Thoughts after Sandy Hook

[TX-Beau]

I wonder if Jews living in Germany in the 1930's/40's would agree.

It would have been hard to ask them - since they would have bombed in their houses because of the armed threat they represented.

 

[Rolyo85]

I don't buy the "never ever". Things are only "never ever" until they happen. It happened with slavery, it happened with integration, mixed marriage, gay rights, the first black president... It will happen with guns as well, sooner or later.

And I find it in poor taste to go the "yeah, but you guys killed jews" route. That was decades ago. Wanna talk about what the US was doing at the time? Yeah, not genocide, but still not pretty either. It's not just off-topic, it's an unnecessary insult to someone whose PARENTS weren't even born then.

 

[Telstra]

I wonder if Jews living in Germany in the 1930's/40's would agree.

So idiotic statement i can't describe it.

 

[Rolyo85]

And until a couple of years ago, more than 50% of Americans opposed same sex marriage. Things change. And it won't start with a ban, it will start with tighter regulation.

 

[Rolyo85]

Legalizing gay marriage should not be a state issue to begin with, and DOMA is mostly a legal issue. But yeah, point stands. Lucky for us, EVERY amount of gun regulation is STILL within the confines of the 2nd Amendment ^_^

 

[bankside]

the genie is already out of the bottle with guns... even if they were made 100% illegal today, there would still be millions out there on the streets. and short of shredding the 4th Amendment, you're not going to see armed police officers searching through every home in America trying to ferret out guns.

which isn't to say that semi-meaningful regulations can't be passed, but to say that people need to just stop being "fearful" and everything will magically be better doesn't really reflect a good understanding of the issues imo.

Don't be too pessimistic about the possibility of success. Australia de-gunned.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-20765259

 

[HenryReardon]

.

By the way, since Sandy Hook died 78 persons in the USA by fire weapons!!!

On average in 2009, 93 people were killed on the roadways of the U.S. each day.

So which is the larger problem?

 

[JayHawk]

Exactly Henry and auto accidents would be much more severe if the entire industry wasn't insured, tested, licensed and regulated. Which is what responsible people in the us desire to occur with guns.

Although the auto argument is ignorant. When a automobile is properly used it results in no deaths. When a gun is properly used it results in the destruction of something. A target or a six year old.

 

[andysayshi]

On average in 2009, 93 people were killed on the roadways of the U.S. each day.

So which is the larger problem?

Collectively, Americans travel around 5 trillion miles per year in motor vehicles. The vehicles enable citizens to perform essential functions like work and school. They move goods like food to where they can be consumed. Without motor vehicles the economy would collapse, and many millions of Americans would probably starve. They are essential.

Imagine how many would die if there was little or no requirement to regulate driving capabilities (ie licenses, driver testing), if vehicles did not need to be roadworthy (registration) and there were no restrictions on how large or powerful a vehicle anybody could drive?

 

[JB3]

Don't be too pessimistic about the possibility of success. Australia de-gunned.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-20765259

Unless protection of gun rights was enshrined in their constitution, the comparison is not relevant. It is impossible for guns to be banned in the US unless there is a massive sea-change. It will not happen. Ever.

 

[HenryReardon]

I like the idea of a gun buyback, but the fact remains that there are legions of people who will absolutely not, under no circumstances, surrender their guns. and I'm not sure we've reached the point where we want police breaking down doors and confiscating legally-purchased guns against the owners' will.

)

But 'police breaking down doors' is the next logical step when a country starts to slide down that slippery slope, is it not?

 

[andysayshi]

But 'police breaking down doors' is the next logical step when a country starts to slide down that slippery slope, is it not?

Well, when the gun buyback happened in Australia in 1996, they didn't break down my door. Or anybody I know.

What DID happen was the gun homicide rates and gun suicide rates dropped by more than 50% immediately. And there hasn't been a mass shooting in the nation in the 16 years since.

