Chefelf.com Night Life: The Right to Bear Arms - Chefelf.com Night Life

Jump to content

  • (10 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »

The Right to Bear Arms gun-toting maniacs ahoy

#1 User is offline   Mnesymone Icon

  • Champion
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,836
  • Joined: 08-April 04
  • Location:Somewhere near my collarbone
  • Interests:Food, books, movies, history, languages, religions (though I'm an atheist), miracles of nature and marvels of technology.<br /><br />Particularly: steak, the Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, The Dark Ages in Europe, the 'created' languages, the mythologies of defunct European cultures, fish and cars.
  • Country:Australia

Posted 04 August 2005 - 12:50 AM

Let me preface this by saying that I am an Australian, have never fired a gun, have never handled a gun, have seen very few guns and has also never been shot. Now in the United States of America, the Bill of Rights includes the famous amendment that gives all citizens the right to bear arms.
And so we get guns.
The gun, as any medieval enthusiast will tell you, was designed as a battlefield equaliser, and it is the gun that set the wealthy aristocracy of Europe down the next step from becoming soldiers to inbred crazy-men with bad teeth, simply because the old-fashioned knight in shining armour was rendered pointless by the firearm. Guns have evolved from single-shot affairs of wood, iron and bronze to some really funky crap. A wide range of aforementioned funky crap is for sale to the average American citizen. As a result, everholy craploads of people are killed by those thingies that go bang every year - between accidents, 'accidents', 'hunting accidents' and incidents. Now, I'm sure there must be some people who might have the great idea that if there were less guns, there'd be less people killed by guns. Then, people will tell you, that would breach the right to arm bears or whatever it is you do.
Why is the right to bear arms so damn important?
It's an old law, and it can be changed, yet people insist that it be fixed in stone.
I'm not saying take away the precious gun altogether, simply regulate it a little - the privelege to bear arms, not the right.
For starters, I think it would be reasonable for people to have passed a markmanship test before they can purchase, own or use a gun - just like with cars, see. Anyone with any criminal convictions of any kind should not be allowed to purchase/own/use a gun. Nowhere is it said in the bill of rights that arms may be advertised - thusly, the explicit advertisement of any firearm should be illegal. Nowehere is it said that all citizens have the right to bear all arms - just arms.
So, a fully automatic assault rifle or semiautomatic shotgun should probably be on the restricted list. It should be absolutely impossible for anyone to actually walk in to a shop and actually walk away with any firearms product - guns or ammo - by this I mean there should be a waiting period for any and all firearms products.
Also - all citizens having the right to bear arms means that any individual citizen has the right to posess a weapon - the two plurals cancel each other out. Who, honestly, if they even need one gun, needs two or more. If you've got one, you should be happy with it. You don't need a second .44 Magnum to balance your belt, you don't need to keep your old Glock when you upgrade to a pearl-handled Colt.
A few more ideas that wouldn't violate the right to bear arms on that basis that the Bill of Rights doesn't say the unconditional right to bear arms.
What if everyone who legally purchases a gun, after passing marksmanship testing, personality check, criminal records investigation and getting their new gun - has to give the police all their details including fingerprints and DNA sample.
I hope private sale of guns in America is illegal.. if not it should be - anyone selling their gun privately or buying a gun privately seems pretty dodgy... lock 'em up, or at least give them a nice legal spanking.

And finally - why not make an effort to scrap the right to bear arms... privilege to bear arms - a privilege that can only occur when someone has an actual job that requires it... security guard, police officer, serviceman an that is that.

And sure, if the aliens come, you might have been able to resist them if you had twenty high-powered sporting rifles in your basement and a Magnum in your dresser, but if they have good enough tech to actually get here, chances are you were screwed anyway.
If you really feel like shooting something, go get a good computer and blast aliens til your hearts content.
0

#2 User is offline   Slade Icon

  • Full of Bombs and/or Keys
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Head Moderator
  • Posts: 8,626
  • Joined: 30-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Columbia, SC
  • Interests:I like stuff.
  • Country:United States

Posted 04 August 2005 - 01:11 AM

Some of the things you've mentioned about gun purchasing in America are already in effect. Background checks, etc.

However, it's just not proper to have one six-shooter. You need two at all times, and maybe a stetson, end of story.

Restricting guns helps somewhat, but the people that go around shooting everyone are going to kill people, whether it's with an M4 or a Beretta, or a knife, or a baseball bat, or their bare hands. And then they just go to the black market or illegally modify their guns anyhow. But "Less people killed by guns" does not equal "Less people killed."

