BS: Guns & laws in the US

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Bobert
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 02:38 PM

Whatever, Amos... The militia is part of the subject... I mean, if you were diagramming the sumabich it would be part of the subject whereas the right to bare firmly in the caboose... Right???   

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 02:42 PM

""It's the "handgun culture" (which can't come directly from traditions of hunting game).""

No, you're right. It comes from the nineteenth century tradition of shooting human beings at the drop of a hat, or a careless word.

Apart from competitive target shooting, there is only one purpose to a handgun.....Shooting human beings!

And anyone who owns and carries a handgun is, by definition, prepared to kill a human being. The problem is with the wide variety of reasons which, to the shooter, will justify the killing.

We have just seen that, in at least one case, walking through the shooter's neighbourhood while wearing a black face was justification in the minds of the shooter, the Mayor, the Police Chief and the District attorney.

Am I the only person who finds that a terrifying prospect?

Suffice to say that, if I won the lottery tomorrow, I would leave the US out of my world tour itinerary, in spite of a lifelong desire to see Yellowstone, the Grand Canyon, springtime in New England, and many other places.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: olddude
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 02:43 PM

Greg
Mahlon told me , "love working on your friend Greg's watches, he is such a nice person" nail one on ebay and have him fix it for you. MAN what he did to that steel cased one of mine is amazing and it was a mess when I bought it

sorry for thread creep ... back to guns

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 03:01 PM

""Anyway, "the right of the people...shall not be infringed" seems pretty unambiguous.""

There you go again, leaving out the limiting phrase about "Tyranny in Government", later repeated as follows: ""The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
       -- Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Jefferson Papers, vol. 1, p.334""

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 03:04 PM

gnu ~~ do you really not see that it is your national failure to 'give a shit who don't like it FOR ANY FUCKING REASON' ~~ about what anyone else in the world thinks about anything whatever which doesn't suit your own [in your eyes] god-given purposes ~~ that makes you a hissing and a byword and an object of hatred and contempt to so many right-thinking people everywhere; when you ought by rights, given just a little less of that self-centred national megalomania of yours, to be the most loved and respected nation in the history of the world.

This I mean literally, not poetically or hyperbolically.

Is it really worth it, just to have your own way in any conceivable circumstances?

~M~

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 03:07 PM

""And dig this:

http://news.yahoo.com/holding-gun-may-think-others-too-221346341.html""

Sorry Lighter, that won't wash. The tape of the kid begging for his life is proof positive that he was not the aggressor, and that he was coldbloodedly executed.

No way out!

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Lighter
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 03:34 PM

It wasn't supposed to "wash." (This is the gun thread, not the Zimmerman thread.)

It means that people who pack guns are more likely to think that others are doing the same. And I suppose packing one at the moment of being ready to use it enhances the effect.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: maeve
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 03:36 PM

MtheGM- Gnu is not now, nor has he ever been, an American; can't tar him with that feather.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: maeve
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 03:44 PM

continuing...
I suppose to be accurate I should say gnu is indeed a North American, but not one of the USA type. We should be so lucky!

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: John P
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 03:45 PM

"the right of the people...shall not be infringed" seems pretty unambiguous.

Did you know that in the Constitution, every time the word "people" is used it is referring to the citizenry as a whole, and every time a specific individual right is being given the word is "person"? Why should the 2md amendment be any different?

Is requiring a background check, trigger locks, and getting rid of hand guns really infringement? These things don't stop anyone from owning a gun. Does infringement refer to the basic right, or to any rules we might make up to make ourselves safer? Seems quite ambiguous to me.

On a different subject, I read in the paper last week that a gun in the home is four times more likely to be used on a friend or family member that to be used defending the home against invasion. People who think that gun control laws are infringement need to convince me that they have a plan for dealing with this statistic. Given these numbers, anyone who keeps a gun in the house is saying that every home invader is worth four family members.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: gnu
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 04:11 PM

"And anyone who owns and carries a handgun is, by definition, prepared to kill a human being."

YES! SO WHAT? In my mind, it is ridiculous to state it. I look at it this way. Anyone who owns and carries a handgun is, by definition, prepared to defend themselves, their families, their fellow citizens and their property... LEGALLY.

BIG difference and BIG INFERENCE on your part... which has NO justification and no status as an arguement against LEGAL guns.

