Will USA ever learn about guns?

 
  Carnot Minister for Railways

So the NRA ran a press conference and said that the solution was to have armed guards in every school.  Madness.
http://www.smh.com.au/world/nra-sticks-to-its-guns-20121222-2bsia.html
http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/nra-push-guns-doomsday-proposal-article-1.1225753

Clearly they are a corrupt and morally bankrupt organisation that enjoys funding from gun manufacturers:
http://www.forbes.com/sites/petercohan/2012/07/23/the-nra-industrial-complex/

"And the gun industry – led by Ruger – has benefited tremendously from the NRA. According to IRS fillings, from 2004 to 2010, the NRA’s revenue from fundraising — including gifts from gun makers who benefit from its political activism — grew twice as fast as its income from members’ dues.  Over 50 firearms-related companies have given at least $14.8 million to NRA according to its list for a donor program that began in 2005.  That was the year NRA lobbyists helped get a federal law passed that limits liability claims against gun makers."

Sponsored advertisement

  TheLoadedDog The Ghost of George Stephenson

Problem with the Second Amendment is that it's another outdated holy book.

It was great - for its time.  A well-ordered citizens' militia to counter excess by government was a noble idea.  When both had flintlocks.

But now, the Second Amendment does not confer upon the citizens a right to bear ICBMs, aircraft carriers, etc.  The deterrent to a wayward government is long gone.

Thus, strict adherence to it is as out of date as literal adherence to the Bible or the Quran.
  cootanee Chief Commissioner

Location: North of the border!
Problem with the Second Amendment is that it's another outdated holy book.

It was great - for its time. A well-ordered citizens' militia to counter excess by government was a noble idea. When both had flintlocks.

But now, the Second Amendment does not confer upon the citizens a right to bear ICBMs, aircraft carriers, etc. The deterrent to a wayward government is long gone.

Thus, strict adherence to it is as out of date as literal adherence to the Bible or the Quran.
"TheLoadedDog™"


But they do like taking things literally over there (when it suits).
  Watson374 Chief Commissioner

Location: Fully reclined at the pointy end.
  RTT_Rules Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Dubai UAE
"Watson374"


Love it
  tractorshunter Junior Train Controller

Location: Radiator Springs
Problem with the Second Amendment is that it's another outdated holy book.

It was great - for its time. A well-ordered citizens' militia to counter excess by government was a noble idea. When both had flintlocks.

But now, the Second Amendment does not confer upon the citizens a right to bear ICBMs, aircraft carriers, etc. The deterrent to a wayward government is long gone.

Thus, strict adherence to it is as out of date as literal adherence to the Bible or the Quran.
"TheLoadedDog™"


Couldn't agree more,

The "right to bear arms". The "arms" during the War of Independence were muzzle loaded with round lead shot and separate dose of gunpowder. I assume it would take about 20 or 30 seconds minimum to reload and fire. Any unarmed person could charge the gun user at short range well before he could reload it. The ability to fire into a crowd to create maximum death and injury was impossible when the 2nd Amendment was written.  The machine gun wasn't even invented for 100 years after the 2nd Amendment was written.

Americans are taught from an early age about how wonderful their "founding fathers" were when the American revolution and corresponding Declaration of Independence and Constitution were written. Washington, Jefferson, Franklin and other historical idols are looked upon with awe. As a result of this most Americans believe that they have the highest pinnacle of democracy compared to every other country and to think that any of these men could have "got it wrong" (so to speak) is unfathomable.  

I'm not suggesting that teaching America's history is always a bad thing. They do have plenty to be proud of. But the negative of it is that there are millions of yanks obssessed about "the freedom from tyranny" and behave as though King George's soldiers were on their property last year and could return any day soon. Hence they have kindy teachers possessing military assault semi-auto's as an example. It won't make any difference how many more mass killings will take place, it's part of the country.
 
It's a pity there was never an Amendment associated with transport, when all there were, was horses and sailing vessels and try and apply that to the 21st century. That would've been the only hope to get the point across to the NRA how deluded they are.

 


  Watson374 Chief Commissioner

Location: Fully reclined at the pointy end.
The "right to bear arms". The "arms" during the War of Independence were muzzle loaded with round lead shot and seperate dose of gunpowder. I assume it would take about 20 or 30 seconds minimum to reload and fire. Any unarmed person could charge the gun user at short range well before he could reload it. The ability to fire into a crowd to create maximum death and injury was impossible when the 2nd Amendment was written. The machine gun wasn't even invented for 100 years after the 2nd Amendment was written.
"tractorshunter"


Specifically, the fastest rate of fire for the most disciplined infantry was three volleys per minute. I believe no line infantry ever achieved more than four volleys per minute.

Highly-skilled individuals could occasionally achieve higher rates of fire, but the limit was fairly low until the advent of things like repeating rifles and the Gatling gun.

