USA has the most armed citizenry; with Yemen a distant 2nd.

Yemen. Isn't that a terrorist training camp?

Terrorist University has less guns per capita than right here in the USA so it is incongruous to me people worry about less guns being trafficked. That makes me want to rant.

40% of gun sales are illegal, unregulated, untraceable. That's almost half. We don't even know if these sales are taking place in the US. What is to stop US weapons Mfgs from selling to terrorists or our sworn enemies, or countries we may do battle with? Wouldn't a weapons mfg supply both sides? And if not, why not?

8 kids a day killed in a gun related death. I wonder what other freedoms cost that much to maintain? I am not saying it isn't worth it...or on second thought...maybe I am.

States with the highest rates of gun ownership have the highest rates of gun homicides.

In 2006 the number of gun related deaths in the USA was 10,225 and in Japan it was 2.

Kennedy was shot with a gun purchased and delivered in the mail.

The NRA has a $2 Million dollar advertising budget.

In 1957 the NRA motto was:
Firearms Safety Education,
Marksmanship Training,
Shooting for Recreation

The 2 words in the 2nd amendment people seem to forget are "WELL REGULATED."
What do those 2 words mean?

I think in a public place one should have a reasonable expectation of safety without carrying a gun. How we arrive at that Utopia should be the operative question because moving in any OTHER direction is a decent into an uncivilized hell.

Before you all jump on me I DON'T THINK THE PEOPLE OF THE US who own guns should be disarmed.
I think people NEED GUNS TO PROTECT THEMSELVES in many situations, and whether or not they do should be up to them but I think you can own a gun and still recognize a problem, and come together and help with solutions.

So shoot me.

reply to post by newcovenant


40% of gun sales are illegal, unregulated, untraceable...can you imagine how high that percentage would go if there were bans on guns.



I found that picture interesting. Maybe we should take everything away from everyone and live in sterile cubes.

The only feasible way to conquer this issue would be to get in a time machine and burn the blueprints for the first gun. Other than that, it is futile.

"Well regulated"? I take it to mean disciplined in their use of arms. I don't think it means "per each man, one gun of the government's choice."

"To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of people always possess arms, and be taught alike especially when young, how to use them." (Richard Henry Lee, 1788, Initiator of the Declaration of Independence, and member of the first Senate, which passed the Bill of Rights, Walter Bennett, ed., Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republican, at 21,22,124 (Univ. of Alabama Press,1975).)

As to Yemen: The fact that we have more guns than them doesn't make us responsible for their being a terrorist-training camp, nor make us one. We ain't them, they ain't us....

Originally posted by newcovenant

The 2 words in the 2nd amendment people seem to forget are "WELL REGULATED."
What do those 2 words mean?

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.

To paraphrase; Because a standing army (well regulated militia) will be necessary for security, the people will have the right to guns and that right shall not be infringed.

Get it now?

The second amendment was added to appease the anti-federalist's fear of a standing federal army. The constitution would have never been agreed to without this protection. Protection from the Federal Government/Military.

In my opinion our second amendment right has been massively infringed over the years

The lack of understanding of the reasoning behind and meaning of the 2nd is just mind blowing to me

This is what I think :-

The People of USA have long enjoyed there freedom of holding guns.
Nobody prevented them from doing it and gradually it became a part of their 'culture'.
After many decades it became firm in their mind that holding 'guns' is a part of their 'freedom' .
Now because of the Sandy Hook incident ,the 'freedom' of holding gun is being questioned by
many.
The US citizens know themselves that nothing catastrophic will happen if they do not hold guns.
But as it has become a part of their 'freedom' and 'culture' ,they feel that not holding guns is denying them their freedom.

So as we see it is all conditioning.People have been conditioned for decades to think that 'Holding Guns' is a part of freedom.Now 'de conditioning ' these is not that easy.Rational arguments will looked down.

Originally posted by algaedyne

Originally posted by newcovenant

The 2 words in the 2nd amendment people seem to forget are "WELL REGULATED."
What do those 2 words mean?

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.

To paraphrase; Because a standing army (well regulated militia) will be necessary for security, the people will have the right to guns and that right shall not be infringed.

Get it now?

The second amendment was added to appease the anti-federalist's fear of a standing federal army. The constitution would have never been agreed to without this protection. Protection from the Federal Government/Military.

In my opinion our second amendment right has been massively infringed over the years

The lack of understanding of the reasoning behind and meaning of the 2nd is just mind blowing to me

A lack of concern and understanding of the 4th Amendment is MIND BLOWING TO ME!!!

So, out of curiosity....How do you feel about your 4th Amendment Protection, freeing you from illegal searches and seizures, being taken away after 9/11?

What was so unnecessary about that 4th Amendment that we could let it go so easily?