MGM... "right-thinking people everywhere". Apparently not. Fact is, Yanks don't take shit... from you or their government and that is PARTICULARLY why the USA is the land of the free and the home of the DON'T FUCK WITH ME. That is what their nation was founded on. That is their constitution. The right to peace and quiet enjoyment of life and if you fuck with that, they reserve the right to shoot your ass... when it's LEGAL AND JUSTIFIED. Their government is iffy on that one... you know... their Militia running amok in other countries (my country too, sniff)... but that's on so many other threads.

Ya know... this thread(s) is never gonna end. Fact is, I own a gun. I ain't gonna shoot you... unless you tell me you are gonna take my gun. Don't worry. I am a marksman. You won't feel a thing.

gnightgnu... have fun with it.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Lighter
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 04:39 PM

It's unambiguous in the sense that "not infringed" is the norm. That means further regulations must not be true infringements. If you're not a criminal, you still get to own a gun, regardless of the later-legislated paperwork and so on, as long as the paperwork doesn't infringe on your right to own one.

At least that's how I see it. One could argue that even licensing is an "infringement" of Constitutional rights, but two hundred years of reasoned opinion would seem to deny that assertion.

Not that I expect it, but a properly argued suit before the Supreme Court could conceivably change things, now or a hundred years from now. That's how the rule of law works.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: John P
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 04:46 PM

The right to peace and quiet enjoyment of life . . .

Right, with a bunch of untrained, angry idiots running around with guns in their pockets. Somehow it doesn't feel peaceful to me. So my right to peace is trumped by violent armed people? And you say they are living in peace?

If they were doing something that had no effect on other people, I would defend their right to do whatever. Guns, however, have a large impact on other people. My whole life is being infringed on by gun people.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: GUEST,Chongo Chimp
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 05:01 PM

I got guns all over the place, lotsa guns, guns of every kind, and I have NEVER shot a family member or a friend in the home. Not once.

Okay, I have shot a coupla ex-friends who turned out not to be such good friends after all....but that don't count. If they was real friends, I would not have shot them.

And not once have I shot down an ex-friend in the home. No sir. Not once.

(I did shoot one of them down in the hallway once, though...he seen it comin' and he made a break for the door, so I didn't actually ventilate him proper till he was not technically in my home no longer. He was 6 feet outside the entrance door and runnin' down the 2nd floor hallway. I shot him straight through the west office wall with my tommy gun. 32 rounds. And he deserved it!)

You people who wanta take away my guns had better think twice, cos you are walkin' on very thin ice and swingin' on a vine that is just about to break.

- Chongo

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 07:28 PM

""Yanks don't take shit... from you or their government and that is PARTICULARLY why the USA is the land of the free and the home of the DON'T FUCK WITH ME""

"Land of the free"....as long as you ain't Black, Hispanic, Chinese, Muslim, Native American, or Sick, and you have lots of dough!

Nothing is free in the US, and neither are a huge number of its citizens.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: number 6
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 07:56 PM

The following excerpt is from an interview with Canadian (yes a Canadian) folk singer, and a global enviromental/peace activist Bruce Cockburn ...

.......

King: You are or have been a handgun enthusiast and target shooter. Can a man of peace own handguns?

Cockburn: I don't want to get into a debate about gun control. In Canada it's kind of a nonissue, because we have plenty of guns, and we don't have a gun-crime problem.

I do think the Second Amendment to your Constitution is legitimate. In the context of the time in which it was written, it was entirely appropriate to make sure the populace was not going to be a pushover for a military takeover. But that was an era when the military wasn't much better equipped than the population.

In the current context you can't outgun the authorities. They've always got bigger guns. It's about knowledge and information now. So if you want to protect your constitutional right to defend yourself, the way to do it is through having enough information that you can make sound choices, and through demonstrations of the sort we've seen against the World Trade Organization and the Iraq War. An armed response to government oppression is not effective other than as an attention getter. The thing that scares them most is people knowing the truth; otherwise they wouldn't go to such lengths to keep it from us.

Personally, I think that in a democracy the authorities should not be the only ones who are armed. The best-case scenario would be if nobody was armed. But if the cops are going to have guns, then people should have them too.

The gun-control issue can distract us from more important issues, like the environment and social justice and exploitation. These problems are complicated by the presence of weapons, and that needs to be looked at, but gun control is not the biggest issue we face.
......