It's a pity there was never an Amendment associated with transport, when all there were, was horses and sailing vessels and try and apply that to the 21st century. That would've been the only hope to get the point across to the NRA how deluded they are.
"tractorshunter"


THIS
  Speed Minister for Railways

Oh well, not yet.
“Yesterday, President Obama said it was a shameful day for the Senate, and it probably was, I agree. But we should make no mistake: This debate is not over, in fact this fight is just beginning,” Reid said on the Senate floor Thursday.

Reid’s decision came the day after President Obama’s comprehensive gun control effort suffered defeat in the Senate, with all the major proposals he backed failing to gain enough votes.

Reid said the Senate would “take a pause and freeze the background check bill where it is” and return to it at an undetermined date, likely with consideration of other proposed amendments.
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/04/18/reid-pulls-gun-bill-from-consideration

With the many non-gun-related fatalities this week, the President's lamentations about gun controls not passing are likely to be the only ones attracting media coverage.
  HeadShunt Chief Train Controller

there are millions of yanks obssessed about "the freedom from tyranny"
tractorshunter


While they are at it, they'd do well to start cutting the BS out of their national history textbooks and take a more realistic look at the "taxation without representation" and Boston Tea Party situations.



and behave as though King George's soldiers were on their property last year and could return any day soon
tractorshunter
King George's soldiers had been fighting off the French and others in North America for decades, mainly to the benefit of the colonists, but do you think they would be willing to foot some of the bill? Not if they could help it... That was tyranny.

Tyranny? One of the freest places in the world, more like it.
  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork
I was once involved in an email conversation with a modeller in the US who had sent me a photo of a model he had made using one of my mechanisms. We had weighted it down with two odd looking round objects. I asked him what they were, and he replied, 'Two 50 cal. balls, hammered flat'.

I said they looked like a useful way to weight down a model, but were probably not available to people here in Australia. He asked why and I explained about our tough gun laws. He replied saying 'what an awful country we had, he could not live in any country where he could not have his guns'.

I replied 'If it is all the same to you, we don't want you over here either'.
  cootanee Chief Commissioner

Location: North of the border!
...'what an awful country we had, he could not live in any country where he could not have his guns'.

I replied 'If it is all the same to you, we don't want you over here either'.
TheBlacksmith

We have our home grown ones - they even influence governments here.
  Carnot Minister for Railways

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/burton-newman/the-nras-fraud-fabricatio_b_3103358.html

"The depth of lost life is evident by comparing deaths in foreign wars and firearm deaths of citizens within our borders. In all foreign wars during our history about 650,000 soldiers died. In the 45 years since Robert Kennedy and Martin Luther King were assassinated in 1968, there have been over 1.3 million deaths in our country caused by firearms."
  Melbournesparks Chief Commissioner

Location: City of Eltham
At the moment I'm watching what is going on in Boston, where police are trying to apprehend one of the suspects of the bombings a few days ago. Apparently the entire city has effectively ground to a halt, with authorities ordering the shutdown of all public transport, taxis, schools and businesses and hundreds of heavily armed police officers in the streets.

I can't help thinking how ironic the vastly different response to this is compared to the school shooting of a few months ago, when more people were killed, most of them children. Is it really just down to the shock value associated with terrorisim, but yet people hardly seem to bat an eyelid when a maniac shoots schoolkids... It doesn't make much sense.
  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork
I can't help thinking how ironic the vastly different response to this is compared to the school shooting of a few months ago, when more people were killed, most of them children. Is it really just down to the shock value associated with terrorisim, but yet people hardly seem to bat an eyelid when a maniac shoots schoolkids... It doesn't make much sense.
Melbournesparks

Agreed, but what does make sense in the way the US reacts to any threat to them, or even a perceived threat?
  Draffa Chief Commissioner

It seems that while the religion or ethnicity of the school shooter a couple of months ago wasn't an issue, but the same cannot be said of Boston Marathon Suspect #2...

And nice of Alan Jones to attribute the bombings without any evidence whatsoever.  It reminded me of why I don't watch Sunrise on Seven anymore.

Meanwhile...
  johnboy Chief Commissioner

Location: Up the road from Gulgong
Guns in the USA is fixed into their way of life, it wont change, or not in a foreseeable future
  Carnot Minister for Railways

The Daily Show's take (includes interview with John Howard):
http://vimeo.com/64479601
  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork
The Daily Show's take (includes interview with John Howard):
http://vimeo.com/64479601
Carnot

Whoop-de-f*ckin-doo. I love the way that idiot made the interviewer's point for him. And he is allowed to carry a gun.....
  Oldfart Chief Commissioner

Location: Right base for BK 11R
Pretty funny video; although Oz and USA really are different ‘planets’ as regards guns. There it’s mostly about self-defence (including against ‘the guvment’). Here it’s mostly about sports (and we’d consider our government far too incompetent to ever turn truly tyrannical). Then again, if we’d had a violent revolutionary war, a catastrophic civil war, European settlement of a land full of bears, cougars and wolves, several wars against neighbours, an often vague and convoluted law enforcement system, an era of prohibition, the odd 'Waco' type siege, and little social security, we might be just like them too.

