BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Apr 02 - 09:06 PM

LOL! Yeah, Doug oughta know...

That Thomas Jefferson quote is one of the most astoundingly prophetic bits of foresight I have heard yet! He was clearly a very wise man. "Material abundance without character" is precisely what I see happening in affluent North America...Canada included.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: kendall
Date: 17 Apr 02 - 07:26 PM

I'm too young to remember prohibition, ask Doug!

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: GUEST
Date: 17 Apr 02 - 07:23 PM

"Yes, we did produce a near perfect republic, but will they keep it, or will they, in the enjoyment of plenty, lose the memory of freedom? Material abundance without character is the surest way to destruction."

Thomas Jefferson

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Apr 02 - 07:11 PM

Well, Kendall, it's a complex situation. One actually has to deal with each drug on its own merits, bearing in mind the particular characteristics of that drug, and how entrenched its use is already in a given culture.

examples:

alcohol - much too thoroughly entrenched to make illegal, either for sale, use or manufacture. Therefore, you need laws which take that all into account, and I believe we have those fairly well worked out at present.

caffeine and sugar - too deeply entrenched to be made illegal. Give people more health information and provide them with more alternatives at the grocery, the restaurant, and the school cafeteria.

marijuana - anyone can grow it at home with absolute ease, and harvest it! Therefore, I suggest that it should be legal for adults to grow and use their own, and that that in itself would totally eliminate any lucrative field for organized crime to get involved in the marijuana trade. This would cause barely a ripple in society, since most of the people who are already strongly inclined to smoke grass are already doing it anyway, as a matter of course...

tobacco - harder to grow and harvest, so it wouldn't work as a homegrown too well at all. I suspect it is also too deeply entrenced to be eliminated entirely as a business, so education and certain restrictive laws would seem to be the best route to follow. That's basically what is being done now.

cocaine - again harder to make, and extremely addictive over time. Costs a bloody fortune, therefore is highly attractive to criminals. Make it illegal to market the stuff, but provide a legal medical prescription to users, plus medical treatment to help cure the addicted. Again, you have eliminated a lucrative field for organized crime. Plus, you have eliminated desperate addicts from the need to commit crimes simply to support their expensive habit.

shopping mall addiction - Stop issuing credit cards to people who obviously can't control themselves, and have proven that again and again! :-)

Mudcat addiction - Ummm... Well, I...

Forget it, there is no cure.

And so on...each drug merits a solution all its own. It is silly to treat users as criminals, and it is silly to provide large scale criminals with a golden opportunity to get rich.

If what you say about Prohibition is correct (that it was legal to drink, but not to market alcohol), there must have been a lot of people making home brew of various kinds...was that the case or was it illegal to make home brew as well?

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: kendall
Date: 17 Apr 02 - 12:46 PM

During prohibition, it was not illegal to drink liquor. It was illegal to make and transport it, still the crooks got rich and very violent. So, how would allowing people to use drugs fight crime?

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Kim C
Date: 17 Apr 02 - 10:38 AM

I agree there are a lot of people doing jail time for stuff that doesn't really warrant it. I am not a drug user myself but I can't see jailing people who are keeping such things only for themselves, and not selling it to minors. The drug war is a subject for a whole other thread.

Now y'all, look here... history has proven that anytime a government wants to dominate the people, the first thing they do is TAKE AWAY THE WEAPONS, or at least try.

I also agree that instead of adding new laws, we should make the effort to enforce the ones we already have. But I suppose that makes too much sense.

I have a gun. That's my choice. If you don't want to have one, that's your choice. Here in America, we get to have that choice. I won't criticize your choice if you won't criticize mine.

Maybe that makes too much sense, too.

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 17 Apr 02 - 08:40 AM

You're absolutely right, Peter. NO ONE should ever be jailed for using a drug or having it in their personal possession for their own private use (or that of their friends)...they should get medical assistance, if they desire it. If not, leave them alone. It's the people who sell the drugs as a business...the dealers and the big drug barons...who should be jailed.

The police are wasting a colossal amount of their time and energy harassing ordinary drug users, who are people with an illness. Besides, it is my assertion that 99.9% of all people in modern society ARE habitual drug users!!! Where do they get off being so self-righteous about someone else's drug habit! And it's not too surprising this has happened, given the combination of stress and constant marketing of addictive substances that is bearing down on people these days.

If a drug user commits a crime, then I would prosecute him for that crime...but not for the fact that he is a drug user. (We're all drug users.) Example: I will prosecute someone for drunk driving or violence committed while drunk...but I will not prosecute him for drinking, which is something he has the right to do on his own free time if he wants to. The same principle applies to all other drugs, most of which are quite a bit less dangerous than alcohol.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Midchuck
Date: 17 Apr 02 - 07:19 AM

The USA doesn't jail all its violent criminals

1. because a goodly number of them work for the people in power.

