, they really did!)

[Platinum Pete]

Quick story:
I live in a pretty decent neighborhood with a bustling main street full of business/commercial/retail/restaurant nightlife. My buddy was unlocking his bike outside one of a bar with a huge outdoor patio and a 16 year old came up to him, asked if he had change for a 20, when the wallet appeared the kid grabbed the wallet but my buddy wouldn't let go. The kid pulled out a small handgun and put it right to his heart.

How does the story end? Does my buddy pull out a gun and blast a 16 year old kid dead? Does my buddy get rushed to the hospital with massive trauma from a hole in his chest? Do the police catch the kid and blow hime away? Do stray bullets hurt innocent bystanders? Are there any happy endings when guns are involved?

Sure the problem isn't guns, it's poverty or inequality or poor parenting or violence in the media or liberals or whatever. The guns may not be the source of the problems, but they make the problems worse.

We all know that automobiles are very dangerous and kill way too many people every year, we don't try to ban them we regulate them: who can drive them, sobriety regulations, age limits, etc. Why not regulate guns?

[P_McPoser]

yeah i heard that too f2f

[Crass3000]

Um... by getting rid of guns.

I'm not anti-gun, but I think this is a situation where the bad guys ruin it for the rest of us.

That's unrealistic. There are gangs, cartels, whatever you want to call them that specialize in bringing guns into the country. Obviously not normal guns but where do you think people get grenade launchers? If guns were outlawed there would be so many illegal guns coming into the country it would make your head spin.

The reality is that you won't be able to get guns out of the hands of criminals unless you go to the extreme of executing any felon caught with a gun -- now questions asked -- just get it done like tomorrow. I don't think that's going to happen so the only option is to let responsible people legally own guns.

[ColMan]

no worries, video games are to blame. Faux News just said so (no, they really did!)

Fixed it for you.

[PNWbrit]

Because we need guns to protect ourselves from our government.

No matter how many times I hear/read it I still fall of my chair laughing.

Can anyone explain to me what this is supposed to actually mean? Who? How? When? What happens afterwards? A few examples of it actually working to anyone's benefit?

[Crass3000]

How does the story end? Does my buddy pull out a gun and blast a 16 year old kid dead? Does my buddy get rushed to the hospital with massive trauma from a hole in his chest? Do the police catch the kid and blow hime away? Do stray bullets hurt innocent bystanders? Are there any happy endings when guns are involved?

Yes when the perpetrator is shot dead when they try to rob someone -- one less scumbag left to cause problems and no drag on the legal system.

We all know that automobiles are very dangerous and kill way too many people every year, we don't try to ban them we regulate them: who can drive them, sobriety regulations, age limits, etc. Why not regulate guns?

Guns are regulated.

[Crass3000]

No matter how many times I hear/read it I still fall of my chair laughing.

Can anyone explain to me what this is supposed to actually mean? Who? How? When? What happens afterwards? A few examples of it actually working to anyone's benefit?

This all came about when those in America felt the need to defend themselves from the country you used to call home. Luckily the French (imagine that) supplied us with enough amo to blow you Brits out of the water so now we are in control of our own destiny.

[mrw]

no worries, video games are to blame. fox just said so (no, they really did!)

What I heard on Fox was an interview with someone who has investigated the background of school shooters and found that the commonality for all of them was that they used video games to train for their assaults.

That's a bit different than blaming video games as the source of the assult

[lemon boy]

A few examples of it actually working to anyone's benefit?

OH OH OH OH! I'll start...the revolutionary war!

SWEETNESS!

[MeatPuppet]

I can't understand how anyone can see 22 students in bodybags and think a call for gun control is "politicizing" anything.

Because one political party in America worships at the altar of gun control. The other doesn't. So to support gun control, in effect, lends support to the Democratic party. I'm not saying this is good or bad, it's simple the way it is.

40-some people were shot. With a gun.

...let me guess: the gun didn't kill those people, a person killed those people, is that it?!

That is a rhetorical argument that speaks to the root of the problem, and focuses the argument on the only possible solution. Attacking the gun is attacking a tool. It's the abuse of the tool that is the problem.

There seem to be a lot of people who attach all kinds of negative emotions to inanimate objects and then crusade against those objects when the real problem lies in people's behavior.

Imagine the absurdity of arguing that cars should be limited in the amount of power the engine could produce, or the gearing in the transmission should be limited in order to reduce deaths associated with speeding.

A person making that argument would be laughed out of a public debate because it is the behavior of the drivers that is the problem, not the capabilities of the car. In the same respect, it is the behavior of the person wielding the gun that is the problem, not the capabilities of their chosen weapon.

Compare the number of gun deaths in the US per capita with the number of gun deaths per capita of any other country. You really think there's not a problem with guns in the US?

A better comparison would be to look at the number of gun deaths in the US compared to the number of gun owners in the US. I don't know the numbers, but I would guess that any country you would compare the US to would have far fewer gun owners than we do.

