Obama may re-instate the ban on assault weapons.

[JRslinger]

As a rebuttal to your Australia comment I provide this link

http://www.smh.com.au/news/national/gun-laws-fall-short-in-war-on-crime/2005/10/28/1130400366681.html

That artical is from 2005.

In Australia NOW it is a requirement that all firearms are kept at a gun club
OR
after two years ownership may be kept at home in a locked safe.

This stops guns getting into the wrong hands or being used in a moment of anger.

How does that fact that crime victims know their attacker have any bearing on self defense?

Because you are very likely to be shot with the family gun, by another family member (whom you are unlikely/unable to shoot back, as they have your gun....).

Furthermore the national crime victimization survey estimates 100,000 defensive gun uses a year. It's halfway down the page.
http://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/165476.txt

To quote that same report wich is very out of date (from 1997)
"Evidence suggests that this survey and others like it overestimate the frequency with which firearms were used by private citizens to defend against criminal attack. "

Studies show that only 0.2% of crime is thwarted by guns, this includes the use of guns by police officers (20% of these incidents).

By saying that I'm likely to be shot by a family member, you're assuming my family is violent. The thousands of defensive gun uses per year suggests that law abiding people are more likely to use a gun in self defense than commit murder. Many murders are committed by sociopaths with criminal records that prohibit them from legally owning guns.

As far as the differences between the U.S and Australia; I believe the US has larger racial underclasses who commit violent crime at a higher rate. The war on drugs helps criminal gang cultures thrive in the ghettos. This is where most shootings take place.

Also keep in mind we have states with high rates of gun ownership and low rates of gun crime (New Hampshire, Idaho,) So the key aspect is culture, not gun control laws. Criminal subcultures are the problem.

 

[Travdelosmuertos]

Sometimes I wish I lived in the US. Bigger salaries, cheaper computers, good stuff. Then I think that I might run into a psychopath carrying one minigun in each arm and an M60 in his backpack who is using them as a penis extension, feeling badass when he is carrying them... and just got dumped by his girlfriend. Greece is fine, Greece will have to do.

I think I feel more safe living in a place where murders are committed by deviants, not by the very police officers who are sworn to protect and serve.

Edit: Just speculation here: maybe if corrupt police officers feared armed retribution they wouldn't commit such atrocities.

 

[TwistedEllipses]

"...from my cold dead hands..."

As it happens Charlton Heston is dead now...

 

[TwistedEllipses]

Ignore this, I can't read. Can someone delete this?

 

[Agayek]

Here's the logic that does follow. The firing rate is a lot faster, so if you were on a murderous rampage you could do more damage with that than with a slower firing rifle with more powerful rounds...

No. No it's not.

The action and important inner workings of the guns the proposed bill is trying to ban IS EXACTLY THE SAME as the hunting rifles you find acceptable. The only difference in the ones that are different is that the hunting rifles fire larger rounds, at higher speeds.

If you are going to be against "assault rifles", be against all guns. Then at least you wouldn't be a hypocrite.

 

[Po_the_ads_toner]

but I am not.

 

[Travdelosmuertos]

assault weapons are pretty fucking scary. besides, i dont see any reason why a US citizen needs them. you think pistols would be suffice against, say, a thief.

So you're suggesting we ban hunting rifles then? Does ANYBODY read the thread before posting these days?

since i am against hunting then yes

Don't eat any meat then please.

I eat meat, am pro-gun and I think hunting - at least in context of deer season - is stupid for two reasons:

1. A bunch of untrained, half-retarded hicks running around in the woods shooting every which way? No thanks. Here in Pennsylvania, people are shot accidentally every year. The gun safety classes are a joke. The regulations on hunting - at least in PA - are not strict enough and make it unsafe.

2. When I ask people why they hunt, the logic given to me is that we need to "thin the herd" to allow them to survive. I say fuck them. If they're too stupid to conserve resources to live then evolution has set them up at a dead end. Fuck 'em. Don't call me callous, either. That's nature. We're just getting in the way of the natural course of things. I feel the same about pandas. If they can't fuck to save their own species, they're not doing the world any good.