And

2. because the wretched social conditions in American inner cities constantly breed more of the ones who don't, and there just aren't enough jails to keep up with it.

It's a case of supply badly exceeding demand.

Little Hawk, you're quite right as far as you got, but you forgot:

3. because so much of the available jail space is take up by people convicted of nonviolent, victimless, crimes (mostly possession of drugs for their own or their friends' use, as opposed to dealers) that the room for the people who are real threats is depleted.

Peter.

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 09:50 PM

Banjoest - Yeah, man, I know you believe in freedom for everyone, same as I do... Believe me, I know it. I am in no doubt of it.

We're arguing from different angles, but that's generally due to just coming from a different background in the first place, that's all.

I can imagine situations where I would take up arms too. I hope to God they don't come, here, where I live... Canada's a pretty good place.

Take it easy.

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: X
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 09:33 PM

things a goverment out of control can do.

The motto: "De Oppresso Liber" is the motto of the USASF and we believe in it.

I need some sleep, good night.

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: X
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 09:26 PM

Little Hawk:

I am for freedom for everyone.

Sometimes some people think they know how to run your life better than you. So you have to take up arms against the oppressors so you can "overcome". That's why Americans need guns today, so we never have to take up arms against our goverment.

I believe in everything you said in the first sentence of the last paragraph. Like I said before, I believe it so much I layed my life on the line for it. We all did all of us who saw the

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 08:24 PM

No, no, I lost my glorious "comrade" designation some considerable time ago, due to the numerous times I have viciously attacked the policies and record of Joe Stalin, Soviet Russia, post-Soviet Russia, Communist China and the Khymer Rouge, among others...

I just can't seem to please anybody! Those guys now refer to me as a "capitalist running dog", while their bitterest opponents on the Right say I'm a communist. :-)

My disparagement of both corporate capitalism and state communism has made me an international pariah!!!

The fact is, if you are genuinely in favour of freedom for everyone, and equality of opportunity for ordinary people, and economic independence for small countries, the Hard Left and the Hard Right in this world both regard you as a shit-disturbing radical who threatens all that they stand for and work toward. They figure you must belong to the other side... I say: a pox on both their houses. They are oppressors, dupes, and liars.

My actual motto might be better put as: "Venceremos!" (We Shall Overcome)

- LH

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Shields Folk
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 07:35 PM

And if its goodnight from him it's goodnight from me aswell. GOODNIGHT

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Shields Folk
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 07:33 PM

Well stick to your banjo and your guns mate, and avoid the guitar at all costs as, to quote Woody, "This Machine Kills Fascists!"

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: X
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 07:28 PM

Shields Folk:

"Old chestnut"? Yes, but still ture.

Good night all.

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Gareth
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 07:06 PM

To try and bring a touch of reality to the subject, and drag it back to music did not Elvis Presley have some thing to sing on this subject ? - Like "In the Ghetto"

Query - and to toss a hand grenade into the pool of debate, if a free people needs to be armed does this apply to the Palestinians/Israelies ?

Gareth Where the bayonets slash,
And the rifles crash,
To the echo of a Thompson Gun !

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Shields Folk
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 06:34 PM

Haway banjoest not that old chestnut!

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: X
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 06:31 PM

I think Little Hawk is really Comrade Little Hawk.

"De Oppresso Liber"

Subject: RE: BS: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 06:13 PM

The USA doesn't jail all its violent criminals

1. because a goodly number of them work for the people in power.

And

2. because the wretched social conditions in American inner cities constantly breed more of the ones who don't, and there just aren't enough jails to keep up with it.

It's a case of supply badly exceeding demand.

This has caused the value of the average, run-of-the-mill violent criminal to sink to possibly its lowest level in recorded history, and it has seriously overloaded the penal system, despite the fact that it's a major growth industry with lots of funding.

Gone are the days when a criminal was worth something in America! People can only look back nostalgically to the glorious times of Jesse James, Bonnie & Clyde, Pretty Boy Floyd, and Dillinger. It's sad. Something should be done about it.

Perhaps if you were to study the methods of the Nazis more closely, set up an extensive chain of extermination camps with electric chairs, gas chambers, and ovens, and go for a "Final Solution", then America would again become a place where criminals can be proud of themselves, get remembered as folk heroes, and have songs written about themselves, while folks in the suburbs could feel safe. Well, fairly safe...

Someone should write to Bush about this and get it done ASAP, I think...

- LH

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: GUEST,Truthtroller
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 10:13 AM

Why now Mick, oooooops, sorry, BIG Mick. Man, can't you see just how far you've got that shotgun of yours wedged between your legs??! Being so rude to Peg .Look at what you've been saying there. {I hate the idea of a gun being used in a "dispute". I don't keep what weapons I have for that sole purpose.} Now just clear me on this one Mick. You mean you shoot ducks as well?

T.T.

