BS: Anyone defend US gun law?

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 09:41 AM

No, I don't think so -- Charlton Heston is indubitably a most accomplished actor. Just shows that such status doesn't necessarily bring good judgment in all matters.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Lighter
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 09:58 AM

> Charlton Heston is indubitably a most accomplished actor.

Sadly, "was."

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Stu
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 10:09 AM

"Charlton Heston is indubitably a most accomplished actor."

Really? Apart from Planet of the Apes I can't think of one good thing he's been in. All subjective I suppose.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 10:46 AM

"As a white American male, Carl is a lot more likely to shoot himself than anything else. "

Nonsense! Carl and many others, like olddude, are probably quite careful and competent when handling weapons... and it has nothing to do with "having small dicks". It 'may' have to do with an excess of testosterone, but that is a problem in lots of places. Some express it by collecting guns, some by making nasty posts in online forums.

The problem is all the not-so-careful, stupid, bigoted, aggressive idiots who are able to get guns thru the same ridiculously lax laws that allow them to Carl & others.

I do not approve of Carl, Dan, and various others who have debated this in Mudcat for a few years, having so many guns, but I would feel safe around most of them, even when I knew they were 'carrying'. That is quite apart from my fear & disgust with the myriads of others I don't know who treat guns like they did playing games at 10 years old!

If I could wave a magic wand, I'd soon have only hunters, ranchers who need to control vermin, police and a few carefully screened others who demonstrate a **need** able to access most weapons.... but we are far past that except as a fantasy.

   Gee... it must be nice to have such simple views of the world's problems. Too bad simple solutions¹ are not also on the menu.



1.simple solutions- like when Will Rogers was asked in the 1940s- "What can we do about the German submarines?"


paraphrased:
"Simple." replied Will. "Boil the ocean!"
"Oh c'mon Will, that's nonsense, how could we boil the ocean?"
"Oh, I'm just the idea man," Will said, "We have technical experts for the details."

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Lighter
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 10:55 AM

Yeah, but there'd still be German airplanes.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Stu
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 12:44 PM

"Some express it by collecting guns, some by making nasty posts in online forums."

True, but you'll have a heck of a job walking into McDonalds/school/shopping mall and blowing the living shite out of everyone with a nasty post from an online forum when the red mist comes down.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Musket
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 01:11 PM

Bill uses the word "probably" when discussing the sanity and competence of people who think roaming around with guns makes you look cool.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Lighter
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 02:42 PM

Cool is as cool does.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 02:48 PM

Musket knows...or at least should... that that is not what I was discussing. I very specifically would NOT trust anyone who ostentatiously shows off by "roaming around with guns".

Careless interpretation of others' posts seems to be as popular a hobby as carrying guns...especially in areas where guns can't be the hobby.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 04:10 PM

Bill, guns CAN be a hobby in the UK but, having SANE regulations brought in many years ago by a government which actually had some balls, those guns are very, VERY closely controlled indeed.

Anyone who wishes to follow such a hobby has to show, amongst other things, very good reasons why he should be allowed to own a gun, and claiming to need one for 'self-defence', or to 'restrain our government' would immediately put the claimant in the category of 'Complete Fucking Crackpot' and debar him from ever having access to firearms of any sort.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Musket
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 04:30 PM

One concurs.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 04:52 PM

Bill, my point references the fact that the great majority of gun deaths among white males are suicides. This has been pointed out our multitudinous gun threads. Carl, for his part, said that if someone wants to shoot himself, it is his right.

Vermont, incidentally, has a substantially higher rate of suicide than the national average, and a lower rate of violent crime. Neither of those is nonsense.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 05:45 PM

We must be making headway when the gun lobby have to import outside talent to defend themselves - and if that's the best they've got, it's even more encouraging. I suppose it becomes understandable when charges of corporate manslaughter could lead to the American justice system.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 06:02 PM

Ok Stim... in that context, I can see why one has concern about gun owners being at a higher risk for suicide. That is quite apart from an opinion about "if someone wants to shoot himself, it is his right." That question is about suicide as a right, not the method.