I don't understand the benefits to this "freedom"/right to have a gun, but I'm willing to listen to that side of the story if someone can fill me in on why Americans think it is so important.

Other than being part of our heritage and one or the tools that helped forge our country, guns are a fact in modern life. If a criminal is determined to acquire a gun, he will be able to do so. This is true for any country on earth. Given this fact, it is indefensible, even immoral, to disarm the law abiding citizens and remove the most effective option for personal protection that is available to them.

That's my rational, others will have different opinions.

[Stu Gotz]

How does the story end? Does my buddy pull out a gun and blast a 16 year old kid dead? Does my buddy get rushed to the hospital with massive trauma from a hole in his chest? Do the police catch the kid and blow hime away? Do stray bullets hurt innocent bystanders? Are there any happy endings when guns are involved?

So, how does the story end?

[Cliff Huckable]

This all came about when those in America felt the need to defend themselves from the country you used to call home. Luckily the French (imagine that) supplied us with enough amo to blow you Brits out of the water so now we are in control of our own destiny.

In control of your own destiny?! *stifles hearty laugh*

Did you mean to write "Corporate entities backed by pro-business legislation controls the destiny of every non-elite American - and the firearms industry is one of those corporate entities."?

[Crass3000]

In control of your own destiny?! *stifles hearty laugh*

Did you mean to write "Corporate entities backed by pro-business legislation controls the destiny of every non-elite American - and the firearms industry is one of those corporate entities."?

No I meant in control of their own destiny. I'm sorry you've laid your life down to be a defenseless tool to someone else but I actually make decisions that effect the outcome of my life.

Edit: I'm out of this thread. I can see there are alot of Einstein's who haven't done much thinking or have been sheltered by mom and dad. I'll let the gun control advocates finish this as I have no stake and don't choose to own a gun.

[BigAirSkier1580]

That's not the point. If you have a firearm legally, and a guy breaks into your house and steals it, it's now in circulation.

Legal owners of firearms are contributing to the gun problem. And how many people are murdered with legally owned guns?

I still don't see why people feel they NEED guns.

And all this talk about having a gun to "defend yourself" against criminals...that just seems so unrealistic. It sounds like pure Hollywood crap.
I'm sure there have been cases where it has happened but I'm sure the cases where someone has tried it and got killed for their trouble greatly outnumber any successes...not to mention the number of people killed by guns that were once legal, then were stolen.

It is the AVAILABILITY of guns that seems to be the problem in the US, not whether or not they're legal.

I guess the gun industry makes a lot of money therefore has lots of lobbying power...uh...no, I don't want to start a debate on the US lobbying problem!

There is no solution then. Since those types of guns have already been made. Take those guns from all the law-abiding citizens, then all you have is criminals who hav guns already in circulation and the police.

Which changes the situation in no way.

Not to mention it will just create a more violent atmosphere as is such with the trading of banned assault rifles being smuggled in from other regions of the world.

Criminals are going to get effective weapons and carry out violent crimes regardless of whether or not you make it illegal to own one. These people are going to KILL people. Frankly, they already don't seem to be big on morals or obeying the law.

The only way to decrease violent crimes is through stiffer punishment for violent criminals.

[lemon boy]

The only way to decrease violent crimes is through stiffer punishment for violent criminals.

YEAH! The death penalty totally discourages people from committing these types of crimes in countries that practice the death penalty!

[Blurred]

15 pages, here we come.

[Steven S. Dallas]

That is a rhetorical argument that speaks to the root of the problem, and focuses the argument on the only possible solution. Attacking the gun is attacking a tool. It's the abuse of the tool that is the problem.

So, assuming you have the goal of ending gun violence, is it easier to prevent people who would abuse the privilege of gun ownership by denying them access to whatever social factors lead them to do so, or is it easier to deny them access to the tool? As difficult as it would be to effect the second option, it would be far less difficult than it would be to effect the first.

I think the analogy to the speed limit is apt. If we reduced the speed limit to 55, there would be far fewer- thousands fewer- highway fatalities than there are at 65. If we reduced it to 25, there would be thousands and thousands fewer. But we don't do that, because the our desire to save lives on the highway is outweighted by the inefficiency of a 25 mph speed limit. Similarly, if we said, that's it, no guns nowhere (except for law enforcement, the military, and certain other business licensees), the number of gun deaths would drop precipitously. So the question to me is, is the desire for recreational handgun use worth the deaths that result from easy access to handguns? I have a hard time saying that it is. But, then, I don't live in an area where recreational handgun use is much of an issue- I live in northeastern cities, where hundreds of people are murdered with handguns every year.

[horizon]

I continue to think that all across Europe we should make drinking illegal until 21 years old and compensate by making guns legal.

[ak_powder_monkey]

if I saw some guy was going into my school with a gun drawn he'd have buckshot in his ass very shortly. Its that simple fight fire with fire.

[Cyber Cop]

fight fire with fat kids.

[smmokan]

AKPM, and then you'd be dead.

[ak_powder_monkey]

yea maybe the ass wouldn't be the best place to aim...