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: pattyClink
Date: 16 Apr 02 - 09:42 AM

For the troll's edification, the Constitution was a document drafted by people who believed all power rested with the people and our government ought to and would be merely a mechanism devised to carry out the people's will, not a power to rule over them. The only way the people can maintain this native right to govern themselves is by not allowing all weaponry to be concentrated in the hands of an official power elite. I'm glad the British have ceded their rights to a benign power elite which have sort of ruled over them well, but we don't trust ours and for good reason.

For jim's edification, guns don't kill people. People with boxcutters, planes, knives, and frying pans kill people. Study this concept until it sinks in.

For everybody else who's anti-gun, I don't know what kind of sweet place you live, but I live somewhere that burglars routinely invade the homes of elderly people to rob them, and kill them if they are around. Routinely we have a few of those folks survive by having and using a weapon in their own homes. I don't give a d**m what you think about guns and neither do homeowners around here.

Why don't you ask the US why it doesn't jail all its violent criminals, that's the better question. Oh, I forgot, we have to uphold criminal Rights.

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Peg
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 11:23 PM

What discussion? More patronizing insults. I'm over it.

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Big Mick
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 05:48 PM

Again you slip into the dodge, Peg. At what point in this debate have I ever implied, inferred, or in any way suggested that you should be afraid of me? You should not be afraid of me in any sense. And I don't believe you are, you are just trying to shift the premise. I won't let you do that. The only thing you should worry about is having the opinions you state examined in a critical way.

I can assure you that it is not my intent to be patronizing, but I do respond in kind when I read things that sound smug. With regard to your pretending to speak for someone else in this thread (I am not the first person you have insulted in this thread ), I reject your ability to do so. You speak only for yourself. As far as your "we women" comment, more of the same. Nice try.

I will take exception with one more thing you have said, before letting it go. Your assumptions about me, as well as gun owners in general, show through when you indicate that I am "clearly a person who thinks a gun should be used to solve disputes". Would you do me a favor and show me where I said that? You see, Peg, I have taken life with a weapon. I have experienced killing and people attempting to kill me. I hate the idea of a gun being used in a "dispute". I don't keep what weapons I have for that sole purpose. Should it be needed for the protection of my family or myself, or you for that matter, you may rest assured that it will be used in an effective manner consistent with my training and the great amount of time I spend keeping my skills up to date. I have never taken any of my weapons out to solve a dispute, in fact I think that anyone who does that is likely a looney. Among my friends that engage in the shooting sports, I don't know of any of them that would do such a thing. Just another incorrect assumption made on your part.

Spat over, back to the discussion.

Mick

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: GUEST,kendall
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 05:42 PM

Troll, under the war lords millions starved to death on a regular basis.

Mick, Peg, I have met both of you, and, I can assure you that you are both decent thinking people who simply dont agree. This printed medium is so inadequate in relating information. I've had strong arguements with certain 'catters, but, we still communicate and respect each other. I hope you two can get there also. Now, I will "butt out"

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Peg
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 05:34 PM

Mick: I was pretty sure you'd accuse me of dodging the argument, and you have not only done that but also accused me of "hiding" and "avoiding."

Perhaps it is time to make it clear I am not afraid of you, no matter how very "big" you may be, and that your patronizing tone, while insulting, is not enough to bait me into going any further with this (and I am certain more accusations of "hiding" and "dodging" and "avoiding" will be forthcoming; my, we woman are so very weak and unwilling to argue "facts", aren't we?). I am not the first person you have insulted in this thread nor, I suspect, will I be the last (do keep referring to us as "you folks" though; makes it so much clearer where you're coming from).

The primary difference between us is that you are clearly a person who thinks a gun should be used to solve disputes. I am not. And maybe that's something you should think about for a while.

I'm not interested in arguing this any further because you aren't actually willing to read anything I have written.

I don't find your debate vigorous: I find it shallow, bullying and prone to platitudes. No facts as far as I can see, either (despite your demanding them from others, and yet not being at all clear what you mean by that, since everything in your posts is based on your opinions, too), except that the law gives you the right to keep and bear arms, and, well, duh, we all know that and that's the lynch pin of this discussion.

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Troll
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 05:23 PM

Kendall, over 20 million Chinese starved to death under Mao during the Great Leap Forward when he decided that China would catch the West in five years and turned them from farming to smelting iron in their back yards.
re. "lax gun laws", read lax enforcment of the existing laws. Congress passes "feel good" legislation and then nothing is done to enforce it. Clinton passed the background check law and his flacks claimed that over 200,000 criminals were prevented from buying guns in one year (1996). Would anyone like to guess how many of those criminals faced prosecution for breaking that law (trying to buy a gun while on parole etc.)?
None. Zip. Nada.
We don't need more laws. We need to demand that the ones on the books be enforced.

troll

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: artbrooks
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 05:23 PM

Banjoest, and others, the specific intent of the 2nd Article of the Bill of Rights is to assure that there is an armed citizenry available when the militia needs to be called out. Thats why it starts out by saying "a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state" before it goes on to state "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." That's the entire thing-the words "self defense" do not appear anywhere in it.

