Shooting, Killing, Murder!!!

[Unseen]

HOW IS THE 2ND AMENDMENT *NOT* A MAJOR PART OF AMERICA’S GUN PROBLEM? LET’S ASK THE FOUNDING FATHERS.

Of course, we have a President and a major party (you know which one) who won’t even ADMIT there’s a gun problem. They won’t even say the words “We have a gun problem here in the United States.” Instead it’s crazy people problem. That from a President and party currently actively defunding mental health resources.

Mental illness is a red herring. It will have the effect of scapegoating people suffering from mental isues when very few mentally ill people are sociopathically violent. They are far more likely to turn a gun on themselves than on others.

The age when one can buy a gun is another red herring. The youth of the perpetrators is not a major common factor in mass shootings. In fact, most such shootings are carried out by full adults, many of them not clinically medically ill, and without a clinical assessment of mental illness, it’s hard to remove a dangerous individual from society or even force them into treatment.

Most people who want guns will cite self-protection as a reason for wanting firearms. Howeverl I think even gun proponents would agree that the most useful firearm for self protection, in most circumstances, is not a rifle, shotgun, or assault-style weapon (like the AR-15), but rather a simple handgun.

Years ago, the Supreme Court interpreted the 2nd Amendment so broadly that our hands are largely tied in terms of attempting to gain reasonable control over who can carry, when, and for what reasons. True, the have granted a few basic limits. There are a few “gun free zones” such as government buildings and schools, but often this sort of restriction simply creates a “soft” (easy) target where a person with a gun can expect almost no effective response.

As I said above, most gun buyers cite self-protection as the need for a firearm, not to answer the need for a “well regulated militia.” Why self-protection should be covered by the 2nd Amendment when it’s not mentioned there is a fair question. The Amendment’s wording goes “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” The Supreme Court placed its emphasis only on the second clause, ignoring any contingency between the first and second clauses.

In my heart, I have to believe that if we could bring the Founding Fathers back to take a look at a country where gun murders are common and mass shootings or fear of such shootings are a part of daily life, they’d get to work right away rewriting it to make it work, because clearly, right now, it is NOT working.

Why is there little to no need for self-protection guns in Europe, Japan, or Australia? These are not places where it’s not absolutely impossible to have a gun, it’s just hard and you need to jump through some hoops in order to get one.

Anyway, I wish I could ask our Founding Fathers this: “How many innocent lives lost, including those of schoolchildren, would justify at least revisiting the 2nd Amendment?”

[.]

Whatever. While all of the intellectuals talk, life as usual goes on, where guns save lives regularly.

yet another example….

APD: Man involved in Albuquerque shooting saved woman and her daughter

I myself am training to be able to carry a firearm for protection, and while I probably will choose a handgun, either way any responsible gun owner will tell you there is a LOT that goes into owning and handling a gun responsibly and a decision people don’t make flippantly if  they are serious about self protection.

[Strega]

@unseen There seems to be a knee jerk reaction to regulating gun ownership in the USA – it’s quite strong here in Vermont.  The question I have, is what is the constitutional position on “well regulated”?  I have seen people quote “second amendment” rather abundantly recently, but not actually quote the valid sentence.  I had imagined that “well regulated” might involve some kind of regulation.

The reatrictions suggested so far in what I’ve read, are to make the ‘machine gun’ type of gun unavailable to the general public, to improve background checks (not a big fan of this one, mainly for its probable inadequacy at achieving anything much) and to raise the age of ownership to 21years.

I don’t think an assault type weapon is useful for hunting at all, so I can’t really see why they are considered necessary, but then again, I wasn’t brought up around guns.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 2 months ago by Strega.

[Noel]

@belle:  you’ve shared with us your sons emotional issues. I’m one who empathizes with you and the cards the two of you have been dealt. I hope you’ve done your homework and considered the fact that the CDC attributes guns as the third leading cause of child deaths each year.  Be careful and be informed. Here is the article in Newsweek: http://www.newsweek.com/guns-kids-third-leading-cause-death-627209

[.]

Yeah I’ve definitely considered that Noel. Truth is that I really need one. Especially now.

[.]

I laughed as I got a “courtesy call” from the NRA last night asking me to rejoin. I almost said something smartass but was too tired and just said not right now.

[.]

@Unseen

Most people who want guns will cite self-protection as a reason for wanting firearms. Howeverl I think even gun proponents would agree that the most useful firearm for self protection, in most circumstances, is not a rifle, shotgun, or assault-style weapon (like the AR-15), but rather a simple handgun.

It really depends on what and why you need a gun. That’s a pretty broad stereotype, don’t you think? Are you suggesting we should outlaw everything except for handguns?

