Facts about Gun Control!!

[toofastforyou]

I've always been against that stupid "right to bear arms" thing and whatever you say won't change how I feel about it. I've expressed my opinion and that's it, I'm done.

Claude.

 

[ghostv8]

I've always been against that stupid "right to bear arms" thing and whatever you say won't change my feelings about it. It's my opinion and that's it, period.

Claude.

Just remember, your freedoms will be and are being attacked in every way by the same people... and since your are on this forum I would assume you like fast cars... get ready for the carbon tax, crushing your more than 10 year old Buick because it's not "green", higher taxes on tires, oil, race gas, etc, etc, anything to do with high performance or older classic cars.. The same people that want to take our and your 2nd amendment right away want total control of everything you do and they will do what ever it takes to make you conform, which you are doing already by not wanting to protect your right to bear arms.
News today is that Mexico's government is sinking and the drug lords are taking control. What would you do if, for instance, the trillions of dollars the muslims have is used to pay the drug lords for entrance into the U.S. and they try to take over the U.S. like in the movie Red Dawn?? You gonna cry "please have my stuff" or fight? If you don't have a gun, how are you going to fight?

 

[rtviper]

Gun control can be done more effectively then we have done. England and Canada have almost no homicide by gun's in comparison to the US. The people still have guns they are just not being used to kill each other.
If you have a police record for a viloent crime and it was really just your wife's doing then you are being punished for poor judge of character in choosing her for a wife.
It is being done today elsewhere and could be done here.

 

[toofastforyou]

Gun control can be done more effectively then we have done. England and Canada have almost no homicide by gun's in comparison to the US.

You see?...:wink:

Claude. :smile:

 

[GNBRETT]

Just remember, your freedoms will be and are being attacked in every way by the same people... and since your are on this forum I would assume you like fast cars... get ready for the carbon tax, crushing your more than 10 year old Buick because it's not "green", higher taxes on tires, oil, race gas, etc, etc, anything to do with high performance or older classic cars.. The same people that want to take our and your 2nd amendment right away want total control of everything you do and they will do what ever it takes to make you conform, which you are doing already by not wanting to protect your right to bear arms.
News today is that Mexico's government is sinking and the drug lords are taking control. What would you do if, for instance, the trillions of dollars the muslims have is used to pay the drug lords for entrance into the U.S. and they try to take over the U.S. like in the movie Red Dawn?? You gonna cry "please have my stuff" or fight? If you don't have a gun, how are you going to fight?

Apples and oranges.... What does a carbon tax and Mexican drug lords have to do with the 2nd amendment? I think you've been smoking too much Mexican ganja....

 

[GNBRETT]

Gun control can be done more effectively then we have done. England and Canada have almost no homicide by gun's in comparison to the US. The people still have guns they are just not being used to kill each other.
If you have a police record for a viloent crime and it was really just your wife's doing then you are being punished for poor judge of character in choosing her for a wife.
It is being done today elsewhere and could be done here.

Exactly.

 

[V8Assassin]

Gun control can be done more effectively then we have done. England and Canada have almost no homicide by gun's in comparison to the US. The people still have guns they are just not being used to kill each other.
If you have a police record for a viloent crime and it was really just your wife's doing then you are being punished for poor judge of character in choosing her for a wife.
It is being done today elsewhere and could be done here.

For the record, I realize my example was not the best in the world. And, you are exactly right. We are judged by the company we keep.

I don't, however, believe england and canada are good examples to relate to our gun control issues. They do not represent our heritage, or our cultural influences. I actually found Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" very imformative as far as the media's influence on the atmosphere of fear and violence in our society.

 

[V8Assassin]

Apples and oranges.... What does a carbon tax and Mexican drug lords have to do with the 2nd amendment? I think you've been smoking too much Mexican ganja....

It's exactly the same thing when you consider what one, and I'm not sure which, of our founding fathers said, our liberties are each bought for a small amount. The meaning of which, and it's relation to the two threads, is simple. It begins with those that are the least defensible by "popular" standards, or by virtue of the very violence they represent. BTW it would very easy to argue the violent nature of speech, but that is a different subject. It ends with the abolishment of what once was our inalienable rights for adoption of those rights found in our european friends, those which are granted and taken not by a higher power, but by the goverment enacted to protect the rights of the very people from which it is taking them.

I'm curious as to hench's take on inalienable vs granted rights as they relate to our constitutional democracy and those found in europe today.

 

[V8Assassin]

I've always been against that stupid "right to bear arms" thing and whatever you say won't change how I feel about it. I've expressed my opinion and that's it, I'm done.