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 05:06 PM

All I can say is, it's probably a good thing one can't shoot guns via modem!!! The body count would be rising around here... :-)

Kendall - Thanks for the backup on Cuba. It's the young people now (some of them that is) who don't remember the days of Batista and are restless (mostly the young males, in fact, from what I witnessed while I was there)...they want CD players, new cars, 55 TV channels, etc, and they hope to get to Florida or Toronto ASAP...they have no idea how much worse it would have been for them in Cuba without the revolution...nor do they care, I suppose. They weren't there when it happened.

And of course, all of Latin America shares their yen for the "good life" north of the Rio Grande...and their willingness to take great risks to get there. It's not a specifically Cuban phenomenon by any means. The poor will always migrate toward richer areas if they can figure out how to get there (legally or otherwise).

- LH

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Big Mick
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 03:58 PM

Nice try, Peg. The sigh was very effective. But I note that you still don't wish to answer the question. Also that you are attempting to dodge by attempting to paint me as a closet chauvinist. It is still a dodge. You see, I agree that men who, in an attempt to gain favor with women, brag about their feminism. There is a fundamental difference in this thread however. It was you who questioned my motives, as well as inferring that I had a bias based on gender. So mine was a response to your attempt to hide behind the old red herring. But nice try. I must point out, however, that I have read your posts, and posted on what I read.

BTW, you don't seem to have insulted any of the MEN in this discussion who have disagreed with you; hence my calling attention to your rather sexist tone.

Here is where you really show your lack of depth, and how you are avoiding the debate of fact and hiding behind the "sexism" issue. All one has to do is scan any of the gun threads (of which you have been a part of also) and you would know that I am vigorous in my debate with any of them. And the most important thing you should remember is that it was you who made the first reference that I responded too. Maybe, in you convoluted logic, you thought I should have responded to someone else? Then you introduced the gender piece? Maybe I should have ignored it? Your arguments are weak, Peg, and you don't want to address facts. You want to hang on to tired old cliche's because they suit you. And worst of all, you would attack someone, and imply him a sexist, who has more in common with you than not, because he disagrees.

jimlad, we don't need guns. We have a right to them. Fundamental difference.

Mick

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Peg
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 03:45 PM

Peter;

I agree with you that law-abiding gun owners are not the problem (although the real militant types who like to crow about how powerful their weapons are scare me a little) and I see no real solution to the situation as it is now, except to say that tighter restrictions MIGHT help the problem, and law-abiding, responsible gun owners might have to accept some restrictions to allow for the law to reign in the other assholes out there. The "outlaws and guns" thing has never made me sneer, merely shake my head, because it just isn't that simple. As for the Bill of Rights applying to ever-changing technology, I don't think this is a semantics problem (which you seem to be turning it into) but one of looking at each situation on its own separate terms. And I still don't think the issues at the heart of these two things are similar in the way you are insisting. But I do agree (??) the amendments need to be changed to reflect reality.

Big Mick:

If you actually bothered to read my posts, instead of deciding I am just some emotion-driven female who can't string a logical argument together (despite your vaunted "feminist" stance, sorry, but men who need to brag about how evolved they are, usually aren't), you'd know what I have to say on the subject. I never said anyone's right to own a gun should be taken away, so to ask me to explain "the problem that justifies your opinion that I should lose a very valuable right?" isn't actually worth pursuing, since, if you really WERE interested in my opinion, you'd have already sussed out that it's rather more complex and thoughtful than what you are assuming.

But you wish to take it personally and label me a Polyannaish fear-monger who wants all guns locked up and away from the big dangerous men. (sigh) If that's the way anyone who is not entirely pro-gun, nor entirely anti-gun, is going to be categorized by you, I'd say this discussion is no longer worth pursuing.

BTW, you don't seem to have insulted any of the MEN in this discussion who have disagreed with you; hence my calling attention to your rather sexist tone. If that makes me "guilty of sexism," well, so be it. At least I am also aware of what it is.

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: kendall
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 03:18 PM

WOW! I do love a good row, even if I'm not in it! Especially if it is between, or among intelligent reasoning people.

Anyway, I too was in Cuba, before the revolution, and it was not a nice place. Most of the people I saw were pimps, whores and Batista's police. I have no doubt they are better off now than they ever were under Batista. Just as the Chinese are far better off under the present government than they were under the war lords. At least they are not starving to death by the millions anymore.

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Midchuck
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 03:08 PM

But I think you are changing the subject, which is that our laws as they stand are not helping prevent the psychotic public massacres that lax gun laws allow.