Why does it matter how many firearms a person owns if they aren't shooting people with them? Contrary to popular belief, we're not all shotgun-wielding "Git offa my land!" idiots who can't tell a human from a sheep in the bedroom over here. They do exist, of course...

"Guns don't kill people. You can die from organ failure, or a major hemmorage, but a small piece of metal isn't your problem!" - This message sponsored by Amu-Nation
This space for rent. Inquire within.
0

#3 User is offline   Dorothy Icon

  • We supply it, we demand you eat it.
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,604
  • Joined: 17-May 05
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Seattle.
  • Country:Nothing Selected

Posted 04 August 2005 - 09:51 AM

Mnesymone, some of your ideas are really great, but I would just add a thought. Do we really want the only people with guns to be great shots? The sniper guys from a few years ago were excellent shots, but that didn't stop them from killing people.

I think it would be a better plan to have everyone who wants to purchase a gun go through a gun education program. In Montana, if you are going to hunt you have to take a hunter's education class. There are still have people who shoot themselves accidentally, but I imagine that the numbers would be even greater if they didn't take the class.

What I hear a lot out here is that if you outlaw guns, then only outlaws will have them (ony in MT would you call a criminal an outlaw). It's not necessarily an arguement that I hold to, but it makes you think... kinda like that one Simpsons episode where they get rid of all the guns, and then those cowboy ghosts come and take over...except without the ghosts. And the time traveling.
"The problem is, you're not a kangaroo... that's a bear... and he's in your pants."
"Maybe artists shouldn't talk about their art."
"Well kids, I guess your father isn't a hermaphrodite."
"Izzy! enough with the rabid smootching!!"
0

#4 User is offline   WalkingCarpet Icon

  • Soothsayer
  • PipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 624
  • Joined: 16-June 05
  • Location:Somewhere Across Forever
  • Interests:Puns, irony &amp; sarcasm
  • Country:United Kingdom

Posted 04 August 2005 - 10:03 AM

The prospect of The Right to Arm Bears is quite disconcerting to me.

I'd ask 3 questions above all others......

Why do you want to own a gun?
What model of gun are you intending to purchase?
How many guns are you intending to purchase?

It wouldn't be 100% fool-proof, but it wouldn't take a world class psychologist to spot the characters who shouldn't be trusted with pointy sticks, let alone firearms.
0

#5 User is offline   Laughlyn Icon

  • Token drunk
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2,198
  • Joined: 18-December 04
  • Location:Here, probably.
  • Interests:Who am I? I'm Laughlyn, resident Gentleman B*stard of the highest order of the british empire, A geek who's crawled out of the far side of the abyss to wreck havoc upon his breathren. A closet troll, purveyor of bartender brand advice (<br />Call me for realtionship advice\general abuse on +447949623581.... Just don't expect me to answer), thinks-he's-artsy person, and occasional Pirate.<br /><br />Interests? What the bloody hell is this? A census?
  • Country:United Kingdom

Posted 04 August 2005 - 10:17 AM

Just to counterbalance the arguement a little. Here in the Uk guns are illegal aside from a farmers shotgun (no pump actions either). Yet we are currently experiencing a rise in armed crime and firearm related murders.

People would want a gun will get a gun regardless of the restriction.
IPB Image
I want to go back to the films of the 80's, where plots were simple, and explosions happened regularly....
0

#6 User is offline   civilian_number_two Icon

  • Canada's Next Top Model.
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Head Moderator
  • Posts: 3,382
  • Joined: 01-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:In Your Dreams
  • Interests:I like stuff.
  • Country:Canada

Posted 04 August 2005 - 10:36 AM

You're experiencing a rise? From what to what? From some small number to another small number that is in term of a percentage increase superficially alarming? The US, by the way, is experiencing a decline in gun-related killngs. This could also be from a very high number to another very hign number, making the drop insignificant. I'd say these stats could stand some analysis.
"I had a lot of different ideas. At one point, Luke, Leia and Ben were all going to be little people, and we did screen tests to see if we could do that." -George Lucas, in STAR WARS: the Annotated Screenplays (p197).
0

#7 User is offline   Laughlyn Icon

  • Token drunk
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2,198
  • Joined: 18-December 04
  • Location:Here, probably.
  • Interests:Who am I? I'm Laughlyn, resident Gentleman B*stard of the highest order of the british empire, A geek who's crawled out of the far side of the abyss to wreck havoc upon his breathren. A closet troll, purveyor of bartender brand advice (<br />Call me for realtionship advice\general abuse on +447949623581.... Just don't expect me to answer), thinks-he's-artsy person, and occasional Pirate.<br /><br />Interests? What the bloody hell is this? A census?
  • Country:United Kingdom

Posted 04 August 2005 - 06:21 PM

Just for a quick 10 year update; in 15,000 in 1998/1999, 2003/2004 reported 25000 firearms offences. Bearing in mind we made them illegal in about 97 and gun crime fell to about 5000. (Dunblane school shootings occured in 96).