Claude.

[YOUTUBE]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c_OVlrZXstk[/YOUTUBE]

 

[GNBRETT]

For the record, I realize my example was not the best in the world. And, you are exactly right. We are judged by the company we keep.

I don't, however, believe england and canada are good examples to relate to our gun control issues. They do not represent our heritage, or our cultural influences. I actually found Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine" very imformative as far as the media's influence on the atmosphere of fear and violence in our society.

Considering our language is derived from England id say we have quite a bit in common with England. There criminal justice system is just as modern as ours. Their military is just as modern as ours (Maybe not as powerful but as modern). Scotland yard is considered one of the finest law enforcement agencies in the world. Their civil rights are just as modern as ours. There MI5 or 6 government services our just as modern as our intelligent services. There education is just as modern as ours. The cost of living there is something few of us could even dream of affording.

The pound is worth almost twice that of the Dollar so I'd say Englands representation of our heritage and culture is about as close as you will find anywhere on the planet yet their crime rate is a fraction of ours. Gun control has a lot to do with that.

I would agree that Michael Moore's movie was an eye opener in many respects. Even tho I think he is a whacko he makes a few valid points from time to time. Especially the points he makes on countries that have strict gun control and the lack of violent crimes that take place there.

 

[V8Assassin]

Considering our language is derived from England id say we have quite a bit in common with England. There criminal justice system is just as modern as ours. Their military is just as modern as ours (Maybe not as powerful but as modern). Scotland yard is considered one of the finest law enforcement agencies in the world. Their civil rights are just as modern as ours. There MI5 or 6 government services our just as modern as our intelligent services. There education is just as modern as ours. The cost of living there is something few of us could even dream of affording.

The pound is worth almost twice that of the Dollar so I'd say Englands representation of our heritage and culture is about as close as you will find anywhere on the planet yet their crime rate is a fraction of ours. Gun control has a lot to do with that.

I would agree that Michael Moore's movie was an eye opener in many respects. Even tho I think he is a whacko he makes a few valid points from time to time. Especially the points he makes on countries that have strict gun control and the lack of violent crimes that take place there.

The similarites between our system of law and england's is not by chance. We left because of their tyrannical control and reformed the problems. Why now should we captitulate and go back to what we left. Every day they are headed more towards a socialist society and we should join the wagon train of eastern europe.

Civil rights, are you kidding. You are going to compare our great experiment in democracy, our melting pot as it is to a almost completely homogenous society that has been handed down the basis of its laws from rule of royalty. The very liberties they have managed to grasp onto is because of a few "crazy" revolutionist who we know remember as our founding fathers.

Btw you want to know why the pound is rising against the dollar, I'll give you a hint, call your congressman and ask him to quit printing money and handing it out to people who have already bankrupted their company. We are who we are because of our rebellion against england, not a thing we should quickly forget.
It goes without saying that while we as Americans believe man is endowed by his Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, Property, and those natural rights encapsulated in the Bill of Rights that allow us to pursue Happiness unimpeded by government (i.e., as long as we don't violate the equal rights of others) --- the British allowed their government to assign them "rights" which could then be restricted or qualified out of existence at will by government ---- be it the despotic, capricious rule of the Crown or the tyrannical, arbitrary, Parliament majority, or for that matter, the UN.*

And so, near Concord and Lexington on April 19, 1775, when the British attempted to apprehend the leaders of the brewing rebellion, Samuel Adams and John Hancock, and intended to seize and confiscate the arms and ammunition the patriots had stored at Concord --- the shot was fired that was heard around the world. A band of armed patriots --- an organized militia with small private arms, the Minutemen of the revolution --- routed the mighty Red Coats, the disciplined and highly professional force of the British Empire.