If the enactment of very strict, prohibitive gun laws were likely to cause all the nutcases, all the really evil people, and all the just plain angry+stupid people to form neat lines at the police stations to turn in their weapons, you might have a point. But somehow I think that the people who could most be trusted with guns would be the only ones to obey the laws and give theirs up, and the ones that shouldn't have them would be the last to give them up, and the first to buy more on the immense black market that would spring into existence. Good liberals sneer at the "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" bumper sticker. Then when you ask them what the logical flaw in it is, they mumble.

I mean, you can't kill a bunch of people all at once by hurling a computer at them. I think comparing the two points is somewhat impertinent.

No, it's exactly the same point. Either you construe the Bill of Rights as applying only to technology in existence at the time of its enactment, or as following the advances in technology. But you can't construe two adjacent amendments in opposite ways, just because that's what you'd like them to mean, and retain your credibility.

Peter.

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Big Mick
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 02:58 PM

And by the way, if I want to wave my penis around, I will use the real thing. Atta boy (he says with tongue planted firmly in cheek), Peg, when logic fails pull out the old phallic symbols.

One of the things I noticed in re-reading your post, is that we gun owners have to admit there is a problem. Fair enough. Would you be so kind as to state what the problem is? I know what I think it is, but I am interested in hearing your view of it.

One word of caution. Think this through before you answer it, because it will have to stand the test of factual data to back it up. Most of the people that I have this discussion with (Reminder: I am very well connected in the antigun circles given my politics, and have no contact, memberships or connections with the pro gun side) don't deal in factual data, rather they just apply that old "someone shot someone, easy fix, lets just ban guns" logic. You, in my opinion, are making assumptions about me. I am a liberal, left wing democrat. In most issues, with a few exceptions, I have more views in agreement with folks like you than not. But when you are putting out long diatribes that don't jibe with the facts I read, then I challenge.

So let's hear it, Peg. What exactly is the problem that justifies your opinion that I should lose a very valuable right?

Mick

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Big Mick
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 02:15 PM

First off, Peg, I made no assumptions about you or your background with regard to guns. But obviously you are so touchy about being disagreed with that you react like so many that I have seen over the years, that immediately assume that someone makes those assumptions on the basis of bias. To put it very bluntly, you are wrong. Secondly, I find it curious that you immediately slip into the "silly little female head" line of crap. Peg, you are the one guilty of sexism, not me. I don't know about what you may have done worthwhile with your life, but let me tell you about mine. I have spent most of it combatting sexism, primarily against females. Not talking about it with the tone you used, but in the trenches fighting it in all its forms. In the workplace, the community at large.......everywhere. My works are demonstrable, and they will keep up until I quit drawing air. It was not me that introduced this into the discussion, but you. My 3 daughters have been raised to not tolerate sexist discrimination and actions, in fact to seek it out do battle against it. You make my point about the type of sanctimonious and half baked, knee jerk response better than I ever could. Do us all a favor and stick to the subject at hand, and the facts.

With the little bit of logic you did manage to bring to bear, let me say this. If you go back and read my post you will see that I broke out the arguments into two separate areas. I happen to agree that the constitutional argument is the weakest of the two. And I thought I was very clear about the central question that I have. And that you and others who put forth this line of logic almost universally refuse to answer, and instead fall back into spouting sanctimonious, half truths like "Guns don't kill, schoolkids with guns kill". It is simple. Why should I have to give up a possession of mine, that I have used responsibly all my life, that the data shows is not responsible for the problem, that getting rid of will likely increase the violent crime? Why? Why should I have to give up a right, that I currently have, if it won't produce any benefit except to make out of touch people feel more comfortable with their false logic?

Mick

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Peg
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 01:49 PM

okay, Peter et al, point taken re: handguns...I see now what I should have said was "handguns that fire multiple rounds quickly without taking time to reload a huge unwieldy metal ball." The point is, the "right to bear arms" when applied to a time when weapons were so slow-loading is a whole different thing from applying it to a time when guns can fire multiple rounds with clips and at semi- or fully automatic speed. Much faster for killing people. Most unsportsmanlike when used for hunting.

As for the free speech thing, well, first of all, I do not apply logic subjectively if I can avoid it. But your point is well taken because obviously we do now have a lot of legal impications when considering privacy and freedom of speech on the internet. And I do think the amendment dictating the confines of free speech should be overhauled just as I believe the second amendment should be, to keep in pace with the times. But I think you are changing the subject, which is that our laws as they stand are not helping prevent the psychotic public massacres that lax gun laws allow. I mean, you can't kill a bunch of people all at once by hurling a computer at them. I think comparing the two points is somewhat impertinent.

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Kim C
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 12:29 PM

There is a loaded gun in my house because the law enforcement in my area is overworked, underpaid, and can't be everywhere at once. They themselves will tell you this. I don't expect to ever have to use it but it's there just in case, and you can bet I wouldn't hesitate if it meant my life, or my husband's. That's providing that any perpetrators could get past my dogs, who might not attack, but would make a pretty good show of it.