And I certainly agree with Backwoodsman that "having SANE regulations" is the goal.

Gosh... now all we need to do is unravel 250 years of history and attitudes! Easy-peasy, hmmm?

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Musket
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 06:05 PM

Regulations don't need to be a goal. You just introduce them in law and regulate.

Easy peasy lemon squeezy.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Lighter
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 06:38 PM

> You just introduce them in law and regulate.

Any idea what it takes nowadays to pass a new law in the US on any "controversial" matter?

Or "noncontroversial," come to think of it.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Bill D
Date: 07 Sep 14 - 08:00 PM

"You just introduce them in law and regulate."
LOL
50 times..with amendments....

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 01:57 AM

See.......every time you're given the solution, out you come with the same old same-old - "Oh yes, you're absolutely right, but it's too difficult".

So.......back to my first post - 75% of you aren't interested in firearms! Why aren't you organising and forcing your will on your government and the small (25% FFS!) minority? Oh sorry, I forgot - it's too difficult. WTF happened to the 'Can-Do' nation we non-Yanks used to admire so much?

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Musket
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 03:37 AM

So penis inadequacy is the fault of corruptible government?

Keep banging the rocks together..

Anyway, that's a stupid response. The same lawmakers can ban smoking in public places so they can ban guns too. Despite all the bullshit about land of the free, I found that taking over businesses in The USA subjected us to far more red tape and regulation than in any other country we operated in.

So don't come out with that crap.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 04:05 AM

One concurs.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Lighter
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 09:31 AM

> The same lawmakers can ban smoking in public places so they can ban guns too.

Wrong.

There's no Constitutional guarantee of a right to smoke.

A Constitutional guarantee is inviolable. And guns are more popular than cigarettes, so to speak.

What's more, wiseguys, people have been organizing and urging and lobbying for stricter gun laws (not an unconstitutional "ban on guns") since the 1960s. And they still are.

Limited results, including a law ending the manufacture of assault weapons for civilians (1994). But Congress allowed it to expire ten years after they passed it.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Musket
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 09:56 AM

There's no constitutional right to go around with guns if you bring in a law to say so.

There's nothing in any constitution about it. The nearest is something about the right to be drafted into an army or militia to defend The USA. I believe it is called the right to bear arms.

I know you are living in a lawless third world country but the democratic majority of your decent citizens want this criminal activity stopped. Take lessons from democracies and work as they do.

Eventually, you might get there. After all, the people wish it to be so. And your President is embarrassed when being lectured by world leaders about getting his house in order before criticising others.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Lighter
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 10:16 AM

Perhaps some are thinking too that our elected representatives are supposed to provide "leadership" as well as follow what their pollsters tell them is the "will of their constituents."

That *was* the theory.... But the over-riding real-world goal is to get elected and then stay in office.

This was frankly explained nearly fifty years ago in an Esquire article by Congressman Adam Clayton Powell, who later managed to get re-elected right after he was kicked out of the House for corrupt practices. (An extreme case, to be sure).

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 11:32 AM

"There's nothing in any constitution about it. The nearest is something about the right to be drafted into an army or militia to defend The USA. I believe it is called the right to bear arms"

That part of the constitution is a vague, antique formulation which made a certain sense for 150 years or so. It became obsolete as the world changed. The vagueness allows the idiots to hang on to it.

"...the democratic majority of your decent citizens want this criminal activity stopped. Take lessons from democracies and work as they do."

Do you really understand the procedures necessary to do this? The 'democratic majority' does not get to vote on such things in one National ballot! A few states have passed some laws that look like progress, but that 2nd amendment needs Congress to take the vagueness out of it. Congress has too many Republicans to pass any meaningful revision. If they were to magically pass a revision, **it would have to be ratified by 3/4 of the states**!! Half of the states would likely defeat it. If 3/4 did magically pass it, what would you have? You'd have millions of angry gun nuts who have been stockpiling guns for years, and who have vowed to resist any such attack on their 'rights'.