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: number 6
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 08:10 PM

Anyway ... Bruce says that ... me, I think guns aren't the problem, people are (this includes governments, corporations and the common peons) and it's not just in the U.S. A. were people are all f&%kd up, it's a phenomenon that is happening the world over ((in case you haven't noticed) ... and why are people the world over getting so wonky ... I really don't know, maybe it's the food, maybe it's the water, or something in the air, maybe the sports shoes they wear ... or more than likely it has to do with all those reality T.V. and 'what ever' idol programs.

biLL's 2 cent rant of the week.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Bobert
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 08:50 PM

Yeah, John P.... Couple months ago I heard where two families had a feud and one guy had a gun... During the altercation the guy with the gun accidentally shot both his brother and his father while shooting none of the other folks they were fighting with???

BTW, the father lived but his brother wasn't so lucky...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Little Hawk
Date: 21 Mar 12 - 09:46 PM

Your problem isn't guns. Your problem is a terrible and growing gulf of economic disparity between the rich and the poor, massive social injustice, a decaying infrastructure, loss of traditional jobs, the busting of unions, privatization of public institutions, high unemployment, gross lack of social services, unpayable public debt, erosion of civil rights, and a corrupt government that has sold itself out to private corporate interests and banks and abdicated all social responsibility in the process.

Your problem is endemic corporate fascism run by banks and billionaires. Fascists like guns...but they don't particularly like having the guns in the hands of the ordinary public...rather, they would prefer that all firepower be in the hands of the police, the army, the private mercenaries (such as Blackwater), and the various security services (governmental and private contractors).

The various random acts of violence that occur on the part of ordinary citizens with guns will only strengthen the draconian powers of corporate fascism in a crackdown response that potentially affects everyone...therefore those incidents are actually quite convenient for promoting the general fascist program that is already underway.

When people get really scared, they tend to panic and call for "security"...and they'll let their regular civil rights be taken away with hardly a whisper of protest. That's what's been happening bit by bit ever since 911. 911 was the USA's equivalent of the Reichstag fire. It has similarly enabled a fascist takeover...one that still clothes itself in the fig leaf of a supposed 2-party "democracy".

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Jim Dixon
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 08:30 AM

Sorry I came late to this conversation--

Lighter: I'm surprised to read that Canadians "own guns at a rate half that of the US." I remember Michael Moore, in his film *Bowling for Columbine* said the opposite: that Canadians owned more guns but had less gun violence. However, I'm pretty sure Moore was including rifles and shotguns. (More Canadians are hunters). I'll bet your figures refer only to handguns.

Another point that Moore made was that the tradition of keeping guns for self-defense became strong in the South during slavery days because whites were always afraid of slave rebellions. Also, the gangs that went out to recapture runaway slaves were armed, and guns were used to intimidate blacks during the Jim Crow era. So my guess is, there are still regional differences in gun ownership, and the northern states may be more comparable to Canada.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: GUEST,olddude
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 08:51 AM

Don
I understand your point my friend but the same can be said for drunk drivers ... careless and crazy extend to all area's of life, not just gun owners. There are responsible people, there are not responsible people that will always do harm to others regardless of the weapon. sometimes it is even a car

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: GUEST,olddude
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 09:05 AM

Like anything else in life, what we need is to plug the loopholes that put dangerous things into the hands of irresponsible people. Fix the gun show law, enforce the drunk driving and texting law etc .. heck I read where I guy ran over a little kid in Texas, he was picked up five times before on drunk driving .. why did he still have a license? Well they plea bargain it down ... ya see, it is all about responsibility not weapon.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Lighter
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 09:15 AM

The Canadian figures are here:

http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/facts-faits/archives/quick_facts/2011/dec-eng.htm

According to the RCMP, the 33 million Canadians own about 8 million registered guns.

According to the USDJ, in 1995, 300 million Americans owned 223 million guns:

http://web.archive.org/web/20071214070953/http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/guic.pdf

(That number is presumably higher now. It's an old document but still informative.)

Maybe you're thinking of Switzerland. Every every adult Swiss male is required by law to own an automatic weapon and ammunition for national defense. Homicides in Switzerland are rare.

Antebellum Southerners certainly were afraid of slave rebellions, and on the Frontier you'd be crazy not to have a pistol to defend yourself. But research shows that the rate of shootings in places like Dodge City and Tomstone was nothing like in the movies.