Do you get it?

Now that there is the possibility of a terrorist threat on a plane, and we lost a few people, we are all strip searched, when that is not supposed to happen unless there is reasonable suspicion of a crime?

And as for the beginning of your reply...WE HAVE A STANDING ARMY NOW.


Either that is the well regulated militia, or the words WELL REGULATED apply to the people with guns.

Originally posted by iamhobo
reply to post by newcovenant

 

40% of gun sales are illegal, unregulated, untraceable...can you imagine how high that percentage would go if there were bans on guns.

I found that picture interesting. Maybe we should take everything away from everyone and live in sterile cubes.

The only feasible way to conquer this issue would be to get in a time machine and burn the blueprints for the first gun. Other than that, it is futile.

Well isn't that the long, hard, IMPOSSIBLE way?

How about this....Address mental heath issues with a comprehensive health care plan like they have successfully used in other countries lessening the amount of kooks running free in the streets.

Try to get a grip on where the guns that are made are going. We know where they all start out. How do they end up in the hands of criminals? WHICH private gun dealers are dropping the ball? When you find out and make them pay others will hesitate to do the same. Maybe they will find another way but it will be more difficult and more costly for them and that will slow them down long enough for us to change a generation of culture.

Tone down the violence in TV, News and Video Games and though it sounds hokey, focus on peace and love a little more.

Teach conflict resolution in schools.

Instead of complaining about teachers, pay them. Respect and Value the teachers who spend time with children and teach them to socialize. Parents are supposed to but they don't. The attention children get from their teacher in school is more essential to their development and how they see themselves later in life than many of us realize. Children self image should be important and parents cannot always be depended upon to encourage a positive one but we CAN expect, and demand that from our schools. We need more counselors in schools and they need to pay attention. We can give schools the resources they need to turn out decent socially competent people even if parents are not supportive of the child.

We should strive for no one to hate themselves, but in our culture we almost encourage it by allowing intolerance and difference to drive people away from each other. We should embrace our differences and consider them normal variations as long as they hurt no one else.

Accepting gay marriage and homosexuals in our society, believe it or not, goes a long way toward teaching tolerance and patience to our children and THAT isn't a hard or impossible thing to do.

You post the chart above as if we do not see and tackle these as problems everyday. Deaths on the highway? We post speed limits. WE DO NOT ENCOURAGE PEOPLE TO SPEED. We DO address the other credible (as opposed to nonsense) KILLERS you mention by putting warning labels on cigarettes for example and removing the ads from TV. Stopped showing people smoking in movies and glamorizing it. They are heavily taxed and you need ID to get them....So why can't we regulate guns the same way we regulate everything else that kills.

We take the knives away from crazy people now don't we? You can do the same with guns.

So in a way - it isn't a matter of a time machine. We can make the changes we need now and see the results in the next 20 years. What matters is what we teach our children.

reply to post by iamhobo


Did you know 2000 people a year fall off barstools?

When something presents itself as a problem we naturally try to fix it.

We put warning labels on cigarettes and took the promotions off TV.
We increased the penalty for selling to minors.

Driving kills so we came up with seat belts, guard rails and speed limits

They took asbestos out of buildings and the lead out of paint.

They CAN address the proliferation of guns in our culture.

The very first thing they can do is NOT allow the NRA to deceive people (present company included) into thinking everyone needs a gun - especially considering there is only a breakeven chance that gun will save or kill you and might kill your kid.

That plan of arming the teachers??!! WTF? They are TRYING TO SELL GUNS! HELLO?
The second thing they can do is follow the life of the guns that are made.
What is the problem with that? Anything else is like doing nothing and watching people fall off a cliff.

IMO Build the guardrails ....for cripes sake.

reply to post by newcovenant


Your arguments are nonsensical. You complain about the government abusing it’s powers in one situation, but want the government to have more powers in another situation without even contemplating the fact that they will abuse those powers too.

That is what Orwell called doublethink.
Believing in two mutually contradictory things at the same time.

You want the government to have heavy control over the weapons that will allow us to defend our selves from the government to the point that we will be unable to do so, but you complain about how the government has overstepped it’s bounds and is invading into people’s lives.

You complain about infringing on the 4th but you don’t comprehend how that makes the 2nd all that more important.

You really need to set down and make up you mind as to which is more important to you. The lives of a few people that may get killed by the misuse of freedom by the people, or the freedom from all out control by the government. You can’t have both at the same time. The time to make that decision is now.

................edit............
All rights will be abused by the criminals. But that doesn’t mean that we shouldn’t have them. there has been plenty of criminals and murders that have hid behind the 4th amendment. If we put in place things to allow the government to stop those people from hiding behind it, then it is no longer a right for all.