Now, if that the democratic majority would rise up and overwhelm the crazies by.... lessee....hmmmm.. forming posses and knocking on doors and demanding everyone turn in their guns... sure.. that would work.....................bang, bang, bang.

What we need is Peter Sellers to bring the nation of Grand Fenwick over on a little ship and ......

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: pdq
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 11:50 AM

The estimates of gun ownership in the US are usually low because about one third of all gun owners answer "no" instead of saying "it's none of your business".


How Many Americans Own Guns?

Posted on December 21, 2012

That depends a bit on how you look at it. The narrowest definition of a gun owner is a person who has put money on the counter, fulfilled all legal requirements and taken a gun home. The broadest definition is someone who lives in a home with a gun. The most direct way of determining either number is to call up two thousand or so homes and ask.

Gallup has been doing something like that, with much the same result seen in the graphic on the left. Unfortunately, there is a problem with that. Gun "control," actually gun confiscation, drives have so many gun owners frightened to the point they will deny they own a gun. So other than the fact that a lot of Americans own a gun, polls like the Gallup poll are not very informative.

Since the main road is blocked, let's take a detour and see what the scenic route will turn up. Starting with the number of occupied dwellings.

The National Association of Homebuilders says there are 105,480,101 currently occupied dwellings in the United States. The 2010 Census found 111,800,000. Given the number of foreclosures and abandonment's, the NAH may be correct – but for appearances sake it will probably be better to use the official Census number.

Next, a private telephone poll that contacted 1,200 individuals found 58% of respondents indicated a gun in the home. This is slightly higher than the highest percentage from the Gallup poll, 54%, but the Gallup poll numbers are pulled down by fear engendered by active gun control campaigns in the Northeast and West.

A poll of individuals known to be gun owners contacted 758 individuals and found a 29% denial rate. When all the variables, including the geographic ones, are factored in, and with a three percent margin of error, 77.5 percent of American homes have at least one gun.

So we come back to the number of occupied dwellings. Using the Census number of 111,800,000 there are at least 86,650,000 Americans who own a gun.

On the other hand, if we allow that everyone who lives in a home with a gun has some ownership claim, the census says that each occupied dwelling in the United States houses 2.72 people. Which totals 235,675,000 Americans have some claim to gun ownership.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 11:50 AM

Are you people telling us that the United States of America, far from being the world's leading nation, is in fact a dysfunctional anarchy, whose legislative, executive, and judicial institutions are unfit for purpose?

If not, then what, precisely, are you telling us?

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Lighter
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 11:54 AM

> a vague, antique formulation which made a certain sense for 150 years or so

It is conceivable - barely - that some future Supreme Court might somehow modify the current interpretation of the Second Amendment.   But then you'd "have millions of angry gun nuts who have been stockpiling guns for years, and who have vowed to resist any such attack on their 'rights'."

It was widely claimed in 2008 that Obama would come with jackbooted thugs to confiscate licensed guns. Six years later no thugs, but folks is still a-watchin' an' a-waitin'.

(Maybe I should have said "the folk." You'll remember them from other threads.)

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 11:55 AM

A good share of the citizens - subjects?- in the UK is anti-monarchist. That being so, I cannot understand why they have not made their will known and abolished the system. Long since, even, because they have felt that way for a l o n g time. Their country knows that the whole concept, not to mention the actual reality, is class-ist, demeaning and archaic.

Instead they just keep banging those rocks. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 12:11 PM

Give us your statistics, and their source[s], to justify that assertion, please Ebbie.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 12:27 PM

Ebbie.. I just looked up the stats on UK monarchy, and there seems to be a disconnect between how many do not wish to be governed by a monarchy and how many want the entire system disbanded. Many enjoy the show & the history and the tradition.

------------------------
≈M≈

"If not, then what, precisely, are you telling us?"

Well I for one am telling you that your black & white, either/or division is simply not credible. Noting troubling aspects of the current status is not the same as trashing the whole concept. You know I can type long paragraphs dissecting various issues, but how to break down an accusation such as yours in a reasonable amount of time is just not possible.... and at the end, I'd just get a bunch of sarcastic remarks saying "So, you admit it's a mess, right?"

