| Author | Thread |
|
|
12/19/2012 03:40:16 PM · #676 |
Originally posted by GeneralE:
One of the Supremes (I'm not sure if it's Justice Alito or Scalia), holds, as a strict Constitutional originalist, that the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment only holds for weapons available at the time of its ratification. |
I'm glad to hear it. It's more than I would have expected from either of them. |
|
|
|
12/19/2012 03:48:02 PM · #677 |
So...what was available in 1791?
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:
Originally posted by GeneralE:
One of the Supremes (I'm not sure if it's Justice Alito or Scalia), holds, as a strict Constitutional originalist, that the right to bear arms under the Second Amendment only holds for weapons available at the time of its ratification. |
I'm glad to hear it. It's more than I would have expected from either of them. |
|
|
|
|
12/19/2012 03:49:21 PM · #678 |
Black powder muskets that were very innacurate and very slow to load.
|
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:06:28 PM · #679 |
Originally posted by PGerst:
Oh for crying out loud....why does everyone need to argue over the dumbest of things?
Tool....weapon....who the hell cares what its called. The end result is the same.
Bring the discussion back to the points that matter.
ETA: Just thought about it for a second more, there is a little use in the discussion of a tool or weapon. This was obviously my fault for calling that in the first place. I should have said device, instrument, or even object. I was trying to remove the particular connotation to lead a more open discussion on gun control.
Originally posted by Spork99:
Tool n. anything used as a means of accomplishing a task or purpose |
|
Don't be so quick to disregard the argument over tool/weapon- the semantics, the verbiage frame the debate,
just like pro life/pro choice, Affordable Healthcare act/Obamacare, Estate tax/death tax.
The NRA wants us to believe guns are mere tools, and that the real issue is mental health, society, videogames, anything but the fact that there are too many guns around and not much real need for them to be around.
... to hunt? - we don't need to hunt anymore, its a hobby, and if it meant lots fewer guns around, find something else to do.
... for target practice? - shoot an airsoft rifle or some non lethal equivalent. its a hobby remember.
... to protect yourself against tyranny? give me a break- firstly, go ahead and announce to the US government that you are ready to effectuate a regime change- lets see what happens to you. and no amount of guns you could ever amass will overthrow the US government, get real. Stop watching "Red Dawn," you and your hunting buddies are not going to overthrow the government.
...for protection? tasers, mace, baseball bats, carry a hammer and a machete if you must, you will not do much worse than those trying to protect themselves and repeatedly shot with their own guns(for every anecdote you have about deterence- theirs one with a stupid accident)
...to stop mass killings? it just doesn't happen, and if it does its extremely rare.do guns stop mass killings?
...because its your constitutional right? c'mon- Scalia won't be there forever. Restrictive laws in Washington DC that were helping were overturned, the "right" could soon be interpreted by some court not to be so "God given" and solid- especially at the expense of our children.
The world is changing, if you are scared say it, if you like shooting guns say it- thats ok, just don't make up bullshit reasons for the "need" for guns.
|
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:06:47 PM · #680 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
Black powder muskets that were very innacurate and very slow to load. |
The problem is that this was what was available to EVERYONE. Civilian weapons were effectively equivalent to military weapons of the age.
As for no-one advocating to ban weapons. Bullshit. That's exactly what you are advocating for, you just don't have the balls to say it, or you think it's an unreasonable goal. |
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:11:03 PM · #681 |
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:17:25 PM · #682 |
Originally posted by Alexkc:
Originally posted by Spork99:
Originally posted by escapetooz:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Spork99:
Tool n. anything used as a means of accomplishing a task or purpose |
You know better than that. All weapons are tools, but not all tools are weapons. Arguably, any tool (or anything, for that matter, including words) can be used as a weapon, but for the purposes of this discussion, "guns" are tools of the specific subset that is designed to fire a projectile down a hollow tube at a high velocity. |
Yes, and the task or purpose of a gun is to kill or mame. Not put holes in paper. Not build a house. Not fly me to France.
