Discussion about rights to bear arms

[v-600]

As a UK citizen, teacher and fellow human being I was saddened by the news of the murders in Connecticut a few days ago. As a foreigner I never really studied US law (most of the time it doesn't affect me). I also realise that the civilised world doesn't really understand the US attitude to guns, so hope to get some sensible insight here.

First, my own view is that gun regulation is necessary and that more guns will not solve a problem. You may disagree with me (again, it doesn't affect me) but I don't particularly want to know if you do or don't.

That said, I've seen a lot on the news about the right to bear arms. I've quickly looked through wikipedia (as I mentioned I don't have an in depth knowledge of this) and it most of the wording seems to show that US citizens have the right to bear arms to defend themselves.

You can arm yourself with a big stick. You don't need a gun. So where does the fascination with guns come from?

Pro gun groups are claiming they have a right to carry guns....well do they? Could laws be passed banning guns and mandating that everyone carries a sword to defend themselves? Is this still within the boundaries set out by the constitution?

If so, what is the big deal with owning a gun? I honestly don't understand it.

I know the US has a long tradition and culture of owning guns but times change. You had a long tradition of owning slaves. You had a long tradition of not owning mobile phones. Both of these traditions are no more, which at least shows that folks in the US are willing to accept changes to their society.

Lastly, going back to the sword/gun point. If it is defined in the constitution that citizens specifically are allowed guns, can you change the constitution? At this point I will acknowledge I have no real standing to say what US citizens should do with their constitution, moreso coming from a country that has no single document stating my rights and responsibilities. However from my viewpoint this makes sense so bear with me:
1) the constitution specifically grants the rights for citizens to own and carry guns
2) lots of people are being killed by guns
3) enough people stand up and say this is not a good thing (I have no idea what "enough" would be here)
4) change the constitution to reflect the views of the people

The very fact that the constitution has amendments to it suggests people are amenable to changing it when it suits them, so why not now?

Please try and keep this on topic and help a foreigner to understand where all this gun culture stuff comes from. Please don't let it degenerate into another guns are good/guns are bad/good/bad/good/bad/thread-locked thread.

 

[bigrash]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RablPaIREkk

 

[waggy]

what would saying they are not illegal do? how do you take them off the streets?

you would have to go door to door searching EVERY house.


stupid idea is stupid. it won't solve nothing.

 

[v-600]

I wasn't suggesting you should actually do it. It was an example to highlight the point - would you be allowed to do it?

 

[v-600]

Hehe. I'd not seen the family guy clip before. This is something I take that Americans have been thinking about for a lot longer than me. Care to share the wisdom.

 

[Newbian]

 

[waggy]

I wasn't suggesting you should actually do it. It was an example to highlight the point - would you be allowed to do it?

wouldn't happen. far to many issues if they do. far to many guns in the hands of law abiding citizens. you ban them you are going to have a fight on your hands.

Good luck getting people to turn them in. I know damn well i wouldn't.

 

[Capt Caveman]

 

[Arkaign]

You can't re-cork the genie. There are quite literally billions of firearms in the US. The overwhelming vast majority of them are never used by a criminal to cause any harm. To boot, gun control efforts in the US have always met with abject failure. We have no-firearms zones, but criminals are if anything more bold there in using them, while the responsbile citizens who obey the bans are left defenseless. A nationwide ban would simply hurt more than it would help.

I also see comments like how killer X, Y, or Z wouldn't be able to kill so many people without a firearm. Assuming that they couldn't get a weapon, it's not like a dedicated asshole can't murder a bunch of people with a vehicle as well, or even worse, anyone with an IQ of 90 can make some rather spectacular explosives from common materials. The theatre murdering dickhead out in Colorado recently also had a cache of explosives in his Apartment. If he had used those rather than some rifles, he may well have mudered 10x the people.

If a magic act was pulled and all firearms in the US simply vanished one day, it wouldn't be long before cartels/etc started piling them in easily just like the drug trade, and it would be criminals who were heavily armed while the general citizenry would be helpless. The US is a nation of 300 million people of vastly different cultural and socioeconomic status, it's just a violent place in many areas, guns or no guns.

Cliffs : banning guns here will do no good, in fact it will hurt more than it helps. What will help? In general, a better economy, better education, and better mental health resources. But nothing is a magic bullet (heh).

 

[zerocool84]

Couldn't you have talked about this in the other threads currently going on?

 

[v-600]

I know damn well i wouldn't.

Ok, help me out here. Speaking as someone from a country with an unarmed polece force for example, I may just not get it. Why?

 

[v-600]

Couldn't you have talked about this in the other threads currently going on?

Yes. But the one or two I looked at here didn't seem to discuss the point I wanted to raise and after looking through the first 3-4 pages they seemed to degenerate to where it didn't look like there was any point contributing new ideas.

 

[waggy]

Ok, help me out here. Speaking as someone from a country with an unarmed polece force for example, I may just not get it. Why?

why? why should i give up something that keeps me safe? i live in the country. if something happens it will take 10+ minutes at the min for a cop to get here. a LOT can happen in 10 minutes.