How long would it take to carefully explain the UK monarchy, it's history and the current attitude toward keeping it, tossing it or revising the details?

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 12:32 PM

"Give us your statistics, and their source[s], to justify that assertion," M

Good gracious. "statistics"? I said "a good share".

My source? The UK. In Mudcat.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Musket
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 12:38 PM

A vocal minority are anti anything you like. But I think Australia said it best when they last looked at dropping the monarchy. The argument that won was "yes, but the alternative is someone who actually wants to be a president...."

The monarchy is a constitutional one, so "getting rid" happened when Charles I was beheaded. When his son was eventually put back on the throne, it was quite clear that parliament was in charge.

We don't have a monarchy to get rid of. We have a titular head of state. She has no power, and when Prince Charles's letters to ministers stating his views became public there was an outcry because they shouldn't interfere.

That said, if a party on a republican ticket came to power offering a republican referendum, it would happen and we could end up with a republic. Unlikely, but being a democracy, the ultimate will of the people happens.

Polls suggest a majority of people in The USA want guns banning. If that is difficult, ask yourselves how can call yourselves a democracy, let alone a safe place to live.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: MGM·Lion
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 12:58 PM

Well, "a good share" is hardly an overwhelming majority in any one's terms, is it, Ebbie? Do you really think it worth abolishing an ancient and revered institution, obliterating it from the face of the earth, because maybe 40% (quite a 'good share' I should say) of some sample of people might have vaguely said they don't like it much.

I haven't the least idea what you mean by citing your authority as "The UK. In Mudcat". I remember citing some survey-based statistics in one of the threads on the monarchy which appear to give an impression quite other than your none too specifically asserted "good share of HM's subjects" wishing her away. Were these, I wonder, included in your "survey" -- such as it may have been? They were on Mudcat.

I fear I think you are being uncharacteristically vague in the matter. And how you purport to observe any analogy to any anti-gun lobby as might exist in the US I cannot for the life of me see.

All v well sneering at my questions, Bill; but there is an awful sense of helplessness coming over from all these despairing posts about how the bloody guns are there and there is sod-all on earth that anybody in your Great Nation can do about it. Looks a bit dysfunctional & anarchic and unfit for purpose from where I am standing.

≈M≈

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 01:02 PM

I greatly fear that you have utterly missed my point. :)

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 01:06 PM

After that little monarchic red-herring, nobody has yet answered my point that the easiest way is to alloww the rednecks to keep their guns - but stop selling ammunition and explosive powders, which are NOT covered by any Amendment. OK, sell some to residents of Badlands areas, but beyond that, nix. At that point, the guns become glorified clubs.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Ebbie
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 03:19 PM

My point, as you should be able to guess, is that everyone's sacred cow is sacred only to themselves.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Bill D
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 03:32 PM

there is an awful sense of helplessness over here, also. That doesn't mean no one is trying.

I was not 'sneering'... I was disagreeing with the basic premise.
"Looks a bit dysfunctional & anarchic and unfit for purpose from where I am standing..."

I stand about 17 miles from The White House and 20 from Congress and I listen to & watch 10-12 forms of local media trying to assess it all.

The percentage I found was 70-80% in favor of continuity

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Lighter
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 03:43 PM

> stop selling ammunition and explosive powders, which are NOT covered by any Amendment.

What makes you say that?

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Musket
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 04:35 PM

The amendment covers, in recentish history, the right to draft young men to die or be terminally affected by serving in Vietnam.

Err. That's it

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: GUEST,Stim
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 06:50 PM

As per PDQ's post--it strikes me that if a stranger called and asked if there were guns in the house, the prudent answer, regardless of fact, would be "Yes".

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: pdq
Date: 08 Sep 14 - 07:20 PM

Perhaps the word "prudent", which I associate with "common sense", is conditional.

If I thought a pollster would report his contacts back to activist groups, I would deny owning a gun. More than 30% of those polled must feel the same way.

