Should Guns be Outlawed in the U.S.A?

I would certainly try to stop her and if she killed another "innocent" person then she has forfeited her life.

Call them games if you wish but I think they do help, another point we seem to disagree on.

 

It is just a bottom line but does not does not mean that is the only reason for gun ownership, I would say that a lot of people who own guns grew up in a gun owning family and it is as much a family tradition as any thing else and has nothing to do fear or defense.

But when talking about why guns are mentioned in the bill of rights, it is talking about defense and that is why guns are talked about in terms of defense, fear if you will, and the bottom line of defense is defending your family.

 

The second amendment is directly related to a 'well regulated militia' for the 'security of a free State'. Not home defense or hunting, but defense against foreign invaders in a nation where militia made up a good deal of the military and that it being free to govern itself was still fresh. The second amendment has been obsolete for quite some time.

 

You, like other brits here, have no understanding of the context of the second amendment, or of most of the US.

It was never DREAMED of that you couldn't have hunting pieces. This was more like protecting the rights of the colonists who stashed CANNONS and hid them from the british, and felt persecuted when/if the british found and seized them.

We need a thread: "should guns be totally legal in britan?" Then we can all look at their situation through our lens and tell them what to do with their country, like they do to us....

The second amendment was to protect us from our own government (you can deny this all you want, unless you read the founding fathers writing and take a history class) and to protect us from.... YOU. THE BRITS. THE PEOPLE WHO LIKE CONTROLLING GUNS AND SEE NO NEED TO PROTECT CIVIL LIBERTIES, because you don't need them right NOW.

The second amendment was to protect our right to shoot the british for fucking with us, plain and simple. No wonder they don't like it:mickey:

 

Thanks.

 

i must be a brit . . .

 

what makes you think the brits didn't like the second amendment?

do a lil' research into the english bill of rights - 1689 ... anyone who has even vaguely studied the second amendment (which you claim to have) knows it, and it's impact and influence on the second amendment .. the right for private citizens to bare arms was not, and is not a purely US ideal

the only difference is, that over time our societies have evolved in different directions :mickey:

 

Isn't that a good reason it should be removed? Unless you still hold a grudge against the british. I wonder in the last 100 years what the ratio is of killing brits vs killing other people (americans).

 

I hold a grudge against the specific british people who have a habit of telling us how to run our country, and practicing (very) amateur psychology to try to belittle americans for not wanting to see things their way and get rid of all our guns. And they do this while totally ignoring the reality of the situation in this country, as well as our sovereignty. It worked for them, now they should realize the rest of the world isn't just like them. Back when they had power, this mindset on the part of the british is why the world's fucked today. World wars I and II, and a host of other wars, and the unstable middle east, etc, would not have happened if it was not for the british knowing how to run the whole world and pretending it's all just an extension of their island. This isn't a 200 year old dispute, this is what set up the current middle east, religious extremism, modern terrorism, and all the rest of that fun stuff.

So, it's time the brits let other countries do their own thing.

Also, them trying to tell us what to do with our guns is just as immoral and out of line as the US telling everyone what to do with their drugs.

Also;

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D8yEqco39T8

 

I don't see why there should be such an "us and them" attitude reinforced on this matter. I should think that anyone who has the slightest sense of responsibility for fellow man makes an interest in these matters mandatory. Nationalism has divided mankind enough, don't you think?

If you took your statement further, why should a nation have any interest in what a family does? Why should a family have any interest in what an individual does? There are infinite divisions that can be made, and it seems that historically, the trend is increasintly towards isolation over unity. America is part of the world, no matter how much it wishes to isolate itself.

I don't think it is correct to say "do this" at any level, but surely you can see the value of participation in the discussion? In World War II, I'm not sure the people of Poland would agree with your assessment that no one should have interfered leaving them at the mercy of the Nazis.

 

I didn't say anything about what the US should or should not have done in world war II, that has nothing to do with a nation bitching about another nations citizens rights to carry guns in their own country. A right those citizens support and enjoy, and that is, furthermore, unchangeable, for obvious huge logistical reasons.

And Oz! claimed that I claimed to have studied the english bill of rights, which I NEVER said. And I never said they had guns illegal, they didn't, until their more recent erosion of rights. And I don't relish the thought of what's happened/happening in britan happening here.

And yes, it is us and them. That's what the brits did, built evil empires of repression well into the last century, and really even today, that shaped the entire world, that are the reason we have large scale war today. It's how a few countries, namely england, interacted with the whole world. And unfortunately the US has been stupid enough to support britan in some of that bullshit.

 

i didn't claim that you have claimed to have studied the bill of rights, i said -

i claimed that you have claimed to have studied the second amendment... which is now incredibly obvious that you haven't.. so i happily retract that claim

.. your ignorance here is just... flagrant

if you wish to discuss a subject, then you need to educate yourself on the subject... because if you don't know what you are talking about.. then you are talking about nothing

like i said.. the bill of rights act -1689 and it's influence on gun culture in the western world
the american war of independance and the east india trading company (the real reason for the war which led to the formation of the USA)
British gun law
and the price charged of europe by the USA for it's aid in the fight against fascism during the 1940's (yes, you sent us the bill for your aid, mercenary to the point of disgust.. especially for your soldiers)

when you understand those four rather major historical acts you will realise that your posts in this thread aren't just ignorant.. they are actually embarrassing

happy studying!

 

For fuck's sake, I'm not British. I'm an American who lives in England. Please refrain from making your arguments about the individual you're speaking to, it's silly and counter productive. (As is the overly aggressive speech in your posts. Maybe you should settle down?)

As for the rest of the post, I would only be repeating what Oz has already said.

 

Guns should be outlawed on a global scale.