And no, I don't have any children.

And yes, handguns go back a long way before the 18th century.

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: jimlad
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 12:20 PM

What my countryman Gervase is forgetting is that whilst the were colonials they were also rebels,they rebelled against their lawful King, King George III.Also the myth that it was americans alone that narrowly beat us Brits(wasn't Yorktown the only American win) Oh no the Americans had French,Native American (boy did that turn out to be a mistake) and Spanish assistance. Then 80 years or so later the south rose up against the north in an attempt to acheive the same self rule the north had,do I hear "double standards" out there?.The slavery matter only came in in the latter part of the war when it appeared that the confederacy might carry the day.

One other matter is the US's constant interference in other countries affairs in countries like Cuba (19th and 20th century)Vietmam,Chile,Bolivia,Colombia,Nicaragua et al.This annoys those of us in more morally developed countries who believe in live and let.

Finally a common thread throughout this debate is that it's people that kill not guns and so it's all right to have a gun as long as you don't use it against you law abiding neighbours that didnt stop you lot from threatening mass destruction of the world in the missile crisis of 1962.

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Troll
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 11:53 AM

A private soldier in the British army circa 1776 was not passed from recruit until he could load and fire five shots in 1 min. 45 sec. Muskets were smooth-bores and were fairly easy to load.
The difficult ones to load were the rifles. The bullet had to be forced down the barrel to grip the "rifling" or grooves in the barrel that imparted spin to the bullet and thus improved it's accuracy. Rifles saw limited use during the American Revolution contrary to popular belief.
Handguns were fairly common and tended to be of two types - saddle guns and belt guns. The saddle gun was fairly large and was carried in a holster attached to the saddle. They were used by both military and civilian horsemen.
The belt gun was primarily a military weapon. The British Army issued one in .69 cal. called a "Tower Pistol" and the Scottish regiments carried a pistol of purely Scottish design that was all metal unlike the Tower which had a wooden frame with the barrel, etc mounted in it.
Most families had a smooth-bore "fowling piece" used to take small game; basically a shotgun.

troll

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Midchuck
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 11:50 AM

Peg: You state that: ...the wording of the second amendment (that gun-totin' fools like you and Charlton Heston are so fond of) refers to muskets that take a good long time to load; it does NOT include handguns, because there was no such thing at the time.

With all respect, two points:

Point one: There were definitely such things as handguns at the time of the American revolution and the framing of the Constitution. Ask the ghost of Alexander Hamilton - who was killed in a formal duel with Aaron Burr - with pistols. Actually, vastly more people were killed by handguns when formal duels were in fashion - late 18th and early 19th centuries - than in the "wild west" era. Maybe even more than in the inner cities now.

Point two: If the second amendment only applies to technology that was in use at the time of its enactment, then, to be consistent, the other amendments must also apply only to technology then in use. This would mean that "freedom of speech and of the press" would apply only to face-to-face speech and hardcopy newspapers, magazines, etc. None at all for speech on radio, TV, the telephone, the (gasp)internet, etc... Are you sure that's what you want? Or does your logic only apply when it produces the result you want?

Peter.

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 11:45 AM

Banjoest - Green Berets, right? I had a good friend in the 70's who had been in the Special Forces in Vietnam. Like me, he was a musician. He didn't seem to like Vietnam very much, and he had a real hatred for orientals in general...for some reason (hmmmm). I'd say it was based on the fact that a lot of them had tried very hard to kill him for a few years.

That's the way it goes. Those Cubans who shot at you probably have an unreasonable prejudice against Green Berets too, I suspect. I've met people from both sides, and I accept them all as human beings.

People everywhere value their freedom, but they have different ways of defining it. If you had been born a Cuban, you might have been on the other side of those firefights, believing that you were defending freedom...your version of it.

I try not to judge anyone too hastily, because what they believe is usually a product of where they've grown up, and I do give a damn about what you say. I also agree that people should have the right to own guns privately.

But if you simply don't want to talk to me, I can live with it.

GUEST - There is no "last great hope for democracy and freedom"...there will always be new hopes rising in that regard...in many places. And each one of them will act as if they were the "last" word on the subject. People tend to be self-absorbed, and self-congratulatory.

- LH

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Peg
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 11:34 AM

Big Mick:

you no doubt refer to me as sanctimonious and a teller of half-truths because you probably think I a)have never handled a gun, b)have never been around guns, c)think all guns are evil, and/or d)don't have a brain in my silly little female head.

None of these are true. I grew up in a family of hunters, learned how to shoot a number of different kinds of guns (and was a damn good shot, BTW) and grew up in a house where we killed our own food damn near every day. I have a very healthy respect for wespons AND for people who use them in a reasonable manner.

That doesn't include waving them around as penile surrogates to get your liberal friends to wet their pants or to give yourself an erection. If that's what's useful about having guns, that's pretty scary, not to mention pathetic.

