| FORUM | ARCHIVE |                    | TOTAL QUIZ RESULT |


  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed - Gun Control
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Events   Register Register  Login Login


Welcome stranger, click here to read about some of the great benefits of registering for a free account with us and joining us in our global online community.


Gun Control

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
Poll Question: How much restriction?
Poll Choice Votes Poll Statistics
1 [6.25%]
5 [31.25%]
4 [25.00%]
2 [12.50%]
4 [25.00%]
You can not vote in this poll

Author
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 3545
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Jul 2012 at 19:00
Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

Citizens in the US don't have a right to bear arms, only militias do - apparently.  heard that on the radio the other night.
 
There is actually a debate over the interpretation of the Second Amendment. Many gun-control advocates advance an argument running along those lines. It will be interesting to see how it turns out.
 
-Akolouthos
Back to Top
Sponsored Links


Back to Top
Al Jassas View Drop Down
King
King


Joined: 07 Aug 2007
Status: Offline
Points: 5000
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Al Jassas Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 31 Jul 2012 at 20:12
If I am not mistaken the English Bill of Rights (1688) was the one that set the precedent for gun rights for all free Englishmen. The 2nd amendment was built on this and the right to bear arms was always understood to mean individual arms.
 
Al-Jassas
Back to Top
Captain Vancouver View Drop Down
Council Member
Council Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2010
Location: Vancouver Isle
Status: Offline
Points: 2160
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Captain Vancouver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Aug 2012 at 03:26
Originally posted by Akolouthos Akolouthos wrote:

Originally posted by Captain Vancouver Captain Vancouver wrote:

Originally posted by Omar al Hashim Omar al Hashim wrote:


Quote
Quote
Malaysia and Singapore take the position that if you are in possesion of a gun, you must be intending to use it. Therefore, the punishment for having a gun is the death penalty. This is quite logical and very effective.

And so strict laws do have an effect?

I don't have statistics, but I believe Singapore has the lowest level of gun crime anywhere in the world.
 
Then maybe they are doing something right.


As one who disapproves of the application of the death penalty in almost all modern cases, I was a bit shocked to read that last bit. I think that comment bears a bit more thought, Captain Vancouver, and I'm fairly certain that you'd agree with me if you'd give it a second look. I understand the frustration that surrounds the issue of gun ownership, but I don't think that seeking to apply the death penalty to gun owners is any sort of answer. Would you please clarify?

-Akolouthos, Council Chairman
 
To be honest here Mr A, I hadn't taken a long look at the laws in Malasysia and Singapore. A quick scan of the net seemed to indicate that in Malaysia at least, the death penalty is only applied to those discharging a gun during the commission of a crime. Pretty harsh by western standards yes, but we are talking about those that are murderers or at least willing and potential murderers, not simply gun owners. I wouldn't go that far myself, but on the other hand I think the combat zone mentality in the US is completely out of touch with reality.
Back to Top
Akolouthos View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 24 Feb 2006
Status: Offline
Points: 3545
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Akolouthos Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Aug 2012 at 03:42
Originally posted by Captain Vancouver Captain Vancouver wrote:

Originally posted by Akolouthos Akolouthos wrote:

Originally posted by Captain Vancouver Captain Vancouver wrote:

Originally posted by Omar al Hashim Omar al Hashim wrote:


Quote
Quote
Malaysia and Singapore take the position that if you are in possesion of a gun, you must be intending to use it. Therefore, the punishment for having a gun is the death penalty. This is quite logical and very effective.

And so strict laws do have an effect?

I don't have statistics, but I believe Singapore has the lowest level of gun crime anywhere in the world.
 
Then maybe they are doing something right.


As one who disapproves of the application of the death penalty in almost all modern cases, I was a bit shocked to read that last bit. I think that comment bears a bit more thought, Captain Vancouver, and I'm fairly certain that you'd agree with me if you'd give it a second look. I understand the frustration that surrounds the issue of gun ownership, but I don't think that seeking to apply the death penalty to gun owners is any sort of answer. Would you please clarify?

-Akolouthos, Council Chairman
 
To be honest here Mr A, I hadn't taken a long look at the laws in Malasysia and Singapore. A quick scan of the net seemed to indicate that in Malaysia at least, the death penalty is only applied to those discharging a gun during the commission of a crime. Pretty harsh by western standards yes, but we are talking about those that are murderers or at least willing and potential murderers, not simply gun owners. I wouldn't go that far myself, but on the other hand I think the combat zone mentality in the US is completely out of touch with reality.
 
Gotcha, and you have put my mind at ease. All I knew about the laws of Malaysia and Singapore was what was in the thread, so you can understand my initial reaction. I generally wouldn't support the death penalty in murder cases either, but those who do are at least embracing an understandable position.
 