Here is the historical background. After the Puritanical rule of the Lord Protector of England, Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658), the British populace welcomed the restoration of King Charles II, condoning the pageantry and permissiveness within his court as well as tolerating the restrictive gun control laws he implemented in the realm. (i.e., the Game Act of 1671). The policies (and religion) of his brother successor, King James II, on the other hand, were not tolerated, and within a few years Parliament orchestrated the Glorious Revolution (1689) that ousted James II and established Parliament's supremacy over the Crown. Included among the Declaration of Rights (Feb. 13, 1689) which Prince William of Orange and his wife Mary, James II's Parliamentary chosen successors, had to agree to accept before they could ascend the throne of England was: "That the subjects which are protestants may have Arms for their Defence suitable to their Conditions, and as allowed by Law." Notice in the statement the lack of equality of citizens before the law (i.e., Protestant vs. Catholic), the arbitrary government prerogative to restrict the natural rights of citizens, and the violation of Sir Edward Coke's wise dictum, et domus sua cuique est tutissimum refugium, "a man's home is his castle," and that a man has a right to possess arms to protect his property, himself, his home, and family. Ditto for Sir William Blackstone's (1723-1780) fifth and last auxiliary right of a citizen, the God-given right of a person to keep and bear arms for his basic and natural right of resistance to oppression and for self-preservation --- "So long as those [liberties of Englishmen] remain inviolate, the subject is perfectly free; for every species of compulsive tyranny and oppression must act in opposition to one or other of those rights."(1) Be that as it may, with the Declaration of Rights, the natural right to self-protection in England became subjected to arbitrary government infringement.

 

[GNBRETT]

The similarites between our system of law and england's is not by chance. We left because of their tyrannical control and reformed the problems. Why now should we captitulate and go back to what we left. Every day they are headed more towards a socialist society and we should join the wagon train of eastern europe.

Civil rights, are you kidding. You are going to compare our great experiment in democracy, our melting pot as it is to a almost completely homogenous society that has been handed down the basis of its laws from rule of royalty. The very liberties they have managed to grasp onto is because of a few "crazy" revolutionist who we know remember as our founding fathers.

Btw you want to know why the pound is rising against the dollar, I'll give you a hint, call your congressman and ask him to quit printing money and handing it out to people who have already bankrupted their company. We are who we are because of our rebellion against england, not a thing we should quickly forget.
It goes without saying that while we as Americans believe man is endowed by his Creator with certain unalienable rights, that among these are Life, Liberty, Property, and those natural rights encapsulated in the Bill of Rights that allow us to pursue Happiness unimpeded by government (i.e., as long as we don't violate the equal rights of others) --- the British allowed their government to assign them "rights" which could then be restricted or qualified out of existence at will by government ---- be it the despotic, capricious rule of the Crown or the tyrannical, arbitrary, Parliament majority, or for that matter, the UN.*

And so, near Concord and Lexington on April 19, 1775, when the British attempted to apprehend the leaders of the brewing rebellion, Samuel Adams and John Hancock, and intended to seize and confiscate the arms and ammunition the patriots had stored at Concord --- the shot was fired that was heard around the world. A band of armed patriots --- an organized militia with small private arms, the Minutemen of the revolution --- routed the mighty Red Coats, the disciplined and highly professional force of the British Empire.

Here is the historical background. After the Puritanical rule of the Lord Protector of England, Oliver Cromwell (1599-1658), the British populace welcomed the restoration of King Charles II, condoning the pageantry and permissiveness within his court as well as tolerating the restrictive gun control laws he implemented in the realm. (i.e., the Game Act of 1671). The policies (and religion) of his brother successor, King James II, on the other hand, were not tolerated, and within a few years Parliament orchestrated the Glorious Revolution (1689) that ousted James II and established Parliament's supremacy over the Crown. Included among the Declaration of Rights (Feb. 13, 1689) which Prince William of Orange and his wife Mary, James II's Parliamentary chosen successors, had to agree to accept before they could ascend the throne of England was: "That the subjects which are protestants may have Arms for their Defence suitable to their Conditions, and as allowed by Law." Notice in the statement the lack of equality of citizens before the law (i.e., Protestant vs. Catholic), the arbitrary government prerogative to restrict the natural rights of citizens, and the violation of Sir Edward Coke's wise dictum, et domus sua cuique est tutissimum refugium, "a man's home is his castle," and that a man has a right to possess arms to protect his property, himself, his home, and family. Ditto for Sir William Blackstone's (1723-1780) fifth and last auxiliary right of a citizen, the God-given right of a person to keep and bear arms for his basic and natural right of resistance to oppression and for self-preservation --- "So long as those [liberties of Englishmen] remain inviolate, the subject is perfectly free; for every species of compulsive tyranny and oppression must act in opposition to one or other of those rights."(1) Be that as it may, with the Declaration of Rights, the natural right to self-protection in England became subjected to arbitrary government infringement.

Your starting to sound like Red. Kinda scary.....

 

[SGRIM]

Considering our language is derived from England id say we have quite a bit in common with England. There criminal justice system is just as modern as ours. Their military is just as modern as ours (Maybe not as powerful but as modern). Scotland yard is considered one of the finest law enforcement agencies in the world. Their civil rights are just as modern as ours. There MI5 or 6 government services our just as modern as our intelligent services. There education is just as modern as ours. The cost of living there is something few of us could even dream of affording.

