Gun control anyone (again)

[BK]

Re: Gun control anyone (again)

UK population = 64 Million

Healthcare - the more folks who get it for free leads to higher and higher costs (money flooding a market raises prices).

We will have to respectfully agree to disagree.

Thank god there are people who hold different opinions.

[shiny!]

Re: Gun control anyone (again)

"Mr. Madison placed the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights because he and his colleagues knew that without it the other nine weren't worth much. We had the experience of being subjects to your "evolved" British society to teach us that hard lesson. "

Raz I thought he put it in to preserve slavery.
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/13890-the-second-amendment-was-ratified-to-preserve-slaver

The first gun control law was enacted by white supremacists in the South (Louisiana) to prevent persecuted blacks from owning guns to defend themselves.

[Woodsman]

Re: Gun control anyone (again)

"... he put it in to preserve slavery.
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/13890-the-second-amendment-was-ratified-to-preserve-slaver

Guns were important to the maintenance of slavery and formal white supremacy, of course. But it's not correct to say that slavery was the prime reason for Amd 2. Thom is a good guy and I agree with him more than I disagree, but this is another place where I think he's just wrong.

And Shiny is on target (sorry, couldn't resist) about the racist motivations of the initial wave of gun control laws. There's plenty of evidence, beyond the usual "any means necessary" examples of black Americans using personal firearms to defend against white racists terrorist bands and lone nut gunmen.

We're all mixed up about guns here in the USA but it seems they're here to stay.

[Raz]

Re: Gun control anyone (again)

"Mr. Madison placed the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights because he and his colleagues knew that without it the other nine weren't worth much. We had the experience of being subjects to your "evolved" British society to teach us that hard lesson. "

Raz I thought he put it in to preserve slavery.
http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/13890-the-second-amendment-was-ratified-to-preserve-slaver

Sourcing Truth-Out.org I'm not surprised: they are left-wing spin masters, only discussing the idea as one of militias.

This is another example of Leftist thought that sees "group rights" as opposed to "individual rights", as in the familiar mendacity of interpreting the Second Amendment as meaning only firearms for the militia. The Leftist gun control crowd has frequently stated that if anyone wants to have an AR-15 you should join the National Guard.

Try reading the Federalist Papers - and the Amendment itself.

When Madison said "states" he meant the individual states, and when he said "people" - he meant just that - individual human beings. Let's attempt a reading of the Fourth Amendment as "the right of the states to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures shall not be violated ..." as an illustration of this. Doesn't make sense, does it?

This is an example of Leftist dishonesty along with the idea of the Constitution being a "living document" that can be interpreted by enlightened (activist) jurists in order to fit the times. THAT is a total crock.

The founders did indeed want the Constitution to be a "living document" - that's why they made specific provision for Amendment. But they NEVER intended or foresaw the activist judiciary of the Twentieth Century with judges basically writing law and usurping the will of the citizenry as expressed through their elected representatives.
Roe v. Wade is an example of this judicial tyrrany that even Ruth Bader Ginsburg says was a huge mistake because it short-circuited the legislative function.

I digress what I meant was that what is true for a certain time in a countries history may no longer be true for the present or the future.

You have a professional army no need for normal citizens to carry arms, and as for protection against tyrannical governments guns are not going to help much when their are much more better tools like Tvs.

I can't think of a better reason for EVERY American citizen to be armed to the teeth than abandoning universal military service (which instilled the concept of public service and collective responsibility) for a Praetorian Guard!

Read Emerson's poem, Concord Hymn: "Here once the embattled farmers stood and fired the shot heard around the world".
Why were the British regulars (a professional force) marching toward Concord? To seize the armory and with it the firearms!

Nothing wrong with my avatar if everyone smoked a reefer a day maybe we would have world peace...

I spent about five years of my life (age 19 to 24) almost continually stoned on reefer. I even grew my own. Then I woke up to the subtle effects of confusion, paranoia and mental sloth as a result and decided to grow up and face life for what it was.

There will never be "world peace" because human beings are corrupt with only a single exception. And only when He returns can their be peace. Until then the words of Plato hold fast: "Only the dead have seen the end of war".

[lakedaemonian]

Re: Gun control anyone (again)

I'll leave this right here:

The Secret History of Guns

The Ku Klux Klan, Ronald Reagan, and, for most of its history, the NRA all worked to control guns. The Founding Fathers? They required gun ownership—and regulated it. And no group has more fiercely advocated the right to bear loaded weapons in public than the Black Panthers—the true pioneers of the modern pro-gun movement. In the battle over gun rights in America, both sides have distorted history and the law, and there’s no resolution in sight.

http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...f-guns/308608/

-----

A very long and very slow(multi-generational) boiling of the frog is going to mitigate the risk of armed and organized(beyond individual) insurrection against perceived and/or real targets of tyranny.

But if a trajectory of economic/political tyranny continued long/deep enough a tipping point would be reached where clear examples of armed insurrection would eventually be seen.