Thanks for getting back with me so soon, Captain Vancouver; hope all is well with you. Smile
 
-Akolouthos, Council Chairman
Back to Top
Captain Vancouver View Drop Down
Council Member
Council Member
Avatar

Joined: 29 Sep 2010
Location: Vancouver Isle
Status: Offline
Points: 2160
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Captain Vancouver Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Aug 2012 at 03:55
The second amendment is hazy because the topic was not an issue at the time. A militia made sense- it had just worked fairly well for the revolutionaries- and anyway other countries had similar arrangements. Guns in individuals possession also made sense. Many at the time lived in remote areas, and needed guns for protection, or for hunting. There was no police force as we know it today, and urban living was for the minority. Why spell out in excruciating detail what was obvious?
 
The problem is, it is not at all obvious why a university student in Salt Lake City today needs a gun to attend classes, and why, if we are to take the NRA seriously, his or her Prof also would be wise to have one tucked into his belt. This is a long, long way from farmers living in a near wilderness, or a flegling state trying to organize some sort of defensive measure. The second amendment is a 230 year old document that has been hijacked in the most absurd fashion by those with soaring testosterone levels, those suffering from intellectual apathy, and those with political motivation.
Back to Top
gcle2003 View Drop Down
WorldHistoria Master
WorldHistoria Master
Avatar
PM Honorary Member

Joined: 06 Dec 2004
Location: Luxembourg
Status: Offline
Points: 13262
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote gcle2003 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 01 Aug 2012 at 15:29
With regard to the death penalty for crimes, the present situation in the US allows anyone to convict, sentence and execute a trespasser.
Citizen of Ankh-Morpork.

Never believe anything until it has been officially denied - Sir Humphrey Appleby, 1984.

Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2012 at 22:01
After reading some of the crap that's been written in this forum regards "Guns", my opinion of the anti gun crowd remains the same, or even reinforced. You guys just don't get it. What is it about "The right to bear arms shall not be infringed"  is it that you guys don't get? Europeans can have guns....if you're one of the elite. God blessed America, I do love this country so.
May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2012 at 22:04
Originally posted by gcle2003 gcle2003 wrote:

With regard to the death penalty for crimes, the present situation in the US allows anyone to convict, sentence and execute a trespasser.

That's correct Graham. It's so nice to start off with you again on an agreeable note sir. LOL
May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
Buckskins View Drop Down
General
General
Avatar

Joined: 16 Feb 2012
Location: Texas
Status: Offline
Points: 792
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote Buckskins Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 11 Aug 2012 at 22:15
Originally posted by Akolouthos Akolouthos wrote:

Originally posted by Zagros Zagros wrote:

Citizens in the US don't have a right to bear arms, only militias do - apparently.  heard that on the radio the other night.
 
There is actually a debate over the interpretation of the Second Amendment. Many gun-control advocates advance an argument running along those lines. It will be interesting to see how it turns out.
 
-Akolouthos

There is no debate, and it was turned out many years ago by our Founding Fathers.
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. 

Anyone of consequence that runs on a platform of gun control best not quit their day job.


May you live as long as you want to,
and may you want to as long as you live.
Back to Top
franciscosan View Drop Down
Tsar
Tsar


Joined: 09 Feb 2015
Location: Littleton CO
Status: Offline
Points: 3242
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote franciscosan Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Dec 2017 at 00:21
The gun lobby in the US is strong, that means that it doesn't have to be right, but can muscle their way through any issues that might come up.  That is how I interpret "Anyone of consequence that runs on a platform of gun control best not quit their day job."  Let us not bother to examine what they think or advocate, the gun lobby will save us the time thinking, by shutting them down, unheard.

I don't necessarily have a problem with firearms, I do find it ironic though that you get people who can't afford a decent car or a house payment, but they can afford an HK assault rifle, or half a dozen handguns.  On the one hand they are ready for the government and its onslaught to "take away their guns."  On the other hand, they read for the government, and the welfare check in the mail.  What would happen if they sold their guns, and paid the bills instead?  But, financial independence is not as macho, as having a handgun.
Back to Top
toyomotor View Drop Down
Moderator
Moderator
Avatar

Joined: 15 Feb 2014
Location: Tasmania, AUST.
Status: Offline
Points: 4923
Post Options Post Options   Thanks (0) Thanks(0)   Quote toyomotor Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: 20 Dec 2017 at 01:13
Unfortunately the USA has lost control of firearm ownership. The freedom with which citizens can legally acquire anything from a simple hand gun to a fully automatic Assault Rifle is stunning in it's madness.http://www.worldhistoria.com/new_reply_form.asp?TID=127694&PN=2&TR=40" width="1px" height="1px" style="display: none;">

The other side of the coin, unlawful firearm posession/ownership is a great unknown. Who knows what some people have stashed away in their houses, Anti-Tank weapons? Surface to Air Missile launchers? Who knows? Certainly not the ATF or any other arm of government.

But with a populaton of what, some 350 million people to police, lawenforcement agencies have a snowflakes chance in hell of controlling weapons sales and possession.

What the government does have the abiity to do, is tighten it's security on military armouries so that the theft and sale of military weapons and other equipment is stopped.


It's not that I was born in Ireland,
It's the Ireland that was born in me.
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <12
  Share Topic   

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down

Forum Software by Web Wiz Forums® version 11.10
Copyright ©2001-2017 Web Wiz Ltd.

This page was generated in 0.078 seconds.