That is the point behind “innocent until proven guilty”. Everyone has full protection under the law until proven otherwise. A potential criminal has the same protection as a potentially innocent person until it’s proven that the person is guilty.

Yet, you want to treat every gun owner as a potential criminal, and heavily regulate their every action, even though they have done no wrong. The only time a person should have his 2nd amendment rights restricted is when it has been shown that he is a criminal that has abused those rights. Until then, hands off.

Originally posted by newcovenant

Originally posted by algaedyne

Originally posted by newcovenant

The 2 words in the 2nd amendment people seem to forget are "WELL REGULATED."
What do those 2 words mean?

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.

To paraphrase; Because a standing army (well regulated militia) will be necessary for security, the people will have the right to guns and that right shall not be infringed.

Get it now?

The second amendment was added to appease the anti-federalist's fear of a standing federal army. The constitution would have never been agreed to without this protection. Protection from the Federal Government/Military.

In my opinion our second amendment right has been massively infringed over the years

The lack of understanding of the reasoning behind and meaning of the 2nd is just mind blowing to me

A lack of concern and understanding of the 4th Amendment is MIND BLOWING TO ME!!!

So, out of curiosity....How do you feel about your 4th Amendment Protection, freeing you from illegal searches and seizures, being taken away after 9/11?

What was so unnecessary about that 4th Amendment that we could let it go so easily?

Do you get it?

Now that there is the possibility of a terrorist threat on a plane, and we lost a few people, we are all strip searched, when that is not supposed to happen unless there is reasonable suspicion of a crime?

And as for the beginning of your reply...WE HAVE A STANDING ARMY NOW.


Either that is the well regulated militia, or the words WELL REGULATED apply to the people with guns.

edit on 28-12-2012 by newcovenant because: (no reason given)

What makes you think I agree with the attack on our constitution following 9/11?I Where did I post my support of the patriot act? I am always taken aback by our collective willingness to give up our rights when we are emotional...


You still don't get it.

At the time it was written, the second amendment was meant to give the people a power equal to that of the standing army. The Anti-Federalists feared a powerful central government and did not want the government to have the ability to create an army. in order to appease them, they were granted the second amendment. To guarantee their ability to defend themselves from the government they were creating.

The militia is not the people!

The people are granted the right to bear arms in opposition to the militia that required for the national defense.

Their is plenty of documentation backing this fact. Written by the men and observers that were there arguing and forming the constitution at the time.

www.google.com...:en-USfficial&client=firefox-a#hl=en&sugexp=les%3B&gs_rn=1&gs_r i=serp&tok=3Jls5fjC9QLHGh4UEW2NLg&pq=2nd%20amendment&cp=20&gs_id=fz&xhr=t&q=2nd+amendment+history&pf=p&client=firefox-a&hs=3gf&tbo=d&rls=org.mozilla:e n-US%3Aofficial&sclient=psy-ab&oq=2nd+amendment+hnisto&gs_l=&pbx=1&bav=on.2,or.r_gc.r_pw.r_qf.&bvm=bv.1355534169,d.cGE&fp=57b747fe93862d6b&bpcl=400965 03&biw=1366&bih=638

There is a reason it is the 2nd and not the 4th, 7th, or 10th too. Without this guarantee the Anti-Federalist walk and The United States are not united.

reply to post by Mr Tranny


My arguments are not exactly arguments, at least in the OP, they are facts to consider. If they don't make sense to you as facts to weigh in when considering the proliferation of firearms in public places, maybe you are in no position to discuss the matter rationally. How can you balance the deaths of children with your fear of government takeover? I think there has to be a way to prevent both but you have given up already. Its reprehensible.

reply to post by algaedyne

The people are granted the right to bear arms in opposition to the militia that required for the national defense.

Wrong. There was no "militia" at the time so people couldn't be asked to fight something that mainly consisted of themselves. Freemen - men, not women, not children, and not slaves - were given the right to bear arms as part of a well regulated militia. Purpose was to defend against foreign invaders and fight threat from government if government should become oppressive.

They never said we couldn't control the weapons.

reply to post by iamhobo

40% of gun sales are illegal, unregulated, untraceable...can you imagine how high that percentage would go if there were bans on guns.

Can you imagine?

If they would go over the top and we would sell twice as many weapons (considering the legal and illegal gun trade) do you think we would have such a furious backlash now from the NRA? Don't make me laugh. The 2 million in advertising seems to have worked on you. I am not a drone.

Originally posted by newcovenant
reply to post by Mr Tranny

 

How can you balance the deaths of children with your fear of government takeover? I think there has to be a way to prevent both but you have given up already. Its reprehensible.

There is no way to balance two mutually exclusive things. The only way to obtain any of one, is to totally throw away all of the other. If you have any freedom at all, you will have people that will do bad things with that freedom no mater how little of that freedom they may have.