But it doesn't matter, as arguing this issue with anyone who thinks the "right to bear arms" is what makes the proliferation of handguns and semi-automatic machine guns in this country A-OK, is apparently ignoring the fact that the wording of the second amendment (that gun-totin' fools like you and Charlton Heston are so fond of) refers to muskets that take a good long time to load; it does NOT include handguns, because there was no such thing at the time. Had the writers of that amendment imagined we would one day be a country that solved disputes over parking places and soccer matches with guns, I think they never would have drafted such an open-ended statement. Contemporary Americans are a scared and angry bunch. I certainly understand the desire to protect oneself. And no one wants their "rights" taken away. But I think citizens also have a right to feel safe in public places.

If you ask me, you can't get more "sanctimonious" than quoting some antiquated, arcane law that describes weapons we now refer to (and rightfully so) as antiques, as being somehow the only justification needed to have guns freely and widely available so that kids, criminals or any psychotic who can use the internet or walk into Walmart can have a weapon capable of blowing away an entire classroom, post-office or women's clinic.

There are ways to pass gun control laws so that responsible gun owners won't be penalized. But this will not be possible until egotistic gun lovers grow up a bit and admit THERE IS A PROBLEM. And they also need to quit spouting the second amendment as if it has anything to do with contemporary reality.

Kendall, re: the deer population, what I did not mention but which you have begun to address is that humans have been encroaching upon the habitat of deer and other wild creatures for many years. When we see these animals in our backyards we somehow think they are after food or must be rabid, etc. when really all that is happening is that we have displaced them from their homes and they need to live somewhere. Yet home-owners feel justified in poisoning and killing these animals. The suburbs of Boston are full of possums, skunks, raccoons and rabbits, and occasionally deer and even bear are spotted...saw an enormous wild turkey in Brookline the other day, at least five miles from their usual spot in a large conservation area.

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Gervase
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 09:58 AM

PS: Apologies for the use of 'colonials' above, but back then they were!

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Gervase
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 09:54 AM

So the UK's safer now we have draconian gun control?
Sure, it may feel that way if you're a white person in a 'safe' neighbourhood, but try telling that to young black kids in Brixton, Stamford Hill, Moss Side or St Paul's.
The fact is, there is now more firearms related crime on the streets of British cities since the knee-jerk response to the Dunblane tragedy, not less. The new laws that were rushed in under pressure from the Snowdrop campaign and the tabloid press have not made a blind bit of difference.
If you want to get hold of a gun in Britain it isn't difficult - you can pick up a basic .38 for around sixty quid (provided you don't fire it - if you actually want to use it, it'll cost you more like £300 because of the buggerance that comes from ballistics).
Nearly all the guns in circulation are either 'souvenirs', which have never been licensed, or illegal imports (with a growing number of workshop-converted replicas and tailor-mades). So what darned use have the gun laws been for the scores of kids who have been killed and wounded on our streets?
The fact that Ryan and Hamilton commited their crimes with legally-held firearms should have been seen as a chance to sort out the licensing, not to ban all pistols and curtail the ownership of other firearms. And, in the field of shotguns and rifles, the licensing has been sorted. All applicants for shotgun certificates and Part One firearms licences now have their backgrounds thoroughly checked, along with those of their referees (who have to be two people of good standing - JPs, MPs doctors etc in the case of a firearms licence), and they have to give a reason for owning a firearm, stating what it will be used for and where.
Personally I'm not in favour of the free-for-all that seems to exist in some states of the USA, where you can buy an assault rifle over the counter, but I'd like someone to tell me why, as a law-abiding Englishman, I shouldn't be able to participate in pistol-shooting on a safe range if I wanted to do so.
So go easy on the Yanks - it's their country and it's up to them what they do there, provided it doesn't make life worse for the rest of us (as in Kyoto, but that's another matter). If you don't like what they do, don't go there and don't buy their kit. Otherwise give it a bloody rest.
I've had enough of my fellow countrymen being mealy-mouthed and proscriptive about what I do here, and now it seems they want to impose those views on others thousands of miles away. Honestly, with threads like this, you can understand why the colonials got so pissed off in 1776!

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: GUEST
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 09:48 AM

Once again logic and truth hit home. Thanks to people like Big Mick, the USA remains the last great hope for democracy and reason. A world that would have you believe "dont fight back you might upset someone" and "the Govt. will defend you from evil" Ben Franklin, Roosevelt, would be proud of ya Mick lad.

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: GUEST,Truthtroller
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 09:16 AM

Twenty four hours later eh? Now I'm sure you 'all' see my point.

T.T.

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: RichM
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 07:18 AM

Anyone who disagrees should just folk off...