And of course the Tony Martin 'self-defence' shooting raised a few eyebrows.
IPB Image
I want to go back to the films of the 80's, where plots were simple, and explosions happened regularly....
0

#8 User is offline   barend Icon

  • Anchor Head Anchor Man
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Crappy News Team
  • Posts: 11,839
  • Joined: 12-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nieuw Holland
  • Interests:The Beers of Western Europe, Cognac, and constantly claiming the world would have been a better place if Napoleon had won.
  • Country:Australia

Posted 04 August 2005 - 07:11 PM

QUOTE (Laughlyn @ Aug 4 2005, 10:17 AM)
Just to counterbalance the arguement a little. Here in the Uk guns are illegal aside from  a farmers shotgun (no pump actions either). Yet we are currently experiencing a rise in armed crime and firearm related murders.

People would want a gun will get a gun regardless of the restriction.


sure. criminals can still get guns but gun related deaths stemming from robberies and the like are not the majority.

people often forget...

the angry neighbour, the domestic dispute, the kid that found the key to gun cabinet, the kid that lives in the house with a gun rack instead of a gun cabinet, the kid that takes is dads gun to school, and not to mention all the little disputes where a gun is close at hand while tempers are still flareing.

trust me...

as ALL human beings are emotionally unpredictable and often unstable...

i'd rather there be a few guns in the hands of police and the odd criminal, then in everyone's home just waiting for anyone to snap.
0

#9 User is offline   Mnesymone Icon

  • Champion
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 1,836
  • Joined: 08-April 04
  • Location:Somewhere near my collarbone
  • Interests:Food, books, movies, history, languages, religions (though I'm an atheist), miracles of nature and marvels of technology.<br /><br />Particularly: steak, the Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, The Dark Ages in Europe, the 'created' languages, the mythologies of defunct European cultures, fish and cars.
  • Country:Australia

Posted 04 August 2005 - 07:13 PM

You said it, great Bender-like titan.
0

#10 User is offline   barend Icon

  • Anchor Head Anchor Man
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Crappy News Team
  • Posts: 11,839
  • Joined: 12-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nieuw Holland
  • Interests:The Beers of Western Europe, Cognac, and constantly claiming the world would have been a better place if Napoleon had won.
  • Country:Australia

Posted 04 August 2005 - 07:44 PM

thankyou....


further more... i don't like the idea of a 12 year old girl being able to ice me because of someone else invention. that's just cheap.

guns are fucked!!!

if you're not man enough to kill someone with your bare hands then your a bitch!!!
0

#11 User is offline   JW Wells Icon

  • Mini Boss
  • PipPip
  • Group: Junior Members
  • Posts: 104
  • Joined: 22-March 05
  • Location:Ice Planet Wisconsin
  • Country:United States

Posted 05 August 2005 - 08:30 AM

QUOTE (George Orwell - You and the Atom Bomb)
. . . I think the following rule would be found generally true: that ages in which the dominant weapon is expensive or difficult to make will tend to be ages of despotism, whereas when the dominant weapon is cheap and simple, the common people have a chance. Thus, for example, tanks, battleships and bombing planes are inherently tyrannical weapons, while rifles, muskets, long-bows and hand-grenades are inherently democratic weapons. A complex weapon makes the strong stronger, while a simple weapon—so long as there is no answer to it—gives claws to the weak.


Can the state which does not trust its citizens enough to allow them weapons trust them enough to allow them freedom?
0

#12 User is offline   Laughlyn Icon

  • Token drunk
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 2,198
  • Joined: 18-December 04
  • Location:Here, probably.
  • Interests:Who am I? I'm Laughlyn, resident Gentleman B*stard of the highest order of the british empire, A geek who's crawled out of the far side of the abyss to wreck havoc upon his breathren. A closet troll, purveyor of bartender brand advice (<br />Call me for realtionship advice\general abuse on +447949623581.... Just don't expect me to answer), thinks-he's-artsy person, and occasional Pirate.<br /><br />Interests? What the bloody hell is this? A census?
  • Country:United Kingdom

Posted 05 August 2005 - 09:06 AM

QUOTE
sure. criminals can still get guns but gun related deaths stemming from robberies and the like are not the majority.


They were for us. Gun deaths within domestic violence were bloody rare. I should have pointed out earlier that the dispute over Northern Ireland was still in effect at the beginning of those statistics.