The only way you can prevent people from doing bad things, is by taking away their ability to do things in private, and to take away anything they can do anything bad things with. To take away all their rights in so many words.

If people have a right to do things in private, then they have the ability to plan bad things in private, and to set things in motion to carry them out. Even if you take away the stuff they can do bad things with, if they have privacy then they can reconstitute them on their own. There is no way in the modern world to prevent someone from making something dangerous. It’s too easy. The only way to stop it is constant surveillance of everyone. Every second of every day. Look at the UK, they are already trying to go down that road.

The trampling of the 4th that you so decry is one of the very thing that helps the government to stop things like this from happening.

It is a basic logical relation. No mater how badly you want 2 + 2 to equal 10, it is not going to happen. The only way to fix one, is to break the other. There is no way to get around it. It has been tried time and time again.

In your quest to stop one thing, you give so much of another thing up (rights) that you set yourself, and everyone else, up for something far worse than those kids experienced. You set yourself, and all your descendents up for a life under tyranny.

There is no way to “solve this problem”. The only thing you can do is try to minimize the damage one crazy person can do. The only way to do that is to kill that person when he starts to do something like this, not after he has already finished shooting everyone he wants to. The only way you can do that is make sure that the people defending themselves has the ability to fight back. The right to bear arms like the constitution stipulates.

“If a problem has no solution, it may not be a problem, but a fact, not to be solved, but to be coped with over time.” -- Shimon Peres

Do not ignore the wisdom of your forefathers. They have already been through this, and learned the lessons the hard way. Do not repeat their mistakes, just to relearn the same lessons.

40% of guns are sold through untraceable methods which is why we have this chart with exact numbers on it right over here.....

lol really guy?


No they are not.

And weapons manufacturers serialize everything - there is no such thing as untraceable weapons in this country being produced on any scale. It happens I'm sure but not in significant quantities.

Terrorists buy from weapons manufacturers in countries like Russia and China because they can get actual military grade fully auto weapons at prices that are cheaper than even the cheapest guns sold here now when they buy in bulk.

Or like the ak they just set up shop and make them locally.

By the way gun related deaths arent even in the top 15

Mortality experience in 2009
• In 2009, a total of 2,437,163 resident deaths were registered in
the United States.
• The age-adjusted death rate, which takes the aging of the popu­
lation into account, was 741.1 deaths per 100,000 U.S. standard
population.
• Life expectancy at birth was 78.5 years.
• The 15 leading causes of death in 2009 were:
1. Diseases of heart (heart disease)
2. Malignant neoplasms (cancer)
3. Chronic lower respiratory diseases
4. Cerebrovascular diseases (stroke)
5. Accidents (unintentional injuries)
6. Alzheimer’s disease
7. Diabetes mellitus (diabetes)
8. Influenza and pneumonia
9. Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome and nephrosis (kidney
disease)
10. Intentional self-harm (suicide)
11. Septicemia
12. Chronic liver disease and cirrhosis
13. Essential hypertension and hypertensive renal dis­
ease (hypertension)
14. Parkinson’s disease
15. Assault (homicide)
• In 2009, the infant mortality rate was 6.39 infant deaths per 1,000
live births.
• The 10 leading causes of infant death were:
1. Congenital malformations, deformations and chromo­
somal abnormalities (congenital malformations)

Militia is defined as the whole body of people who are fit to bear arms and fight.

"well regulated" is synonymous with "well trained" in colonial vernacular.

www.guncite.com...

In other words: the founders believed that an armed populace who knew who to fight was essential to the security of our freedom, and that it should never be infringed.

The moment you surrender your guns to the central authoritatian state is when you are at the mercy of whatever authoritarian regime comes into power.

Can't be bothered to get all the statistics. But Sweden as more guns per-people than any other country in the world, and yet they have nearly zero gun crime.

I suppose some one on here could get all the correct stats, but if not go check it for your selves.

reply to post by panicman66


That's because Sweeden has good gun laws, they changed their laws after they where being misused.

You can't compare the USA with Sweeden unless you get the balls to toughen your gun laws too.

People kill, not guns. If we take away the right to have a gun, the winners will be the criminals. We need to stop people from being irresponsible with guns. If you have have a nutcase in your house, remove the weaphons.

Secure your firearms, don't leave them in your car or laying around the house.

Pay attention what your kids are doing, call of duty 24/7 is bad.

We need to stop bullies in the schools and stop the spread of hate.

Teach our children that just because some kids are smaller or funny lookin,g not to make fun of them because one day it can hurt you or kill you.

reply to post by iamhobo


Is this over the course of a year? 28,292 homicides in the US in a year? What in the name of...