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Troll
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 01:49 AM

Because they are scared, Mick. They are afraid that they cannot protect themselves or their families against an armed intruder. They are afraid that if they challenge someone who is infringing on their rights that they could be killed.
The Government panders to these fears. Instead of punishing those who misuse the right to bear arms, they try to take away the right altogether. Their hipocracy is apalling.
Sarah Brady buys a long gun for her son who is -I believe- 16.
Barbara Boxer hires an armed bodyguard.
And so on and so forth.
The fact is that we have the RIGHT to bear arms. Why shouldn't we be able to exercise that right?

troll

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: X
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 01:41 AM

Little Hawk, I was in the USASF. I you don't know what that is, we're the guys that wear that funny green hat. I've been to other countries, you can have them. I like my liberties. One of which is the private ownership of arms. I layed my life on the line to protect that RIGHT and I have the scars to prove it, and some of thoes scars were made not by guns but by the people who were shooting at me. And Little Hawk, some of thoes people were Cubans.

I don't give a damn what the hell you say.

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Big Mick
Date: 15 Apr 02 - 12:44 AM

I love the interplay between folks that argue phoney constructs with half truths, or in Peg's case, using half truth and sanctimonious statements. The only real predicate that can be argued goes something like this. Americans have a right to keep and bear arms, not long guns, not sporting arms, but arms. That includes handguns. The amendment does not limit me to what I need it for, it rather simply says the right "shall not be infringed". Culturally, guns have been a part of our society from the beginning. It is not just a matter of a right, but also a part of the heritage of our country. In some cases that hasn't been a great heritage, but I feel very safe in asserting that in most cases it has been an honorable part of our society. The constitutional and the cultural right has been with us since the inception of our country and throughout our developement as a society. This is why all the bullshit and demagogic examples about schoolkids, and drivebys don't fly. That is not to trivialize the events, but rather to point out that these are simple demagogery for which the statistics don't bear out the assertion made by them. Hence the only real question I have for the people who would take away my right, and my heritage, is why? Myself and the overwhelming majority of people like me are not responsible for any but the smallest amount of the violence you eschew. A far smaller amount than irresponsible acts, that result in death and injury, from the use of an automobile. So the simple question is why?

Mick

Subject: RE: Why do Americans need Guns now?
From: Little Hawk
Date: 14 Apr 02 - 10:25 PM

Banjoest - You're not the first person to say to me "if Cuba is so great and you feel so safe there, why don't you go and live there?"

So....this means I have to choose???

Hey, I like lots of places I've been to...Bermuda, northwest Pennsylvania, Hawaii, some parts of Mexico, British Columbia, Oregon, Northern California, Cuba...

I can't move to all of them now, can I? :-)

The reason I don't move is this: it's complicated, it's expensive, it involves all sorts of red tape, and I am already quite happy in Ontario, Canada, where I have a small business, friends, family, and a pretty good life. I have no pressing reasons to move at this time.

This in no way alters my good opinion of Cuba. For a country that's been embargoed for 42 years by the world's biggest superpower they are doing damned well, and I admire them for it. They are proof that miracles do occasionally happen in this world, despite the overpowering might of the American dollar.

If you haven't been there, you have little to go on except virulent propaganda. Cuba puts most of its Latin American neighbours to shame when it comes to establishing a decent and responsible society.

As for Ben Franklin, who said: "Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."

Precisely. I agree with Franklin on that. So did Castro.

He was the son of a wealthy family, and he could easily have lived a secure life off the fat of the land, been a friend of the corrupt Batista government, and done nothing for his country. He instead totally disregarded his personal safety, put his life on the line again and again, and fought for Cuban liberty...liberty from Batista, from the Mafia, from the United Sugar Company, from corporate USA...which effectively owned Cuba ever since the Spanish lost it in 1898.

Castro's revolution restored to Cuba a great many of the essential liberties that were unavailable under the dictator Batista...such as the liberty to be a young good-looking woman born to a poor family and NOT be farmed out as a prostitute or raped by the local police and soldiers.

The liberty to actually own the plot of land you have worked on all your life.

The liberty to own one's own country's natural resources, rather than to serve as slave labourers for a foreign mercantile empire.

The liberty to get a good education, learn to read, and get your teeth fixed.

The liberty to receive equal rights and opportunities regardless of whether you are black, white, or brown. Tell me how many black faces you see among the Cuban exiles...

I know that all may sound either unfamiliar...or incredible to you, but remember...you live in a country that believes its own mythology, regardless of the other realities around it, and repeats those myths endlessly...and spreads "bogeyman" propaganda endlessly to scare its people...and you have not been to Cuba. I have.

I wouldn't want to be in any jail for a year...not Cuban or Mexican or Turkish or Peruvian or Argentinian or Guatemalan. All of those are American allies at the moment...except Cuba. They all have political prisoners. That's life out there in the Third World.

And I hear that American jails are not exactly a joyride either, unless you like having casual sex with larger men, frequent beatings, and an greatly increased likelihood of violent death or suicide before your term is up.

- LH