But none of these facts explains the amazingly high rate of shootings and gun homicides in the United States. I haven't checked, but I believe it began early in the 20th century. Overall rates of violent crime really took off in the '60s, but have been dropping for about twenty years.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: GUEST,olddude
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 09:27 AM

Lighter
it is because they are in the hands of criminals. Not to keep repeating but if a felon can go to a gun show, but 15 AK-47's and a host of handguns, take them to a city drug gang and sell them for 10 times what he paid .. the purchase was legal, the rest was not .. how can that make sense. Now you have armed a drug militia group with weapons that out gun the police ... Nothing makes sense for sure.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 09:55 AM

"the land of the free and the home of the DON'T FUCK WITH ME" - put like that - that is supposed to be a good thing? It reads more like the battle hymn of the aggressive and dangerous uneducated uncivilised yahoo.

I have a cunning plan - leave the guns alone. Put a VERY large tax on ammunition, and license the smelting of lead (all those dangerous fumes, you know).   Come to that license the manufacture of gunpowder, tax it heavily, and allow rebates for documented and proven industrial and agricultural USE. That comes within the regulation of commerce and is constitutional.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: GUEST,olddude
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 10:06 AM

I don't know where you live Richard, but the people I know, grew up with are far from what you describe. I guess a lot of foreign folks hate us yanks but we are all use to it

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: pdq
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 10:18 AM

Don't take it seriously, Dan.

Richard "Low" Bridge hates everybody.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Lighter
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 11:27 AM

Olddude, I believe you're correct.

On the larger question of "hating Yanks." My personal experience is that real "Yank hatred" is far less common than some Yank-hating 'Catters believe.

Let's recall too how many people from all over are trying desperately to relocate here.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 03:07 PM

I didn't invent the quote. I only read it and pointed out what it looked and sounded like.

I admit I hate and scorn a wide range quite even-handedly. Mostly. A few more than others, like conservatives (and their brothers under the skin who we do not mention) and people who bomb civilians and oppress whole nations (or would like to) and adherents of the Gordon Gecko mindset. And those who use their religions to oppress.

But I can't be low, as you will find many to tell you I look down my nose at people.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Bee-dubya-ell
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 04:21 PM

I live in the US and I own a couple of guns (a 12 GA pump shotgun and a 9mm bolt action carbine). I have them because I live in the middle of about 100 acres of woods where there are real dangers that occasionally need to be dealt with. If you are staunchly 100% anti-gun, then you have my permission to attempt to keep rattlesnakes out of my house and various wild and feral animals from eating my pets by reasoning with them or clubbing them with garden implements at close quarters. Personally, I'd rather shoot them from a safe distance.

I do not hunt, but I don't begrudge those who do. I feel hunting is a "necessary evil" to keep deer populations from exploding to the point where they wreak total havoc on both the natural ecosystem and most agricultural land, while on their way to eventual mass starvation. Members of the "no guns for any reason" crowd are welcome to come up with creative ways to feed Bambi and his potentially billion cousins without wrecking the economy.   

I don't see a compelling need for handguns in the hands of most private individuals. If someone feels a real need for a gun for personal protection, a shotgun is a much better choice than a handgun. It's safer in that it's probably not going to be in the drawer of one's bedside table so it's less likely to be grabbed and fired without adequate forethought. It's also far less likely to fall into the hands of children. And the sound of jacking a shell into the firing chamber of a pump shotgun will make most burglars shit their pants with no need to actually fire the thing.

I also see absolutely no need for individuals to own military style automatic or semi-automatic weapons (AKA assault rifles) other than "because they can." Assault weapons are meant to do one thing, and that is to kill human beings as efficiently as possible. They're not meant for hunting or even for personal protection, but to kill enemies.   Owning one must mean the owner thinks someone is the enemy. That equals paranoia, plain and simple, and it's a paranoia that's being fed by the NRA, gun manufacturers, and gun dealers, solely for the benefit of their pocketbooks.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: GUEST,olddude
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 07:43 PM

boy there are more than a few cops that shouldn't own a handgun. Some of those guys are horrible at shooting. I had a gunsmith friend in PA and the only time he ever had problems was when a sheriff came in to get a gun fixed. One guy blew a hole in his counter and other shot out his light.. I use to teach advanced shooting to the sheriff dept. some of the guys couldn't hit an elephant in the ass with a snow shovel. Agree Bee .. shotgun for most is safer

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: GUEST,olddude
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 07:49 PM

That is very sad Richard, no way to go through life, you may want to think about huh ... just a kind suggestion. It is a lot easier and more satisfying doing good for others and being nice

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 08:07 PM

In the UK I'm pretty sure that pump action shotguns are off the agenda, and that seems fairly sensible. A double barrel, whether side by side or over and under, should be OK for spiders and snakes.