 

[Strega]

We should outlaw the ones that go ratatatat and not the ones that go pop pop. Seems easy to me 🙂

[.]

LOL!

But then you are making king an assumption that there’s no legitimate legal use of owning a “big gun” and that’s just not true. I’ve actually myself analyzed whether or not to buy a hand gun and a rifle. Because they serve different purposes.

[.]

Me personally: I don’t want my right to own a gun be taken away just because we don’t know how to keep guns out of the hands of irresponsible pipsqueeks. I legitimately need to own a fire arm (or two or three) and it’s really nobody’s business….as a  law abiding citizen it’s actually pretty insulting to be told I shouldn’t have that right. Especially given the very real threats I need to protect my family from.

[Unseen]

Bellen wrote:

@unseen

Most people who want guns will cite self-protection as a reason for wanting firearms. Howeverl I think even gun proponents would agree that the most useful firearm for self protection, in most circumstances, is not a rifle, shotgun, or assault-style weapon (like the AR-15), but rather a simple handgun.

It really depends on what and why you need a gun. That’s a pretty broad stereotype, don’t you think? Are you suggesting we should outlaw everything except for handguns?

If your home is under assault by a band of bad guys, you’ll wish you had a fully automatic weapon, but basically that is something that never happens. If you go to Youtube and watch videos of people fending off and/or killing dangerous baddies, it’s almost always with a handgun. Rarely, it’s a shotgun. Assault-style rapid-fire weapons, almost never.

When are you suggesting someone would need an assault-style weapon and is this need so widespread and pressing that we should accept massacres of our children in order to preserve that as a right?

[.]

If your home is under assault by a band of bad guys, you’ll wish you had a fully automatic weapon, but basically that is something that never happens.

Maybe for you it never happens because you live in suburbia…

For personal every day protection, you’re right, I plan to carry a handgun I can wear on my person. That’s for day-to-day activity…

When are you suggesting someone would need an assault-style weapon and is this need so widespread and pressing that we should accept massacres of our children in order to preserve that as a right?

Just today there was a report on CNN about how this kid had pointed guns at people’s heads in the past. That shows that this kid honestly was premeditating the murders he was about to carry out. It was totally premeditated and there are SOO many things that could have been done to avoid it. This kid has ZERO business with a gun. Any responsible, highly trained gun owner would tell you that. So to say it should suddenly be illegal for everybody…Yeah I take offense to that.

The equivalent in your world Unseen would be that it suddenly become illegal to take nude photos of consenting 18 year olds because there was a huge surge of unlawful photographing of 17 year olds without consent by some crazy pervert (which happens…) and that would mean that you suddenly can no longer possess photos of nude 18 year olds. What if I told you Unseen that you have to give up your camera. Cameras are the problem!!! You can’t own a camera unless it’s the one on your cell phone. That’s the ONLY camera that’s legal…

Wouldn’t you feel like your rights are being trampled on?

Just because YOU don’t need a gun, doesn’t mean that other people don’t.

I know many people who have had to become trained to own a gun for personal protection. It’s not something anyone does willy nilly without extensive education and training if they are serious about it. One of my good friends is a fire arms instructor and he would be the first to tell you that what happened in FL is absolutely not as simple as just outlawing guns. Even if this kid couldn’t buy one legally, there’s always an illegal way to accomplish your goal if he really wanted to…

When are you suggesting someone would need an assault-style weapon and is this need so widespread and pressing that we should accept massacres of our children in order to preserve that as a right?

For me personally, because of where I’m about to live. A hand gun has a very VERY limited range you can fire it. It’s really meant for close up shots.

• This reply was modified 8 years, 2 months ago by ..

[Strega]

You, personally plan to buy an AR 15 or something similar because you are going to need its lethal scatterpower to stay safe?  I just want to make sure I understand.

[JadeBlackOlive]

If you guys are that paranoid or afraid of your fellow neighbours to need continual means of self-protection, then its a crappy place to live.

[Reg the Fronkey Farmer]

When one posited “solution” is to give teachers extra pay to become trained in firearms then you know the problem is not even understood and nowhere near being properly addressed.

What Miriam are your qualifications for this teaching post? “I have an honors degrees in American Literature and a master’s degree in elementary education with 20 years’ teaching experience. I am also a qualified piano teacher and I have an advanced firearms qualification in case a murderer walks into school.

I was in an elementary school in Georgia once for a year end dinner. The first thing I noticed was the sign at the  entrance that read “No firearms beyond this point”. I thought to myself, “do people have to be told that?”

[Author]

Posts