The pound is worth almost twice that of the Dollar so I'd say England's representation of our heritage and culture is about as close as you will find anywhere on the planet yet their crime rate is a fraction of ours. Gun control has a lot to do with that.

I would agree that Michael Moore's movie was an eye opener in many respects. Even tho I think he is a whacko he makes a few valid points from time to time. Especially the points he makes on countries that have strict gun control and the lack of violent crimes that take place there.

Brett,

I think you are missing some things in your comparison of us to England...

We may be structured like Britain in certain ways but the American people really have nothing in common with them. They think we are vial and disgusting... We don't have "tea at 2" and don't bow down to the Queen...

Brits IMO have always seem to have felt a sense of being "better" than the rest of the world. IMO all the Elites of the world have this same spirit... So maybe the majority of them get along better and conform easier. You don't have the multi culturalism there you do here...

When is the last time you have heard of Bocephus doing a concert in England:biggrin:

We are vastly different from them IMO. A lot more of us! No offense to the Brits but who do you think could survive better in a natural disaster? The good ole boys of America that don't mind getting dirty, or the proper Englishman that knows how to dress pretty?:biggrin:

 

[V8Assassin]

Your starting to sound like Red. Kinda scary.....

The english are easier to control because of the centuries of mass indoctrination to the power of the crown. The ability for the english population to better conform to the will of the gov't is nothing more than a relflection of the history of tyrannical royal rule there. Those who split, don't forget, were in general poor, of a different religion, and/or criminals as such defined by the king. A more appropriate comparison would have been to Australia, their prisoner coloney, with whom we actually have more in common.

Now that sounds like Red, btw where is Red??

 

[rtviper]

I think in the attempt to get ones point across we are giving to much credit to the thugs who are using all the guns to kill.
If you ask one of the idiots who just shot someone what were you thinking ,they would not say because of what v8 just said? They are societies defects with too easy access to guns. I have lived near Canadians and English and they have similar lives and ideas about life as many of us.
To imply the homicides by gun is just the way our Country came to be IMO is BS. These are criminals who want what you have and will take it.
Interviews with those who kill indicate that many are over respect. "I shot him because he disrespected me". " I shot him because I wanted to be initiated into the gang". "I shot him because I wanted his new tennis shoes".
This mentality has nothing to do with the founding of our Country.
Guns are easy to get by anyone, and those with guns are often very lax in control of their weapons

 

[GNBRETT]

Brett,

I think you are missing some things in your comparison of us to England...

We may be structured like Britain in certain ways but the American people really have nothing in common with them. They think we are vial and disgusting... We don't have "tea at 2" and don't bow down to the Queen...

Brits IMO have always seem to have felt a sense of being "better" than the rest of the world. IMO all the Elites of the world have this same spirit... So maybe the majority of them get along better and conform easier. You don't have the multi culturalism there you do here...

When is the last time you have heard of Bocephus doing a concert in England:biggrin:

We are vastly different from them IMO. A lot more of us! No offense to the Brits but who do you think could survive better in a natural disaster? The good ole boys of America that don't mind getting dirty, or the proper Englishman that knows how to dress pretty?:biggrin:

Oh I know were not the same but we share a lot of similar freedoms. The Royal family really has very little power in the actual government of England anyway. It's more for show then anything.

My point is they are a very modern and Sophisticated society and have virtually no gun violence and one of the lowest murder rates per capita in the world. Guns or lack of play a huge role in that.

Yea, I know we would kick their ass in a war but their intelligent services are top shelf.

Would still of course rather be here then there especially since they drive on the wrong side of the road....

 

[toofastforyou]

When seconds count, law enforcement is only minutes away. I'd rather be armed and take my chances.

"To each his own"...

Claude.

 

[Rivical]

I've posted my response as a seperate topic in the Political Forum. If you have half an hour check it out.

IT'S ALL ABOUT FREEDOM

 

[faster]

You can say whatever you want, but I'm IN FAVOR of gun control. I think that even though are not perfect, every effort to limit gun use should be made. I'm 57 y/o and never had to defend myself with a gun or anything else. I've always minded my own business and never got in trouble with anyone.
It's NOT everyone's task to take the law into their own hands. Some people are paid to enforce the law, so let them do their job, period.

Claude.

You can't be that naive.