For things we don't have in the UK, like big cats or bears or high-foodchain dog variants, a bolt action rifle seems adequate. I'm not a stellar shot (and pretty crap with a pistol) but I used to outshoot on clay pigeon (using a horrid single barrel 12 bore Webley) some people with very expensive over and under cushion butt Japanese things, and I'm trying to remember the "rapid fire" routine I had to do with a bolt action rifle to get my "marksman" badge in the school corps.

Now my nutty mate who used to shoot for the Navy at Bisley - he's different. I think he was 9 when his grandfather took him into the back garden to teach him how to shoot German invaders with a Lee Enfield 303. The war had been over for over 12 years but grandpa forgot that. He later was one of a very select group of special snipers for Mrs Kween, one of those people with a special relationship with wind and temperature variation for very very long range shooting. He was just as deadly with a handgun. His brother in-law was competitive at Welsh national level with a target pistol, but said nutty mate could halve his group diameter with a gun he'd never seen before.

The point of the story is that I'm not kneejerk antigun.

But there is absolutely no legitimate reason for a civilian to carry a multiple-fire weapon or a handgun - or even to have one for use other than a handgun for competition use on the target range (in which case it should be locked up at the gun club) for the very simple reason that their only purpose is to kill people. That in turn can only be justified if you think that might is right.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Songwronger
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 08:34 PM

Long thread, maybe this has been mentioned, but the main difference between the US and UK is that the US fought a war to throw off the tyranny of the monarchs. Then our founders enshrined in our founding document certain protections. One of those protections is a reminder (in the 2nd Amendment to the constitution), that people have the right to bear arms.

The founders knew that another tyranny would spring up in the US if safeguards weren't put in place. Guns in America are to be used by the citizenry against tyranny. Unfortunately that's rarely taught. The dialogue gets refocused on "hunting" and "sport" and things like that. A shame, because our government will cajole us out of our guns if it can.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Bobert
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 08:56 PM

First of all, I agree with my ol' friend, Beezer... No need for handguns and assault weapons...

As for the government taking away guns??? I seriously doubt that...

I'd like to see the government furnish a long rifle to anyone who is willing to learn how to use it safely and be part of a well regulated militia...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: olddude
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 09:13 PM

won't make ya safer bro, lots of the bad shooting are done by gangs with the AK-47 or the Bushmaster AR ...

A weapon is a weapon .. we really need a federal carry standard and the gun show limitations. The border agents are getting wacked from Mexico by the drug folks using our own weapons. On 20 20 TV show they showed how easy it was, but them, disassemble, put them in a bag and walk over the border crossing no questions. One lady got caught (one of the few) because she has so much ammo and weapons she could not carry the bag. In Mexico all firearms are illegal ... look how well that works for them

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Songwronger
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 10:53 PM

So if law-abiding Americans voluntarily limit their access to guns, will criminals limit THEIR access? We all know the answer to that.

And you have to take into consideration that the criminals in the gun game include Eric Holder, U.S. Attorney General. He's been running guns into Mexico in order to demonize the "gun show loophole."

Simple fact is that big government wants to own you. The dead Jews in Hitler's Germany could tell you how that ends up.

An armed America is a safe America. Deny guns to felons, leave the rest alone.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: John P
Date: 22 Mar 12 - 11:55 PM

Legalizing drugs would go a long toward easing gun violence. At least we wouldn't have gang wars and people who need to raise $100 a day for their habit. Why didn't we learn anything from the Prohibition? Gun violence galore, and we're just doing it again.

Speaking of cops who shouldn't have guns, one of the children that was killed here recently was shot by her brother with their police officer father's gun. The kids and the loaded gun were were in the car. The parents weren't.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 23 Mar 12 - 02:27 AM

Songwronger - do you really believe that a bunch of survivalist nutters can outgun the military that gave us the phrase "shock and awe"? Do you really believe that they can outgun any invading military (if the US military has tried and failed)? It would be a romantic but dangerous illusion.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Bobert
Date: 23 Mar 12 - 09:37 AM

A long rifle and an AK47 aren't the same beast...