A nuclear bomb might do a mighty good job of displacing land, but that doesn't make it a building tool any more than shooting at paper makes a gun a hole punch. It's a weapon. To deny that is lunacy. |
No the purpose of the gun is to fire the projectile, the decision to kill or attempt to kill is not made by the tool, it's made by the person with their finger on the trigger. |
You are grasping at straws. If you admit that guns are built to kill (no one can deny it) the discussion can go on. You can even say that sometimes killing people is useful, but please, guns are not simply tools. |
I will say that some guns are designed to make killing other people easier (which may or may not be a bad thing based on the context of the situation), others are designed to make holes in paper very close together, others are designed to make hunting easier. The intent of their design however, does not mandate their use. Like anything, something designed for one use can be used for another and may even be the best tool for that job. (Ever use a screwdriver to pry open a can of paint?) All guns' basic function is to fire a projectile. Their overall design may contain other features to make their use for the purpose intended by the designer easier, but does not preclude their use for other purposes. Simply saying all guns are meant to kill or making some other statement like that is absolutely false. The key is in the features designed to facilitate one purpose over another.
|
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:18:56 PM · #683 |
Here's The Atlantic Monthly with a very interesting article on how Japan has virtually eliminated shooting deaths.
Originally posted by The Atlantic:
But what about the country at the other end of the spectrum? What is the role of guns in Japan, the developed world's least firearm-filled nation and perhaps its strictest controller? In 2008, the U.S. had over 12 thousand firearm-related homicides. All of Japan experienced only 11, fewer than were killed at the Aurora shooting alone. And that was a big year: 2006 saw an astounding two, and when that number jumped to 22 in 2007, it became a national scandal. By comparison, also in 2008, 587 Americans were killed just by guns that had discharged accidentally. |
Message edited by author 2012-12-19 16:20:09. |
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:20:19 PM · #684 |
Just like Bush & Co. were behind 9/11 to get into Iraq.
I love conspiracy theorists, especially the batshit crazy ones. |
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:22:49 PM · #685 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Here's The Atlantic Monthly with a very interesting article on how Japan has virtually eliminated shooting deaths.
Originally posted by The Atlantic:
But what about the country at the other end of the spectrum? What is the role of guns in Japan, the developed world's least firearm-filled nation and perhaps its strictest controller? In 2008, the U.S. had over 12 thousand firearm-related homicides. All of Japan experienced only 11, fewer than were killed at the Aurora shooting alone. And that was a big year: 2006 saw an astounding two, and when that number jumped to 22 in 2007, it became a national scandal. By comparison, also in 2008, 587 Americans were killed just by guns that had discharged accidentally. |
|
Linked (#620) to that earlier in this thread Bear. Amazingly no rebuttals on the article or numbers presented. |
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:23:42 PM · #686 |
Originally posted by escapetooz:
Originally posted by Spork99:
Everyone likes to tout the attack in China as an example of gun control law success. You do realize that the Chinese government has murdered somewhere between 40-70 million of its own people in purges, starvation campaigns, re-education camps and the like.
Yes, people hunt with AR-15's. Varmints and pests mostly.
Very, very few people in the US have fully automatic weapons. |
Non sequitur. It's not an example of gun control law success. It's an example of guns do more damage than knives.
The Chinese govt is irrelevant. |
That's not how it's being presented. It's being held up as an example of how the Chinese laws have prevented a slaughter. The Chinese laws are the product of the Chinese government that has butchered tens of millions of Chinese. It's like a surgeon getting advice from Hannibal Lecter |
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:25:04 PM · #687 |
Originally posted by Venser:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Here's The Atlantic Monthly with a very interesting article on how Japan has virtually eliminated shooting deaths.
|
Linked (#620) to that earlier in this thread Bear. Amazingly no rebuttals on the article or numbers presented. |
Missed it, sorry. Maybe its resurfacing will spark some discussion...
ETA: Just a couple hours ago, eh? Give 'em time :-)
Message edited by author 2012-12-19 16:26:45. |
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:26:19 PM · #688 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
Black powder muskets that were very innacurate and very slow to load. |
The problem is that this was what was available to EVERYONE. Civilian weapons were effectively equivalent to military weapons of the age.