-----

"Political power grows out of the barrel of a gun." Mao Tse Tung

-----

I have often wondered whether we will see a return to the likes of the organized/politicized(and in these cases left wing) armed violence of the SLA/Weathermen as found in the US and the Baader Meinhoff/RAF(externally supported by STASI) in Europe?

We have seen right wing associated and politically charged violence over the years, but seems more individualized(lone wolf) in nature with less small group/organized efforts(Oklahoma City bombing 20 years ago).

The 1970's were a rather disruptive time here in the US in terms of politicized violence(SLA, Weathermen, etc) and the 1970's and 1980's were quite disruptive in Western Europe in terms of politicized violence(Baader-meinhoff/RAF, and over 30 bombings France alone in just the 80's albeit France was the unfortunate terrain but not necessarily the target of a toxic soup of non state actor proxies).

Outside of the "lone wolf" and "lone wolf plus one" I would think the US and EU have been relatively fortunate in the last decade and a half.

I genuinely would have expected more politicized violence by now.

IF home grown and home targeted politicized violence were to increase in the future, it will be interesting to see the government and media response.

It's easy for government/media/society to condemn racism fueled violence and use it as an opportunity to enhance gun control.

What will happen IF politicized violence were to increase and it was not possible for government/media to disrupt the intent of the violence?

Standing back and watching from a distance it's easy to see the insanity on both ends of the gun control spectrum when the violence is based on racism.

How will both ends of the same spectrum look IF the violence is based on politics?

[lektrode]

Re: Gun control anyone (again)

I'll leave this right here:...

How will both ends of the same spectrum look IF the violence is based on politics?

+1
dunno about - nor speak for - anybody else, but thats why i want mine (2nd amendment etc - since brass-encased lead will be at least as valuable as the shiny yellow stuff (might/ought/hope-will) be...

[Techdread]

Re: Gun control anyone (again)

UK population = 64 Million

Healthcare - the more folks who get it for free leads to higher and higher costs (money flooding a market raises prices).

We will have to respectfully agree to disagree.

Thank god there are people who hold different opinions.

Don't understand what the size of the UK population has got to do with the point you are trying to make please explain.

And with public provision of health care you have a choice to use the free service or go private.
If done right it would lower private premiums as people could just opt to go for the public, and this happens in the UK especially as public health providers with the GP system are better at continuity of care.

There are some things an advanced society ought to provide Basic coverage. Schooling, Roads, defense, healthcare & a minimum income.

[Techdread]

Re: Gun control anyone (again)

I can understand why its hard for someone who has grown up in the United states to think owning a gun gives them freedom. However I think it is misplaced you have police that are better equipped than most modern armies. Murder rate that is out of odds with an advanced society.

Its a good thing in the UK that the only people who carry guns are police and hardcore criminals.

There will never be "world peace" because human beings are corrupt with only a single exception. And only when He returns can their be peace. Until then the words of Plato hold fast: "Only the dead have seen the end of war"

I don't believe in fairy tales.

The world is how we make it and if enough people want peace it will happen. In fact we are much closer to a resolution than people think Strong AI will free or enslave us all.

[vt]

Re: Gun control anyone (again)

Have you ever considered Stalin's or Hitler's murder rate?

[Woodsman]

Re: Gun control anyone (again)

I can understand why its hard for someone who has grown up in the United states to think owning a gun gives them freedom.

Nobody gives you freedom. It's yours from the day you are born to day you stop resisting those who will take it from you.

However I think it is misplaced you have police that are better equipped than most modern armies. Murder rate that is out of odds with an advanced society.

This is truth, but is a separate issue than the right of American citizens to keep and bear arms.

Its a good thing in the UK that the only people who carry guns are police and hardcore criminals.

I can't throw stones living in the giant glass house we call home here in the USA. I'm glad you think it is a good thing for the UK. We're still having the conversation here in the US and the majority consensus over the last 200+ years isn't likely to change.

I don't believe in fairy tales.

No, you believe in the efficacy of gun control and a state monopoly on arms.

The world is how we make it and if enough people want peace it will happen. In fact we are much closer to a resolution than people think Strong AI will free or enslave us all.

Maybe. I'm pessimistic.

[LorenS]

Re: Gun control anyone (again)

I don't believe in fairy tales.

The world is how we make it and if enough people want peace it will happen. In fact we are much closer to a resolution than people think Strong AI will free or enslave us all.

I don't believe in wishful thinking. It only takes one person to start a fight. You don't get anything useful by merely wishing for it. Peace has always been won by hard work and often by the use of targeted violence.

Just now, in Tunisia, just one guy with a gun started a massacre. It didn't stop until he was shot, if he hadn't been shot it's hard to say when he would have stopped, however, thousands of happy tourists wanting peace really really badly would not have stopped him.

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/world/...tel/ar-AAcaQGw


Happy thoughts may improve your health, but they don't accomplish much else.

President Obama:

But let’s be clear: At some point, we as a country will have to reckon with the fact that this type of mass violence does not happen in other advanced countries.