Question really is (suggested by my post) is how can "the majority of Americans (be in) favor of banning guns" (as stated by the Mudcat Brits) while perhaps 77% of us live in households where a legal gun also resides.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Ebbie
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 12:34 AM

And the majority of Americans favors "banning" guns? I doubt that very much. Most of us advocate the regulation of them, strongly favor strict background checks, strongly disagree with certain guns being available, strongly disagree with carrying guns inside many of the institutions currently allowed, strongly lament the gun-happy mindsets of so many Americans.

But banning? No. I live in Alaska. We have wild predators here. And besides that, a great many other potential situations where a firearm is needed. I remember an incident some years ago when a moose (large member of the elk family) on the rampage killed four dogs harnessed into a dog team.

I don't have a gun in my house. But then, I live in a town, not out in the bush.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 01:45 AM

"I just looked up the stats on UK monarchy, and there seems to be a disconnect between how many do not wish to be governed by a monarchy and how many want the entire system disbanded.

Bill, the UK is NOT 'governed' by a monarchy - it is governed by the Government (the clue's in the name!) sitting in The Houses of Parliament. The monarch has no executive powers whatsoever, she merely acts as an 'advisor', a sounding-board, to the Prime Minister, and rubber-stamps the decisions made by Parliament.

The monarchy was stripped of its powers of government three hundred-or-so years ago (when the USA was still peopled mostly by Aboriginal Americans rather than a bunch of immigrants), signified by the King losing his head (literally).

The idea that the monarch is the equivalent to your president seems to be another American stupidity, pretty much on the same level of daftness as the standard American's conception that the whole of the British Isles is 'England'.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Ebbie
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 02:04 AM

Backwardman, your last sentence there - well, let me just assert that we Americans are MUCH too polite to list all the daftness of people like you.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 02:14 AM

Ebbie, I doubt that the anti-gun lobby here are demanding a total, 100% ban on all guns. I'm certainly not, but the US needs to get guns under proper and effective control.

Even in the UK, certain types of gun are permitted, shotguns, target-shooting rifles et al, but possession of these weapons is very, very stringently regulated and controlled. The individual applying for a gun-licence has to show very good reason indeed for his having a gun - and 'self-defence' or 'to restrain our government' are not acceptable reasons. The effect is that very few Brits have, or ever come into contact with, any kind of firearm. Those who do are mostly farmers or sport-shooters.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Ebbie
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 03:36 AM

BMan, I don't mind disagreement or scolding, for that matter- but I seriously despise blanket condemnations.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 03:54 AM

"Backwardman". Hmmmm, I've always regarded you as one of the classier acts around here, Ebbie, certainly one who wouldn't lower herself to personal insults and name-calling, so I'll just assume that was an unfortunate typo. :-)

Now, back to the subject of stupid gun-obsession and bad gun-control laws in the US.......................

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Backwoodsman
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 03:56 AM

OK Ebbie, we've both had our say. End of?

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: GUEST,Rahere
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 04:57 AM

What makes me say stop this gun mania? The lastest figures for the US for 2011 are 32351 dead. You made a big thing of the Twin Towers bombing, starting a war and no end of other stuff. Yet this amounts to TEN 9/11s - every year - and you don't twitch. In the UK, we had just 44. The UK has a population about 5 times the size of the UK's: that means the mortality rate because of this 2nd Amendment is 150 times as high, grosso-modo. It means 30000 families have been mourning someone gone before their time, and all the consequences.
So, if you can't control the guns, control the bullets. That you can do. And unless you do so, you have no claim to any any moral authority over the rest of the world.

Subject: RE: BS: Anyone defend US gun law?
From: Musket
Date: 09 Sep 14 - 05:10 AM

PDQ has neatly yet inadvertently given us a way of ending this thread.

By saying that 77% of American household contain guns, we see a leap into fantasy and make believe.

As you can't argue against lies, and whilst accepting there are a hell if a lot of them out there, it's pushing it a bit to say that only 23% of Americans see themselves as normal people, even if you add a few for pure hunting and sports...

I'm sure PDQ accidentally pushed the wrong keys. It is 47% to include hunting rifles and registered sport firearms.

Still worrying considering the average IQ of your typical redneck.