As for no-one advocating to ban weapons. Bullshit. That's exactly what you are advocating for, you just don't have the balls to say it, or you think it's an unreasonable goal. |
There was a time when I would have supported banning all firearms, but since I moved to a rural area and have lived around people who hunt (to put food on the table) and use their hunting rifles responsibly, I've changed my mind about it. So, no, I'm not handing you a line of bullshit. Are there folks who would like to ban all firearms? Yes, and I certainly understand where they're coming from. But so what? That's not going to happen. It's what Congress is willing to do that matters, and Congress is not going to ban all firearms. The slippery slope argument is just an excuse to do nothing. |
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:29:00 PM · #689 |
Thanks for posting. I'll certainly read more later. I know others on this site live there and my 3 months there is a sliver in comparison, but I had experienced an entirely different culture than here. One built on respect and personal responsibility, two aspects very often missing from the US society.
I remember I was in a car and the person driving wasn't paying attention and ran a red light. We got hit on the side. After making sure we were ok, the next thing the driver did was apologize to the other person. In this country, you don't dare apologize and make well certain it was in some way the other person's fault.
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Here's The Atlantic Monthly with a very interesting article on how Japan has virtually eliminated shooting deaths.
|
|
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:29:15 PM · #690 |
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Originally posted by Venser:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Here's The Atlantic Monthly with a very interesting article on how Japan has virtually eliminated shooting deaths.
|
Linked (#620) to that earlier in this thread Bear. Amazingly no rebuttals on the article or numbers presented. |
Missed it, sorry. Maybe its resurfacing will spark some discussion...
ETA: Just a couple hours ago, eh? Give 'em time :-) |
I love how when it hit 22 deaths from guns, it was a national failing. Hard to argue with numbers like that. |
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:34:21 PM · #691 |
Originally posted by blindjustice:
Originally posted by PGerst:
Oh for crying out loud....why does everyone need to argue over the dumbest of things?
Tool....weapon....who the hell cares what its called. The end result is the same.
Bring the discussion back to the points that matter.
ETA: Just thought about it for a second more, there is a little use in the discussion of a tool or weapon. This was obviously my fault for calling that in the first place. I should have said device, instrument, or even object. I was trying to remove the particular connotation to lead a more open discussion on gun control.
Originally posted by Spork99:
Tool n. anything used as a means of accomplishing a task or purpose |
|
Don't be so quick to disregard the argument over tool/weapon- the semantics, the verbiage frame the debate,
just like pro life/pro choice, Affordable Healthcare act/Obamacare, Estate tax/death tax.
The NRA wants us to believe guns are mere tools, and that the real issue is mental health, society, videogames, anything but the fact that there are too many guns around and not much real need for them to be around.
... to hunt? - we don't need to hunt anymore, its a hobby, and if it meant lots fewer guns around, find something else to do.
... for target practice? - shoot an airsoft rifle or some non lethal equivalent. its a hobby remember.
... to protect yourself against tyranny? give me a break- firstly, go ahead and announce to the US government that you are ready to effectuate a regime change- lets see what happens to you. and no amount of guns you could ever amass will overthrow the US government, get real. Stop watching "Red Dawn," you and your hunting buddies are not going to overthrow the government.
...for protection? tasers, mace, baseball bats, carry a hammer and a machete if you must, you will not do much worse than those trying to protect themselves and repeatedly shot with their own guns(for every anecdote you have about deterence- theirs one with a stupid accident)
...to stop mass killings? it just doesn't happen, and if it does its extremely rare.do guns stop mass killings?
...because its your constitutional right? c'mon- Scalia won't be there forever. Restrictive laws in Washington DC that were helping were overturned, the "right" could soon be interpreted by some court not to be so "God given" and solid- especially at the expense of our children.
The world is changing, if you are scared say it, if you like shooting guns say it- thats ok, just don't make up bullshit reasons for the "need" for guns. |
Bullshit.
I personally know plenty of people that need to hunt and do so because they can't otherwise afford meat. There are also programs that allow hunters to donate deer to poor families so that they can eat. I also know that since people have pushed predators out of their territories that states simply cannot manage their deer herds without hunting.
|
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:37:48 PM · #692 |
Originally posted by Venser:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Here's The Atlantic Monthly with a very interesting article on how Japan has virtually eliminated shooting deaths.