I agree everyone should have the right to bare arms but there needs to be better control of the guns. I have read all the horror stories from the past. Someone mentioned England and also Canada has very strict gun laws. Canada has about .05 deaths per 100k population compared to US at about 4.8 deaths per 100k pop.
Canadians still own guns and complain about the hassle but the numbers look good?
Early in the discussion I saw all the fear regarding the trampling of the Constitution and I thought you were talking about GW and Cheney untill Obama was mentioned. Very few Presidents have walked all over the Constitution like those two have, but thats another discussion. I dont think in this day and age we would allow anyone to take away our guns. Regulate better, yes, take away, wont happen

How are we doing regulating speed on our nations streets and highways?
How are we doing regulating illegal drugs on the streets?
How are we doing regulating criminals on parole?
How are we doing regulating criminal activity on Wall Street?

Regulate better? What are you smoking?

It's not a point of enforcing the law, it's a point of ensuring your other freedoms aren't encroached upon. Reread Assassin's last post. on the island.
The only form of control I'd support would be measures to make sure law enforcement had responsibility of checking registered guns are still present after a burglary or car theft, whatever. You own a gun, prove you have it. And if not, require issue of a civil citation for which there'd be a min. penalty of 2X $$$ of the most expensive firearm missing and max of 3X the insured value of all missing, in the case of gross negligence to secure. And 100hrs of community service for introducing them into the criminal enterprise system. Make the penalties worth buying a safe for even a single gun. Control that ownership is sensibly handled.

More laws won't make less crime. We already have laws on the books with serious consequences for crime. It is not enforced and that is the problem. Quit making life in jail better than life on the street for these criminals.
We just had some jerk killed by an armed 78 year old homeowner when he kicked in her front door. He had 33 arrests for burglary, auto theft, battery and assault since 1996. What do you think he would have done to her while she was trying to get her gun out of the safe?
We don't need more laws limiting the law abiding.

Gun control can be done more effectively then we have done. England and Canada have almost no homicide by gun's in comparison to the US. The people still have guns they are just not being used to kill each other.
If you have a police record for a viloent crime and it was really just your wife's doing then you are being punished for poor judge of character in choosing her for a wife.
It is being done today elsewhere and could be done here.

I love how you people make up facts to suite your agenda. They don't have guns, they were taken away and they still have homicide by gun. The homicide rate has more than doubled since disarming the law abiding citizens. If a law abiding citizen uses a gun defending themselves they go to jail over there. It doesn't matter what the odds against him were.
Dead is dead whether by gun, knife, club, whatever.

The gun lets a 95lb. 78 year old grandma even the odds with a 250lb. 25 year old assailant or assailants. That is the whole point of firearms!

My only real gripe is you leftists who list all carbines as "ASSAULT WEAPONS".
That one always gets me going.

Mikey

 

[rtviper]

You can't be that naive.





How are we doing regulating speed on our nations streets and highways?
How are we doing regulating illegal drugs on the streets?
How are we doing regulating criminals on parole?
How are we doing regulating criminal activity on Wall Street?

Regulate better? What are you smoking?

.





More laws won't make less crime. We already have laws on the books with serious consequences for crime. It is not enforced and that is the problem. Quit making life in jail better than life on the street for these criminals.
We just had some jerk killed by an armed 78 year old homeowner when he kicked in her front door. He had 33 arrests for burglary, auto theft, battery and assault since 1996. What do you think he would have done to her while she was trying to get her gun out of the safe?
We don't need more laws limiting the law abiding.





I love how you people make up facts to suite your agenda. They don't have guns, they were taken away and they still have homicide by gun. The homicide rate has more than doubled since disarming the law abiding citizens. If a law abiding citizen uses a gun defending themselves they go to jail over there. It doesn't matter what the odds against him were.
Dead is dead whether by gun, knife, club, whatever.

The gun lets a 95lb. 78 year old grandma even the odds with a 250lb. 25 year old assailant or assailants. That is the whole point of firearms!

My only real gripe is you leftists who list all carbines as "ASSAULT WEAPONS".
That one always gets me going.

Mikey

I believe all the items mentioned are not as bad as they would be with no enforcement IE regulation.
Could regulations be created that would do a better job? Yes more severe penalties and less leniency from the Courts. So answer is, the regulation of each has had an impact.
Key word here is better


You must be from the right. Say something and it must be true? LOL Canada's population has about 29% gun ownership compared to US 39%. They do have guns. Canada has a rate of homicide by guns of .076 per 100k population, US 3.72 per 100k.
England has about 5% gun ownership and deaths by guns at 0.11 per 100k
Both countries have much less total homicide then the US
What are you smoking?