 

[Agayek]

2. When I ask people why they hunt, the logic given to me is that we need to "thin the herd" to allow them to survive. I say fuck them. If they're too stupid to conserve resources to live then evolution has set them up at a dead end. Fuck 'em. Don't call me callous, either. That's nature. We're just getting in the way of the natural course of things. I feel the same about pandas. If they can't fuck to save their own species, they're not doing the world any good.

The same could be said about humanity. If people are too stupid to not shoot themselves or others, then fuck 'em. That's nature, we're just getting in the way of the natural course of things.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

I for one am against the banning of assault rifles.

And for those of you who are saying "Sure Obama has the right. He's the president." that's crap. One man in a seat of authority should not have the power to trump the ideas of millions.

And what if those millions are actually FOR more gun laws/control? Does he have any right then to trump them by NOT creating a ban on assault rifles?

Maybe a simple majority is in favor, but the 2nd amendment issue means that in order for the ban to be fully legitimate there needs to be a constitutional amendment. Do you think that 2/3 of the senate and house, as well as 3/4 of the states would favor an amendment getting rid of the 2nd Amendment (or at least limiting it severely)? I would admit that a simple majority f Americans would favor this, but not a 2/3-3/4 majority.

This point is why America was founded as a Republic, not a Democracy. Democracy is the enemy of Liberty.

 

[Travdelosmuertos]

I think I feel more safe living in a place where murders are committed by deviants, not by the very police officers who are sworn to protect and serve.

Edit: Just speculation here: maybe if corrupt police officers feared armed retribution they wouldn't commit such atrocities.

erm...since when do the US police have a record of not being accused of using excessive force?

I've not once heard of a fifteen year old child being murdered in cold blood without provocation by an armed officer on the beat. Have you?

And yes, especially in the 90s, the LAPD made headlines for being a bunch of bigoted meatheads. The only time cops seem to be making headlines in the US anymore is when they get killed.

 

[chaser[phoenix]]

There's no part of me that sees the use of concealable weapons or assault weapons.
I suppose it goes on that I borderline consider myself a hippie-- why can't we all just get along?

I'm still convinced that "the right to bear arms" is out of date; that now we have the correct technology and law-enforcement to fight "evil-doers".
I suppose, therefore, I agree with Obama's ban on whatever needs be banned. If it keeps us from killing each other; even if the lack of weapons saves one life, then it was worth the "sacrifice".

 

[TornadoADV]

assault weapons are pretty fucking scary. besides, i dont see any reason why a US citizen needs them. you think pistols would be suffice against, say, a thief.

So you're suggesting we ban hunting rifles then? Does ANYBODY read the thread before posting these days?

since i am against hunting then yes

Don't eat any meat then please.

I eat meat, am pro-gun and I think hunting - at least in context of deer season - is stupid for two reasons:

1. A bunch of untrained, half-retarded hicks running around in the woods shooting every which way? No thanks. Here in Pennsylvania, people are shot accidentally every year. The gun safety classes are a joke. The regulations on hunting - at least in PA - are not strict enough and make it unsafe.

Well, I come from the Midwest where we take our hunting seriously, so I can't speak much about hunters outside of my regional area.

I'm still convinced that "the right to bear arms" is out of date; that now we have the correct technology and law-enforcement to fight "evil-doers".
I suppose, therefore, I agree with Obama's ban on whatever needs be banned. If it keeps us from killing each other; even if the lack of weapons saves one life, then it was worth the "sacrifice".

It won't save any lives at all, the percentage of firearms in the nation used in criminal activity is already less then a tenth of a percentage point. You're more likely to get struck by lightning then shot by a firearm.

 

[sanzo]

2. When I ask people why they hunt, the logic given to me is that we need to "thin the herd" to allow them to survive. I say fuck them. If they're too stupid to conserve resources to live then evolution has set them up at a dead end. Fuck 'em. Don't call me callous, either. That's nature. We're just getting in the way of the natural course of things. I feel the same about pandas. If they can't fuck to save their own species, they're not doing the world any good.

The same could be said about humanity. If people are too stupid to not shoot themselves or others, then fuck 'em. That's nature, we're just getting in the way of the natural course of things.

Only problem there is guns are not part of the natural course of things; they're man-made.

Now if people were dropping themselves of cliffs and the like, and I'm sure there are some people doing that somewhere, then you'd have a case

 

[Agayek]

]There's no part of me that sees the use of concealable weapons or assault weapons.
I suppose it goes on that I borderline consider myself a hippie-- why can't we all just get along?