Originally posted by The Atlantic:
But what about the country at the other end of the spectrum? What is the role of guns in Japan, the developed world's least firearm-filled nation and perhaps its strictest controller? In 2008, the U.S. had over 12 thousand firearm-related homicides. All of Japan experienced only 11, fewer than were killed at the Aurora shooting alone. And that was a big year: 2006 saw an astounding two, and when that number jumped to 22 in 2007, it became a national scandal. By comparison, also in 2008, 587 Americans were killed just by guns that had discharged accidentally. |
|
Linked (#620) to that earlier in this thread Bear. Amazingly no rebuttals on the article or numbers presented. |
I like the idea of a mandatory mental health exam for all prospective gun buyers. |
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:38:26 PM · #693 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
Bullshit.
I personally know plenty of people that need to hunt and do so because they can't otherwise afford meat. |
Anecdotal evidence, the best kind. |
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:40:52 PM · #694 |
Originally posted by Venser:
Originally posted by Spork99:
Bullshit.
I personally know plenty of people that need to hunt and do so because they can't otherwise afford meat. |
Anecdotal evidence, the best kind. |
Kind of like postulating that no one "needs" to hunt because you can afford to go to the store and buy all the food you want. |
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:44:40 PM · #695 |
Originally posted by Judith Polakoff:
Originally posted by Venser:
Originally posted by Bear_Music:
Here's The Atlantic Monthly with a very interesting article on how Japan has virtually eliminated shooting deaths.
Originally posted by The Atlantic:
But what about the country at the other end of the spectrum? What is the role of guns in Japan, the developed world's least firearm-filled nation and perhaps its strictest controller? In 2008, the U.S. had over 12 thousand firearm-related homicides. All of Japan experienced only 11, fewer than were killed at the Aurora shooting alone. And that was a big year: 2006 saw an astounding two, and when that number jumped to 22 in 2007, it became a national scandal. By comparison, also in 2008, 587 Americans were killed just by guns that had discharged accidentally. |
|
Linked (#620) to that earlier in this thread Bear. Amazingly no rebuttals on the article or numbers presented. |
I like the idea of a mandatory mental health exam for all prospective gun buyers. |
I see that, and raise it to everyone that lives under that roof or has access to the facilities. |
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:44:42 PM · #696 |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
...if you have a home invasion where you have multiple people coming after you it pays to have a semi |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
...we have aligators...If you get one of those after you...you had better have more than one shot |
Originally posted by cowboy221977:
That was just one of many exaples...How about wild boars.... |
Dang, the USA is full of dangers !
|
|
|
|
12/19/2012 04:58:47 PM · #697 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
It's being held up as an example of how the Chinese laws have prevented a slaughter. The Chinese laws are the product of the Chinese government that has butchered tens of millions of Chinese. |
Yet even China's oppressive government is more willing to prevent gun violence than you. We lose more than twice as many Americans to gun violence every year than your Chinese "butchers" kill with 4.5 times the population. |
|
|
|
12/19/2012 05:01:53 PM · #698 |
Originally posted by Spork99:
I personally know plenty of people that need to hunt and do so because they can't otherwise afford meat. There are also programs that allow hunters to donate deer to poor families so that they can eat. |
I personally know a number of BOWhunters who hunt and make such donations. |
|
|
|
12/19/2012 05:02:32 PM · #699 |
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Spork99:
It's being held up as an example of how the Chinese laws have prevented a slaughter. The Chinese laws are the product of the Chinese government that has butchered tens of millions of Chinese. |
Yet even China's oppressive government is more willing to prevent gun violence than you. We lose more than twice as many Americans to gun violence every year than your Chinese "butchers" kill with 4.5 times the population. |
If you're such a fan, I have little doubt they'd welcome your application for citizenship. |
|
|
|
12/19/2012 05:09:55 PM · #700 |
Originally posted by Cory:
Originally posted by scalvert:
Originally posted by Spork99:
It's being held up as an example of how the Chinese laws have prevented a slaughter. The Chinese laws are the product of the Chinese government that has butchered tens of millions of Chinese. |
Yet even China's oppressive government is more willing to prevent gun violence than you. We lose more than twice as many Americans to gun violence every year than your Chinese "butchers" kill with 4.5 times the population. |
If you're such a fan, I have little doubt they'd welcome your application for citizenship. |
It's not about wanting to be Chinese, or even to adopt their form of government. It is about evaluating our society and fixing areas that are not working. One good way of doing this is to learn from history and evaluate how other societies have solved similar issues. |
|