 

[Stardreamer]

See, Kuli, I am living in Germany. And I have friends in Spain, Denmark and so on. No friend, nobody, has a gun at home - and it`s not necessary. And we don`t have less idiots and psychopaths than the US, I think. Of course our police and armee and so on have weapons - but not our citizens. Some people have shooting as sports discipline (is this the right word?), yes, but that`s it. We do not feel that we need weapons. Police at school, assault rifles in private hands, a gun in the tray or under the pillow, a weapons association with influence, that is unthinkable here. Therefore I ask: Why you need weapons in private hands? And if you need weapons, what is wrong in your society. I don´t think it´s only tradition - I think there is fear, distrust -- uncertainty - I want to understand this, you see?

I knew couple of Germans when I stationed over there who had guns, my Aunt's brother was one of them. They had rifles they used for hunting.

 

[Stardreamer]

I like the idea of a gun buyback, but the fact remains that there are legions of people who will absolutely not, under no circumstances, surrender their guns. and I'm not sure we've reached the point where we want police breaking down doors and confiscating legally-purchased guns against the owners' will.

I'm not sure how realistic it is, but what I'd really love to see is an exorbitant tax on bullets. maybe give waivers to shooting ranges (as long as the bullets don't leave the range) and limited waivers to hunters (for whatever is deemed "average" for a season's hunting use... buy a hunting license, get X number of rounds tax-free)

Constitutionally any mandatory surrender of guns by the Federal government would require the owners to be compensated for the 'taking' of their property. Our congress can't even pass budgets for the things they have already mandated that we have, can you see trying to get that bill through the House?

 

[HenryReardon]

Well
What DID happen was the gun homicide rates and gun suicide rates dropped by more than 50% immediately. And there hasn't been a mass shooting in the nation in the 16 years since.

And were the freedoms you gave up to achieve that goal worth it? I think not.
I also know, from a lifelong friend whose lived their for 35 years, Oz is already pretty socialist, so it was
probably an easier sell that it would be here in the US wher we still place some value on our freedoms

 

[TX-Beau]

Constitutionally any mandatory surrender of guns by the Federal government would require the owners to be compensated for the 'taking' of their property. Our congress can't even pass budgets for the things they have already mandated that we have, can you see trying to get that bill through the House?

I don't always agree with you, but considering the clusterfuck going on in the house - and now they've retired to replenish their condoms and lube, I have to say Amen to that.

 

[TX-Beau]

and were the freedoms you gave up to achieve that goal worth it? I think not.
I also know, from a lifelong friend whose lived their for 35 years, oz is already pretty socialist, so it was
probably an easier sell that it would be here in the us wher we still place some value on our freedoms

Oh No NOT THE SOCIALISM!!!!!!!!

(I hope no one has told Henry that streets and sewer systems are the socialism - you KNOW what he'd have to start doing)

 

[HenryReardon]

[(I hope no one has told Henry that streets and sewer systems are the socialism - you KNOW what he'd have to start doing)

Streets and sewer systems are not sociallism. For the record, the first turnpikes in this country, up until a bit after 1815 or so, were built and operated by, corporations. I've heard that at least one state turnpike currently operating may be leased to private enterprise so it can be run more efficiently.

 

[TX-Beau]

Yeah Henry they are, ALL government programs are socialism. Public Libraries, fire departments, police departments, the army, it's all the socialism.

 

[HenryReardon]

Yeah Henry they are, ALL government programs are socialism. Public Libraries, fire departments, police departments, the army, it's all the socialism.

Not at all. You don't even understand the stuff you believe.
From Merriam-Webster

Definition of SOCIALISM


1

: any of various economic and political theories advocating collective or governmental ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods


2

a: a system of society or group living in which there is no private property

b: a system or condition of society in which the means of production are owned and controlled by the state

3

: a stage of society in Marxist theory transitional between capitalism and communism and distinguished by unequal distribution of goods and pay according to work done

Source Link (added by moderator): http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/socialism