Howard likes to claim the glory for gun control in Oz, but it started way before him (e.g. pistols have been controlled since the 1930s). Gun deaths have always been a fraction here of what they are in the US and were declining in the decades before Port Arthur at about the same rate they’ve declined since (according to Australian Institute of Criminology). It’s good to have laws sensibly restricting gun ownership, with Police checks and good safe storage, etc. to help deter the nutter, but much of the overall improvement is more probably related to factors like our increasing urbanization, an absence of serious social upheaval and changing community attitudes to risk. IMHO Australia’s gun control laws aren’t the main cause of our low gun violence rate. Rather they’re both a result of our historically more positive social attitudes and culture.

No reason for us to be smug though. We still have deliberate mass killings (e.g. Childers Backpackers fire and some of the 2009 bushfires) and our assault rate is a couple of times higher than the USA’s (cue our poorer attitudes towards alcohol fueled Saturday night mayhem??). While gun related suicides have declined (about 80% of Oz gun deaths are suicides), overall suicide rates have not (transfer of method??). Our gun laws are also probably not ‘best practice’ either. Germany, for example, has legislation that has similar approaches and achieves a similar result, but with far less bureaucracy and cost. Odd how we hear so much about these issues in the USA but little about the implications of, say, the Norway shootings.
  TheBlacksmith Chief Commissioner

Location: Ankh Morpork
The US argument about needing a gun for self-defence is self-feeding because every new gun you buy is a reason for your neighbour to buy an extra gun themselves. I recall reading some time ago that often gun owners are killed or wounded using their own guns, taken off them by the assailant when trying to protect themselves.

This article about gun control in Japan makes interesting reading: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2012/07/a-land-without-guns-how-japan-has-virtually-eliminated-shooting-deaths/260189/
  GrahamH Chief Commissioner

Location: At a terminal on the www.
Just how stupid and cruel can parents be with their children? Buy a child a factory-made, sized for a child, working .22LR rifle. Leave it standing around with ammunition. Enable him to shoot his sister. One life ended. Three lives plus screwed up.

http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/2013/05/01/my-first-rifle-kid-shot/2126431/

By Ruth Brown, Newser staff12:58 p.m. EDT May 1, 2013


It was "just one of those crazy accidents," in the words of the local coroner: A 5-year-old in Cumberland County, Ky., accidentally shot and killed his 2-year-old sister yesterday with a .22-caliber rifle.
But unlike many such tragedies, the rifle in this case actually belonged to the child, the Lexington Herald-Leader reports. The gun, which he received as a gift last year, was inadvertently left loaded with a single shell in a corner of the family's home.
"It's a Crickett," said coroner Gary White of the gun marketed to youths with the slogan "My First Rifle." He continued, "It's a little rifle for a kid ... The little boy's used to shooting the little gun."
White told WKYT that the children's mother was home when the shooting occurred: "She was actually cleaning, and she had went out on the porch. She said no more than three minutes had went by and she actually heard the rifle go off. She ran back in and found the little girl."

Accessed 03052013

Crickett Firearms site is down... Copy / paste from Yahoo search.

Crickett Firearms - My First Rifle - Youth Model 22 Rifles - Proudly ...
CRICKETT PRODUCTS ... Banquet Gun Program: Instructor Discount Program
www.crickett.com/crickett_kidscorner.php - Cached
  Black Hoppers Chief Train Controller

Location: Banned
NOT that i want to see any horrors like mass shootings in the USA ever again, but im betting on some tosser going nutso at the NRA gun fest in Houston Texas.

Apparently one nut job got shot at the airport after waving a gun around and letting some shots off with fortunatly no injuries to the public.

Closer to home are the duck hunting,pig shooting ratbags from Victoria who think its oh so cool to rage around up here in Western NSW shooting anything that crosses their sights and cutting fences to access properties that they are not allowed onto.
  Valvegear Oliver Bullied, CME

Location: Richmond Vic
The NRA has never answered the basic question . . . we know you're allowed to have one, but why do you want a firearm?
  Fireman Dave Chief Commissioner

Location: Shh, I'm hiding
More to the point though, why do you want/ need an assault rifle. That, to my mind, is abusing the right to bear arms.
  David Peters Dr Beeching

Location: "With Hey Boy".
I have nothing against people owning a gun but not assault type rifles though, just as long as it is registered and kept locked in a proper gun safe when not being used and also that a background check of the owner is done in full. The rifle is an inanimate object until some lunatic gets hold of it and starts shooting. The background check of the owner will not stop lunatics getting a gun but might help if you have mental issues that bad that you could harm yourself or others, then sorry you can not get a permit to buy a gun. But on the other hand talk to the right person in a pub or somewhere and if you have the cash they can get anything for you.

I have used both rifles and pistols to target shoot with, and am quite good at it, but shooting someone even in self defence is not my cup of tea. If I really had to I could I suppose, as could anyone it all depends on the situation you are placed in.

Sponsored advertisement

Display from:   

Quick Reply

We've disabled Quick Reply for this thread as it was last updated more than six months ago.