QUOTE (barend @ Aug 5 2005, 12:11 AM)
the angry neighbour, the domestic dispute, the kid that found the key to gun cabinet, the kid that lives in the house with a gun rack instead of a gun cabinet, the kid that takes is dads gun to school, and not to mention all the little disputes where a gun is close at hand while tempers are still flareing.

Britian rarely had that problem before we banned guns. The reason I posted that information was to point out that gun laws\legislation do not always prevent gun crime. Irresponsible storage of firearms or lack of social education would seem to be your main argument.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not arguing in favour of firearms, I'm just trying to point out that the countries soceity\Gun culture's as much of a problem as the availability of guns themselves.
IPB Image
I want to go back to the films of the 80's, where plots were simple, and explosions happened regularly....
0

#13 User is offline   Jordan Icon

  • Tummy Friend
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 3,161
  • Joined: 31-October 03
  • Location:Mars
  • Interests:I have none.
  • Country:Ethiopia

Posted 05 August 2005 - 09:25 AM

Gun laws don't do shit. The people who kill with guns don't register them.

The people who do register their guns are hunters, farmers, and target-sport shooters.

In the end, tighter rules only put more weight on the legal entity which use their guns in a sporting fashion.

My father has some rifles and a hand gun. The registration for these was a pain in the ass, especially for the hand gun (ww2 heirlom).

Meanwhile, joe blow buys a hand gun for robbing banks off some guy in a Van. He does not feel the pressure of heavy gun control, since he never registered his gun to begin with.

the angry neighbour, the domestic dispute, the kid that found the key to gun cabinet, the kid that lives in the house with a gun rack instead of a gun cabinet, the kid that takes is dads gun to school, and not to mention all the little disputes where a gun is close at hand while tempers are still flareing.

Barend you're taking a small point and making it an extreme one. More people blow their own heads off from cleaning their guns or being drunk THAN shooting a neighbour out of anger. And the story about little timmy boy is few and far between.

This post has been edited by Jordan: 05 August 2005 - 09:29 AM

Oh SMEG. What the smeggity smegs has smeggins done? He smeggin killed me. - Lister of Smeg, space bum
0

#14 User is offline   Renegade Icon

  • Level Boss
  • PipPipPip
  • Group: Members
  • Posts: 460
  • Joined: 19-May 05
  • Country:United States

Posted 05 August 2005 - 11:34 AM

QUOTE (Jordan @ Aug 5 2005, 09:25 AM)
Gun laws don't do shit.  The people who kill with guns don't register them.

The people who do register their guns are hunters, farmers, and target-sport shooters.

In the end, tighter rules only put more weight on the legal entity which use their guns in a sporting fashion. 

My father has some rifles and a hand gun.  The registration for these was a pain in the ass, especially for the hand gun (ww2 heirlom). 

Meanwhile, joe blow buys a hand gun for robbing banks off some guy in a Van.  He does not feel the pressure of heavy gun control, since he never registered his gun to begin with.

the angry neighbour, the domestic dispute, the kid that found the key to gun cabinet, the kid that lives in the house with a gun rack instead of a gun cabinet, the kid that takes is dads gun to school, and not to mention all the little disputes where a gun is close at hand while tempers are still flareing.

Barend you're taking a small point and making it an extreme one.  More people blow their own heads off from cleaning their guns or being drunk THAN shooting a neighbour out of anger.  And the story about little timmy boy is few and far between.

Agreed.. studies have shown that states with heavy gun regulation actually have increased crime rates. Simply based on the logistics, gun control merely doesn't prevent crime or decrease deaths due to gun violence.
0

#15 User is offline   barend Icon

  • Anchor Head Anchor Man
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Group: Crappy News Team
  • Posts: 11,839
  • Joined: 12-November 03
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Nieuw Holland
  • Interests:The Beers of Western Europe, Cognac, and constantly claiming the world would have been a better place if Napoleon had won.
  • Country:Australia

Posted 05 August 2005 - 08:08 PM

the problem is the lack of effort that goes into inforcing those laws!!!

you can't make a berretta M92F or colt government 45 longslide in your backyard...

most guns found on criminals have been involved in several crimes by different people.

internal affairs, the ombudsman and the like are not doing their job to insure confiscated firearms are properly destroyed by the police.

again, i must re-inforce...

despite the claim of statiscal proof of which, in all honesty, niether of us have provided... taking guns out of the home will still cut down substantially on gun related deaths!!!

no one has the moral right to own a gun! human beings are too fucked...

and the US law/amendment that gives it's citizens the right was written in a time when war was taking place in it's backyard! it has no place in todays society.
0

  • (10 Pages)
  • +
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • Last »


Fast Reply

  • Decrease editor size
  • Increase editor size