Hyperbole or just plain lying? This type of mass violence happens everywhere, including Norway (or is Norway not "advanced").

http://www.euronews.com/2013/07/22/n...fter-massacre/

The initial bomb killed 8. The guy didn't stop with a bombing, though.


Slavery is not peace, slavery requires violence. Freedom allows people to occasionally choose violence, slavery requires ongoing violence. We may as well be free and enjoy the times of peace while they last.

[Raz]

Re: Gun control anyone (again)

Its a good thing in the UK that the only people who carry guns are police and hardcore criminals.

I really, truly hope you aren't serious.

I don't believe in fairy tales.

And I don't base my worldview on nearly impossible odds yielding a meaningless universe.

(The following question and answer is taken from a symposium titled “One Man Brains Trust” held on the 18th of April 1944
at the head office of Electric and Musical Industries, Ltd. in Hayes, Middlesex, England. Mr. H. W. Bowen was the question-master.)

Mr. Bowen: “Materialists and some astronomers suggest that the solar planetary system and life as we know it
was brought about by an accidental stellar collision. What is the Christian view of this theory?”

Mr. C. S. Lewis: “If the solar system was brought about by an accidental collision, then the appearance of organic life
on this planet was an accident, and the whole evolution of man was an accident, too. If so, then all our present thoughts
are mere accidents – the accidental by-product of the movement of atoms. And this holds for the thoughts of the materialists
and astronomers as well for anyone else. But if their thoughts – i.e., of Materialism and Astronomy – are merely accidental by-products,
why should we believe them to be true?

I see no reason for believing that one accident should be able to give me a correct account of all the other accidents.
It’s like expecting that the accidental shape taken by the splash when you upset a milk-jug should give you a correct account
of how the jug was made and why it was upset.”

The world is how we make it and if enough people want peace it will happen. In fact we are much closer to a resolution than people think Strong AI will free or enslave us all.

And if enough people want Yorkshire Pudding to fall from the sky it will happen. Roll another one, dude!

[shiny!]

Re: Gun control anyone (again)

Nobody gives you freedom. It's yours from the day you are born to day you stop resisting those who will take it from you.

This is going into my quotes file. Thank you, Woody.

[dcarrigg]

Re: Gun control anyone (again)

I think the slavery/freedom talk in relation to this issue hyperbolic. But then again, I think both sides on the gun issue tend to get hyperbolic.

We do have data on this stuff. Here's some interesting country data. Here's some state-level US data. Here's some state-level gun ownership data.

The three states with the lowest murder rates in the 2013 data were Iowa, Hawaii and Vermont. Iowa had a middle-high gun ownership rate of 42.9%. Hawaii has the lowest gun ownership rate in America at 6.3%. Vermont has a middle-high gun ownership rate of 42%.

Murder rate in Iowa was about equal to Slovakia. Murder rate in Hawaii was about equal to Finland. Murder rate in Vermont was about equal to Greece.

Meanwhile, the three states with the highest murder rates in 2013 were Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi. Louisiana was close to Vermont with gun ownership at 44.1%. Alabama's a bit higher with gun ownership at 51.7%. Mississippi's gun ownership rate is 6th highest in the nation at 55.3%.

Murder rate in Louisiana was about equal to Haiti. Murder rate in Alabama was about equal to Pakistan. Murder rate in Mississippi was about equal to Cambodia.

Every one of these states has a higher murder rate than China, where gun ownership is rare, or Switzerland, where gun ownership is universal.

Evidence clearly doesn't suggest that there's a 1:1 correlation between gun ownership and murders per capita. There is a little bit of a correlation (small, imperfect) between the percentage of households with guns in US states and the murder rate. But I'd guess the causal arrow probably just as easily works the other way. That is, more people arm themselves in more dangerous states.

But why is the murder rate more than double in Pennsylvania what it is in Massachusetts and 50% higher than New York? That's a lot of variation for a couple hours' drive down the highway. And for that matter why is Vermont lower than any of them even though more people own guns? I think you're going to find a lot of this involves very local phenomena. And you're also probably going to find some correlation with policies that take a bit of the bleeding edge off of poverty.

Murder rates are going down overall. There are already 10 US states with murder rates lower than Norway's. But even the least murderous states still have 4 times the murders per capita of Japan or Iceland.

Data's whacky. But at least it gets us out of anecdotes.

[Raz]

Re: Gun control anyone (again)

...Meanwhile, the three states with the highest murder rates in 2013 were Louisiana, Alabama, and Mississippi. Louisiana was close to Vermont with gun ownership at 44.1%. Alabama's a bit higher with gun ownership at 51.7%. Mississippi's gun ownership rate is 6th highest in the nation at 55.3%.

Murder rate in Louisiana was about equal to Haiti. Murder rate in Alabama was about equal to Pakistan. Murder rate in Mississippi was about equal to Cambodia. ...

Adjust the murder rate numbers for the three aforementioned states by removing one particular ethnic group and then see what they look like.

Do the very same adjustment for Chicago, Detroit, Memphis, New Orleans, D.C., East St. Louis, et cetera, and see what they then look like.