 

Sweeping generalisations much?! Oh and America never "tells us what to do with our country"?! What about the last Iraq war? we wouldn't have entered into that if your fuckwit of a president (Bush) hadn't roped Tony Blair into it.

Guns cause, and perpetuate violence. They enforce manipulative behaviour, that is a fact.

It's good that you have strong opinions, but to the point of arrogance aint cool. Personally I couldn't give a fuck how America govern themselves as long as it doesn't effect the rest of the world - which it does. They yanks are just as guilty of jingoism as the Brits have been.

 

I most certainly have studied the second amendment in the US. However, you said that I claimed to have studied the second amendment, which lead to the second amendment-so yes, you said I studied the british one, which I have not, and which I have no interest in whatsoever.

All you did in this post was try to insult me, and try to twist your own writing, even though you quoted it right in front of us all. Anyone who gives your post more than a few seconds though can see this.

As you've studied fascism so well, you obviously understand why it's existence is ENTIRELY england's fault?

And you anti-gun people wonder why you don't make any friends being aggressive douchebags and telling everybody that they don't understand how much better than them you are because you're no sot scared you need to own a gun, yada yada yada.

Primal: You, too, need to read my posts more carefully. I didn't say the US never tells you what to do, I decryed my own country for that, specifically with relation to pushing other nations into a similar fervor about drugs.

However, the only reason for ANY gulf wars is because britan fucked up the world. It's a fact that the entire current middle east situation is britans fault.

I don't unconditionally support my country, or the things it does. But that doesn't mean I take kindly to citizens of other countries shoving their rules on us. I get that the brits are happy without guns, and THAT'S JUST GREAT, whatever floats your boat. It has obviously worked very well for britan, and if you take a moment to consider the factors that lead to that, you will see why the US is NOT in the same position, and does not want to be in the same position.

So yeah: britan SERIOUSLY fucked up the world telling people what to do, go read "shooting an elephant", by orwell. We don't need more of that. At the same time, yes, my country has the capacity to be a bully, and I don't support that aspect of it, but neither do many americans. I do, however, support the rights that americans want to have in their OWN country.

*edit* of course, the rest of europe helped, france started the viet'nam fiasco, and the US was left holding the bag for THEM too. But They didn't molest nearly as many areas as britan.

And I don't mean to say that british are individually responsible, of course they're not. But this is still relivent to the conversation, especially with the angles some such as "Oz!" have brought in.

In conclusion, unless you're Oz!, I congratulate you on successfully eradicating guns from your country, especially on the fact that neither police or civilians generally have access to guns. However, the US can not make that jump, largely because police have an addiction to power here, and have the worlds most deadly weapons at their disposal. This will NOT change, and for a populace to surrender their weapons to a heavily armed police force would be utter stupidity. Maybe in the future, when we've worked towards less fascist police, we can work towards disarming everyone, but at the rate we're going, this is generations away. And even having the national guard armed and me not would make me worried in the US, because of the overall culture that these people are taken from (ie. I'll shoot anything you tell me, and some things you tell me not to)

*edit2* last edit, I swear: no, primal, guns do not cause or perpetuate violent behavior. That's like saying heroin causes drug use, or that roads cause SUV use, or what have you. Think about it: would you kill somebody? no, okay. Now think about having a gun in your closet, and if you would kill somebody, if you had access to that gun? No, I didn't think so, because you're still primal, and not somebody else. I wouldn't like to kill anybody, and I don't have a gun (at the moment) but when I've had access to them, I haven't felt any murderous tendencies suddenly grab hold of me, it's simply a chunk of steel, it doesn't change who you are. It simply gives you one more option in defense and leisure, if you're a responsible person.

If you want to argue to make the US a better place, why don't you argue for less repression, and not more? Anyone in any country can argue that US police need to stop waging a war on their own people, an literally discriminating on the basis of drug use, because they convinced about half the country that it's bad. Half the people think pot's bad, and that's an excuse to break down your door and shoot you in the middle of the night, and then realize they got the wrong house number. If you want to speak out about the US's actual problems, and the factors that actually cause violence (racism, war on drugs, etc) please do, I do every day. But even if you think guns should be illegal, they should be a back burner issue, compared to this other shit happening. Or even what obama's doing, fighting undeclared wars without asking anyone but himself if he has the right to do so, when the best lawyers will quickly tell you he does NOT have that right.

 

What is the ratio of guns being used against police vs them being used against other people every year in self-defence?

 

wot a rant lol ... learn to de-stress and communicate in a civilized manner... you'll love yaself for it one day :sunny:

for the record, i voted for "don't give a damn" in the poll .. because i don't, i'm not a citizen of the USA :mickey: if you'd actually bothered to ask you could have saved yaself a whole lot of typing in the quoted post

all i did in this thread was point out massive flaws in the pseudo history you've been paraphrasing to help put across your pov in the discussion.. and i gave you some helpful pointers in which direction to research so you could rectify your "facts", i might add

it's not the first time you've childishly attacked me in a thread roor.. and it's just as boring this time as it was the last..

i'll leave it there i think.. feel free to have another lil' rant without me

 

i assume you mean "you said that i claimed to have studied the second amendment, which lead to the bill of rights" ? because to read something without it leading to itself is ...... well, i was going to say it's impossible.. but you seem to have managed it

i will clarify this little point.. because it has become confusing.. and it's not nice to leave people confused

i claimed that you claimed to have studied the second amendment.... which should automatically give a cursory knowledge of the bill of rights.. even the US surpreme court acknowledge the link between the two documents.... which makes your whole "brits are anti-gun" angle completely impotent....... which is why i also suggested you research british gun law

in fact.. it's the second paragraph of the wiki page on the second amendment... how did you even begin to study the second amendment without encountering it?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second...fluence_of_the_English_Bill_of_Rights_of_1689

 

Sweeping generalizations much?!