Originally posted by C.C.Benjamin
Originally posted by vor78
reply to post by C.C.Benjamin
...
Myself, I find restrictive firearms laws to be very damaging to personal freedoms.
Freedom to what, exactly?
But anyway, I think you misunderstood my post.
Owning a gun is not a freedom. It isn't something you should be able to do, period, because it is obviously a mistake waiting to happen. Aren't you sick of school shootings yet?
Guns are dangerous weapons. Only trained professionals should have them, and only where necessary. The general public should not be armed! What kind of mentality is it that dictates it is okay for Joe Bloggs on the street to have a leathal weapon?! And you are defending it!
I can't remember the name of the Michael Moore documentary, but basically it explained how America and Canada have similar gun laws, yet America has around 10,000 shootings a year while Canada has 60.
This means that it isn't actually guns that are the problem, it's Americans. So the best short-term solution would be to take the guns away - after all, we British are no longer coming to invade - and then embark on a long-term program of explaining to the American public why it is a bad thing to want to kill each other.
Of course, you won't and you'll just keep racking up the high school body count.
Where to begin, where to begin...
First of all, even though I enjoy Michael Moore movies, just because Michael puts it in his movie doesn't make it so. However, in the comparison between US and Canadian gun deaths, he blamed TV news and its influence on the American psyche for the difference. So, in the argument put forth, it wasn't that Americans were any less human or more violent by nature than Canadians, but rather that the continual barrage of pro-violence TV programmed Americans to be prone to violent reactions. There may actually be something to that argument, but not to the version that you misquoted.
Second of all, your unsupported contention that owning a gun is not a freedom and shouldn't be allowed under any circumstance is simply un-American, if one defines being pro-American as supporting the Constitution and its philosophy of limited government based on enumerated powers. The Framers thought that the freedom to own a gun for hunting, for varmint control, and to gather into a militia to protect one's self, home and property important enough that it was listed in the Bill of Rights BEFORE mentioning one's right to privacy, due process, trial by jury, or even the right to limit government.
You strike me as someone who has a very low opinion of his own capacities and the capabilities of those around him. Perhaps that is part of being British, I don't know. I do know many people who own guns, and have never seen any one of them mishandle them. They store them responsibly and securely, and even when showing them off, make sure that they are unloaded before they bring it into a room where other people are, and again in front of their guests or family. They do not point them at others, even when they are known and shown to be unloaded. In short, they treat their guns with the respect appropriate to a device that can injure or kill someone.
I don't know Joe Bloggs, but if he is an American, then my assumption is that he is competent to manage his own business, and if he has a permit to carry a weapon on the street, then I know that he has been trained to a degree that you might call "professional" and so the fact that he has a gun on him doesn't concern me. If he doesn't have a permit, then he is either an outlaw or a criminal, and since I get along just fine with just about everybody, that doesn't concern me either.