I'm still convinced that "the right to bear arms" is out of date; that now we have the correct technology and law-enforcement to fight "evil-doers".
I suppose, therefore, I agree with Obama's ban on whatever needs be banned. If it keeps us from killing each other; even if the lack of weapons saves one life, then it was worth the "sacrifice".

What about when the evil-doers are the law-enforcement personnel?

Surprisingly, I happen to agree with you on the first point. I think we should all get along and fuck all the guns. I couldn't disagree more on the second point though. The government cannot suspend liberties because of potential violence. It's not within their purview to play mother to everyone.

As Benjamin Franklin once said, "those who would sacrifice liberty for safety deserve neither". I paraphrase, but the point remains. This whole debate isn't about getting guns off the streets (which I may add for the umpteenth time, only guns that superficially look scary will be banned), it's about the government violating basic rights found within the American Constitution.

 

[Travdelosmuertos]

2. When I ask people why they hunt, the logic given to me is that we need to "thin the herd" to allow them to survive. I say fuck them. If they're too stupid to conserve resources to live then evolution has set them up at a dead end. Fuck 'em. Don't call me callous, either. That's nature. We're just getting in the way of the natural course of things. I feel the same about pandas. If they can't fuck to save their own species, they're not doing the world any good.

The same could be said about humanity. If people are too stupid to not shoot themselves or others, then fuck 'em. That's nature, we're just getting in the way of the natural course of things.

Replace "stupid" with "faulty instincts". The reason deer die off is because their instincts tell them to eat as much as possible before winter. Winter comes, not enough food to go around and then they die.

People, however, forfeit instinct long ago. A man can't justify shooting three cops with a high-powered assault rifle while wearing nearly full body armor by calling it instinct.

 

[Rooster Cogburn]

Apologies, the boards went wonky for a few minutes.

 

[Agayek]

Only problem there is guns are not part of the natural course of things; they're man-made.

Now if people were dropping themselves of cliffs and the like, and I'm sure there are some people doing that somewhere, then you'd have a case

Oh really? Would it be natural if someone beat someone to death with their bare hands? So then when monkeys use a stick to knock down fruit they can't reach or dig up ants, that's not natural? Is it not natural to use what tools are available to make something easier? Because that seems a fairly consistent occurrence in nature.

Everything we do is natural, because humanity is nothing more than another animal, whether you are willing to accept it or not.

 

[Travdelosmuertos]

2. When I ask people why they hunt, the logic given to me is that we need to "thin the herd" to allow them to survive. I say fuck them. If they're too stupid to conserve resources to live then evolution has set them up at a dead end. Fuck 'em. Don't call me callous, either. That's nature. We're just getting in the way of the natural course of things. I feel the same about pandas. If they can't fuck to save their own species, they're not doing the world any good.

The same could be said about humanity. If people are too stupid to not shoot themselves or others, then fuck 'em. That's nature, we're just getting in the way of the natural course of things.

Replace "stupid" with "faulty instincts". The reason deer die off is because their instincts tell them to eat as much as possible before winter. Winter comes, not enough food to go around and then they die.

People, however, forfeit instinct long ago. A man can't justify shooting three cops with a high-powered assault rifle while wearing nearly full body armor by calling it instinct.

 

[TwistedEllipses]

I think I feel more safe living in a place where murders are committed by deviants, not by the very police officers who are sworn to protect and serve.

Edit: Just speculation here: maybe if corrupt police officers feared armed retribution they wouldn't commit such atrocities.

erm...since when do the US police have a record of not being accused of using excessive force?

I've not once heard of a fifteen year old child being murdered in cold blood without provocation by an armed officer on the beat. Have you?

And yes, especially in the 90s, the LAPD made headlines for being a bunch of bigoted meatheads. The only time cops seem to be making headlines in the US anymore is when they get killed.

I'm not sure how you managed to quote that since, I edited the message out directly after posting because I totally misread what was said...

 

[RavingLibDem]

I think he should do it, but I'm Brittish and tbh, I don't see that allowing everyone to have their own arsenals actually helps security, because tbh, the US has much higher violent murder rates compared to rates of assaults.