B~

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: GUEST,number 6
Date: 23 Mar 12 - 09:57 AM

Richard Bridge .... the Iraqi and Afghani rebels have given the 'shock and awe' military boys a good run for their money.

biLL

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 23 Mar 12 - 11:16 AM

Not in their capacities as invading armies - in their capacities as hamstrung peacekeepers. And not with handguns, but with roadside bombs.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 23 Mar 12 - 11:17 AM

PS - same as the IRA used against UK military.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: GUEST,Lighter
Date: 24 Mar 12 - 09:51 AM

One more case:

http://www.ksdk.com/news/article/311679/28/Iraq-War-veteran-killed-widow-says-Floridas-Stand-Your-Ground-law-is-free-pass-for-mu

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Crowhugger
Date: 24 Mar 12 - 11:11 AM

With the caveat that this is vast generalization: I think the chief difference between Canadian and American behaviour with gun laws goes back to a difference in what rights are top of the hierarchy. In the US it's individual rights, in Canada, group rights. The Canadian Constitution clearly limits individual rights to what is reasonable in a free and democratic society. Given that the Canadian Constitution is just 30-something years old, the courts are still working out what that means in different situations. But generally speaking they seem slightly more willing to limit personal freedom than courts in the US. It only takes a small difference in wording of laws and their interpretation to have a big effect on society. I say this not as a lawyer but as a more or less informed citizen.

There is an element of chicken and egg in this effect, since it was Canadians who drafted the constitution to begin with and Canadians who interpret it and who are then bound by those interpretations, and write new laws that fit within its framework.

The difference between US and Canadian gun policy may be explained a lot by history. In terms of need for guns in the settlement of the Canadian west there are three factors that created a tremendously different settlement culture here compared to the US.

1. Canada's northwest (what is now Ontario north and west of Georgian Bay & Lake Superior, the prairies, and BC apart from Victoria and Vancouver) was not significantly settled until the Canadian Pacific Railroad (CPR) was built 1880-1885. By that time European diseases brought by a scant population of missionaries and fur traders had decimated the original populations. Enormous buffalo hunts had very nearly decimated that population--buffalo were virtually extinct by the time The Railway (see #2) was completed in 1885. By the time Canada was settling the prairies, original populations were in a weakened state from starvation and European disease; they also knew what usurping of land had occured in the USA but were far less able to resist. Their chief food supply was so vastly dwindled that during the time of railroad building and soon after, many reluctantly but of necessity moved onto reserves where they would at least have basic food and shelter, if not health and dignity--buffalo were no longer a reliable way to provide for one's family and tribe.

2. During railway construction is precisely when Canada's west began to be settled beyond a few bone-mashing cart tracks between fur trading posts and a few adventuresome naturalists, homesteaders especially along the Red River, and wannabe miners. The Canadian Pacific Railway (CPR) controlled the rules within 20 miles either side of the track and they had their own enforcers to limit employees' and service providers' participation in vices. The majority of navvies (labourers) were either recently decended from Europeans, majority from UK, or were directly from the UK. A smaller number were from other parts of Europe.

3. The British ideas of law and order formed the basis for the North West Mounted Police during this era. This force was in place as the west was being settled, with little tolerance for the American style "wild west."

Putting together those three uniquely Canadian conditions of western settlement:
The majority of the End of Track population, as that tent settlement moved across the prairie, would naturally have within it largely British assumptions about guns. Add to that the fact that original populations and their food supply were decimated by that time, there wasn't the extent of warring resistance that marks stories of the "wild west" of the US.

It's only in the last 30 years or so that Canada has begun to develop a self separate from its British roots rather than exactly in their image. Canada was extremely British at the time the fundamentals of the country were put together and for a long time afterwards. Our gun culture reflects that. And lately, urban gun culture reflects growing drug and gang crime.

I couldn't say which gun policy approach is better, only which one I'm used to and therefore comfortable with: The one in which I grew up.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: pdq
Date: 24 Mar 12 - 11:26 AM

Crowhugger...

No offense, but you use "decimated" way too often, especially since you do not really know what it means. Think 10% and military.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Don(Wyziwyg)T
Date: 24 Mar 12 - 07:15 PM

""but the main difference between the US and UK is that the US fought a war to throw off the tyranny of the monarchs.""

I guess your history lessons stopped short of the English Civil War and the overthrow of the monarch by Oliver Cromwell, the reason why we are a constitutional monarchy?

So many assumptions, so many wrong.

Don T.

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Mr Happy
Date: 25 Mar 12 - 07:48 AM

http://www.addictinginfo.org/2012/03/23/indiana-governor-signs-bill-allowing-citizens-to-use-deadly-force-against-police-officer

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: WalkaboutsVerse
Date: 25 Mar 12 - 08:53 AM

My poem on this - "Monopoly ".

Subject: RE: BS: Guns & laws in the US
From: Richard Bridge
Date: 25 Mar 12 - 09:32 AM

Mr Happy - that IS a satire, isn't it?