Criminals won't give up guns and don't own them legally. why the fuck should i put my family at risk because you are afraid of a gun?

be afraid of crazy people. The guy had mental issues that is what caused him go kill. the gun was just the tool he used.


and not to mention hunting and sport shooting.

 

[Arkaign]

Ok, help me out here. Speaking as someone from a country with an unarmed polece force for example, I may just not get it. Why?

http://reason.com/archives/2002/11/01/gun-controls-twisted-outcome

The Mirror conceded that the CBS anchorman was correct. Except for murder and rape, it admitted, "Britain has overtaken the US for all major crimes."...

I'd wager that if one ignored the sections of the US where there are gun bans, that even the per-capita murder/rape rates would be higher in the UK. Unarmed populace = emboldened criminals.

 

[waggy]

http://reason.com/archives/2002/11/01/gun-controls-twisted-outcome

The Mirror conceded that the CBS anchorman was correct. Except for murder and rape, it admitted, "Britain has overtaken the US for all major crimes."...

I'd wager that if one ignored the sections of the US where there are gun bans, that even the per-capita murder/rape rates would be higher in the UK. Unarmed populace = emboldened criminals.

take a look at Chicago. guns are very very hard to get legally yet there is at least 1 murder a night.


also: they have taken to trying to ban knives. along with kitchen knives once. people will find other tools to commit crimes and murder

 

[shortylickens]

 

[Lifted]

UN black helicopters.

/thread

 

[v-600]

http://reason.com/archives/2002/11/01/gun-controls-twisted-outcome

The Mirror conceded that the CBS anchorman was correct. Except for murder and rape, it admitted, "Britain has overtaken the US for all major crimes."...

I'd wager that if one ignored the sections of the US where there are gun bans, that even the per-capita murder/rape rates would be higher in the UK. Unarmed populace = emboldened criminals.

I never said the UK was a nice place to live. We have soaring rates of knife crime, welfare problems, rising petty theft, falling levels education etc but I don't feel the need to get a gun. I also don't understand how putting more guns on the streets of Britain would help.

 

[jpeyton]

2) lots of people are being killed by guns

We should put it into perspective. 11,100 firearms-related homicides occurred in the US in 2011. 11,000 people also died as a result of drunk driving. 55,000 died because of the flu/pneumonia and 600,000 died because of heart disease. Where's the national ban on cheeseburgers?

3) enough people stand up and say this is not a good thing (I have no idea what "enough" would be here)

There's also enough people who own guns and use them responsibly to counter that argument. ~50% of households have a firearm; 80 million firearms owners; 280 million firearms. 99.9% of which weren't used in gun crime.

4) change the constitution to reflect the views of the people

Changing the Constitution requires a 66% legislative majority to propose and a 75% state majority to approve. Good luck.

The last time we felt that strongly about changing it was to end prohibition, which also meant we as a country were okay with allowing 99.9% of people to responsibly consume alcohol if that also meant we would have 11,000 dead people because of the relative few drunk drivers.

 

[waggy]

I never said the UK was a nice place to live. We have soaring rates of knife crime, welfare problems, rising petty theft, falling levels education etc but I don't feel the need to get a gun. I also don't understand how putting more guns on the streets of Britain would help.

his point is that crime is going to happen with or without gun control. without it it seems UK has a major rise in crime.

Shit is going to happen with or without banning guns. i would rather have a tool that will help me keep my family safe. Cops are to slow and have no duty to come anyway.

 

[OOBradm]

When approached with a question about whether or not something should be illegal, I always start with the assumption that maximizes individual rights. So, guns should be legal by default. Then, for me to change my mind, I would have to be shown evidence which points out that the vast majority of US citizens would be better off by the new law making the item in question illegal. Who is the government to say what I can and cannot do as long as I'm not imposing on anyone else's livelihood or freedom?

Often times people think that a few bad apples should ruin a universal freedom (IE what happened in Connecticut and gun control laws). But, what people need to remember is that once a freedom is taken away, it is infinitely harder to get back.

 

[v-600]

Ok, as I understand so far, correct me if I am wrong. There is nothing specific stating you are allowed guns, but any attempt at a blanket ban would be pointless. Ownership and usage of guns is ingrained as part of US culture (why? most answers so far point towards personal/family protection).

Is the occasional high profile tragedy (for example a school shooting) a price that most gun owners see as acceptable for their right to protect their family?

If not, and bans don't work, then what needs to change?

 

[waggy]

Ok, as I understand so far, correct me if I am wrong. There is nothing specific stating you are allowed guns,
If not, and bans don't work, then what needs to change?

wait what? nothing specific stating you are allowed? lol

 

[v-600]

wait what? nothing specific stating you are allowed? lol

Sorry I should have been more precise. You are allowed guns/arms. It would not be unconstitutional to impose a blanket ban on guns, but it would be ineffective.

 

[sixone]

You live in the UK, and you don't understand why the American Constitution guaranteed the rights of citizens to bear arms?

Read up on the aftermath of the last two Scottish risings. "He created a desert and called it peace."

Thankfully, our forefathers had the foresight to make sure that never happened here.