Will the Second Amendment survive?

[classicman]

Target shooting maybe?

[Radar]

Originally Posted by Undertoad

When you have to create an outrageous and bizarre narrative to support your point of view, that's not critical thinking.

I guess it's a good thing I didn't create an outrageous and bizarre narrative and merely made a statement of fact.

[Radar]

Originally Posted by Beevee

I haven't read all the threads on this subject but another shooting in another mall doesn't seem to bother too many Americans who seem to think it acceptable as long as they maintain the right to bear arms.

Now, it's strange to me that not one of the eight people who unfortunately died in Omaha, Nebraska returned fire. They had the right to bear arms but obviously weren't carrying. Or does it mean one has the right to bear arms as long as they are confined to the house. In which case, as soon as arms are taken from a house, is a crime being committed?

Sorry, but my conception of the 2nd amendment is the thought by Americans that they act in a more responsible manner and can bear arns whereas people in any other democratic country cannot and that obviously isn't so. Every American knows that next week it will be repeated somewhere else.

Now I know this happens in Canada too and lifestyles are similiar. But Canadians do not have such sweeping powers to bear arms and consequently the pro rata murder rate is much lower. Doesn't that say something?

Furthermore the media encourages the use of arms by not questioning the rights and wrongs of the 2nd amendment. Why? Could it be that the owners of these media and news outlets are all in favour of it as they see themselves as prime targets because of their perceived wealth?

I don't have any answers but conversely I don't believe sufficient Americans ask the right questions.

The rate of violent crimes in general is higher in nations that prohibit gun ownership, including Canada, Australia, and the UK.

[regular.joe]

I can easily shoot 80 to 100 rounds in about 1/2 a day on the range, practicing for a rifle match. 10 days worth of shooting is not much really. Don't worry, I only use one target.

Radar, have you been to Iraq?

Another shooting in another mall, is why we should ban guns?

There was another death on the highway somewhere in the U.S. up to 40,000 a year...every year. We are not banning cars anytime soon.

Guns serve a purpose, cars serve a purpose. Right now, those purposes outweigh the need to ban either one.

[Radar]

One does not need to go to Iraq to know what is happening there and what has happened in the past. That is the beauty of modern technology and communication methods.

Luckily I finished my time in the military before the first gulf war and were I still in and ordered to go to Iraq now, I'd refuse that unlawful order because I took my oath seriously.

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by Radar

The rate of violent crimes in general is higher in nations that prohibit gun ownership, including Canada, Australia, and the UK.

Radar, can you provide some evidence for this claim?

Wikipedia offers the following list of murder rates per 100,000 people (most recent data):

USA: 5.9
UK: 2.03
Canada: 2.01
Australia: 1.28

You're MUCH more likely to be murdered if you live in the US than one of the other countries you claim have higher levels of violent crime.

Meanwhile this site (NationMaster, they say their figures come from the CIA world factbook) gives figures for assaults per 1,000:
US: 7.569
UK: 7.459
Canada: 7.118
Australia: 7.024

Which are more pretty much the same. What this says to me is that these cultures are about equally violent, but in the US the violence is more likely to lead to death.

This site also gives the figures for robberies per 1,000 (which combine violence with property crime)

UK: 1.574
USA: 1.385
Australia: 1.160
Canada: 0.823

Ok, second out of four, but first for assaults and clear first in murders. I suspect that this is simply because it is so much easier for an assault to become a murder when one or both parties have guns.
Maybe this is the price the USA chooses to pay in exchange for the benefits of an armed populace, and that is the decision of those who live there, that is, you and not me.
But you will be more persuasive if you can keep your facts correct and refrain from disparaging other countries.

[Radar]

http://www.reason.com/news/show/28582.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/192016.stm

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...icle568214.ece

[icileparadise]

Wait, I'm not an American but I thought the 2nd Ammendment says right to bear arms and militia meant: ( and here's my gap in understanding) At that time the said Amendt. was written the American militia defeated the Brits. To me the militia in the 2nd Amendt actually refers to the Armed forces as it was then - The USA Army as it is known today? N'est pas?

[ZenGum]

Originally Posted by Radar

http://www.reason.com/news/show/28582.html

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk/192016.stm

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/new...icle568214.ece

I'm not impressed.
All these articles still agree that the US leads the list for murders and rapes.
You haven't got anything about Canada or Australia.

[regular.joe]

On the contrary, you do need to go to Iraq to really know what is going on. To different Areas as well, as a broad example Diyala is different then Anbar. Both are different then Baghdad.

The only weapons that are confiscated in Iraq are the RPK heavy machine guns, RPG launchers with or without warheads, and like items. Oh yea, large ordinance like 155 Artilary rounds, Det cord and bomb/IED making materials. The Ak-47's that are confiscated are the ones that are hot to the touch, having been recently fired at U.S. or Iraqi troops or police.

Every household in Iraq is allowed to have one AK-47. It's Iraqi law.
It is unlawful for an Iraqi citizen to posses an RPG launcher, much as it is unlawful for an American citizen to posses an AT-4 rocket launcher.
U.S. troops support Iraqi law.

So, you would advocate all military personnel to refuse service or deployment to Iraq, Afghanistan, Africa, The Pacific Rim, Europe, and South America? Under the grounds that they have received unlawful orders to do so?

[Sundae]

Also the article on Britain's crime figures is from 1998 and was from a US Department of Justice report which suggested the UK was in some ways a more dangerous place to live than America.

[icileparadise]

Originally Posted by Sundae Girl

Also the article on Britain's crime figures is from 1998 and was from a US Department of Justice report which suggested the UK was in some ways a more dangerous place to live than America.

Hey SD when I grew up in England guns were so rare I had to read comics to see them but today in the U.K they are common. Whatever happend to boys comics? What does your Welsh signature mean?

[Cicero]

Originally Posted by Urbane Guerrilla

Hmm. Yes. Might you expand on this some more? Got some notions of what shape it might take?



[Little-Man-from-the-Draft-Board voice]"We-ell -- I wouldn't say that." [/voice]

You have more of an idea than some around here do of what it takes to keep and sustain liberty, and secure the economy from depradations. Criminal assaults and disrespect of property rights amount to leaks in the pipeline of economics.

I'll pm ya!

[Beevee]

Double post.

[Beevee]

Where do you get your information that guns in the U.K. are common?

I'm an ex-brit. I lived in London and on the outskirts for 62 years. I have, truthfully, never seen a real gun other than in a museum, in my life and I never walked in fear of one. I was however fearful of being mugged after dark and never ventured out at night.

I accept there is a high crime rate in the U.K. What I don't accept is that the use of guns is anything more than a minimum inside of those figures.