not another US guns thread

not another US guns thread (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Casual Banter] >> Off the Grid

Message

LadyEllen -> not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 4:33:06 AM)
I want to divorce the whole guns argument from the situation peculiar to the US with this one, and start from the point of view that there is no constitutional right to bear arms. Secondly, I want to divorce the whole argument about criminal access to weapons and start from the point of view that whilst such is a fact of life, it is as relevant to the argument as the use of a car as a getaway vehicle in criminal endeavour is, to legal control over driver licensing, vehicle registration and auto insurance. Instead, I want to discuss as to why an everyday person with no criminal record and no history of psychological/psychiatric issues, who is a tax paying, responsible citizen, should not be permitted to own a firearm, should he/she want one? Given the parameters above, what arguments can be found to deny such a person ownership? E

Real0ne -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 5:20:31 AM)
none except "control" there is no reason what so ever why a "clean" person should not own any weapon they want. a person is not free if they cannot. all licensing is nothing more than state generated revenue

farglebargle -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 5:29:58 AM)
quote: start from the point of view that there is no constitutional right to bear arms. Then you start wrong. You see, we don't have "Constitutional Rights". We have UNALIENABLE RIGHTS GIVEN BY OUR CREATOR. We had these rights BEFORE 1789, and we'll have them when Constitution-2.0 gets written. The Constitution simply tells the Federal Government what they are permitted to do. In few specific cases, the Constitution has been Amended to clarify the responsibilities of the Federal government, but it says NOTHING about what THE PEOPLE can do, because THE PEOPLE are Sovereign and can do whatever they choose.

mistoferin -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 5:39:10 AM)
LadyE, while I know what you are trying to do, I hope you understand that this thread will ultimately turn into a debate of rights and the criminal element will come into play. In the end, I believe the reasons that motivate most anti gun folks are fear and ignorance.

BOUNTYHUNTER -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 5:43:48 AM)
NONE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!...bounty

Real0ne -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 6:02:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: farglebargle quote: start from the point of view that there is no constitutional right to bear arms. Then you start wrong. You see, we don't have "Constitutional Rights". We have UNALIENABLE RIGHTS GIVEN BY OUR CREATOR. We had these rights BEFORE 1789, and we'll have them when Constitution-2.0 gets written. The Constitution simply tells the Federal Government what they are permitted to do. In few specific cases, the Constitution has been Amended to clarify the responsibilities of the Federal government, but it says NOTHING about what THE PEOPLE can do, because THE PEOPLE are Sovereign and can do whatever they choose. PERFECTLY articulated FB! and to take that to the next step, as far as the creator goes, it also means that "all people" have inalienable rights from the creator since the beginning of time to the end of time HOWEVER, the us is the only one who has put it in writing. So that means that you have them too regardless if you have a formal pact with your government or not.

popeye1250 -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 6:20:26 AM)
Like Bounty Hunter said, none. If Cavemen didn't cary spears we probably wouldn't be here.

LadyEllen -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 6:29:57 AM)
"None" sums up my thoughts too. Interested to read what the "guns are bad kids, dont use a gun 'cause theyre bad" lobby might come up with as reasons though, (above that Mackeyesque chant, that is). E

meatcleaver -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 6:50:14 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: LadyEllen Instead, I want to discuss as to why an everyday person with no criminal record and no history of psychological/psychiatric issues, who is a tax paying, responsible citizen, should not be permitted to own a firearm, should he/she want one? You can't divorce guns from the American myth. Criminals start off without a criminal record, though somehow to gun lovers when someone uses a gun criminally they were apparently criminal all along. However, I can't work out why a responsible well balanced person would want to carry a concealed weapon in an urban area. It seems the justification is that there are so many criminals around every corner ready to rob them. As for the American constitution, it didn't mean much when the South wanted to cede and when the assembley in Maryland was discussing ceding, Lincoln sent up armed troops to intimidate them so guns weren't a very effective defence against the State there.

juliaoceania -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 6:53:30 AM)
quote: Given the parameters above, what arguments can be found to deny such a person ownership? I have no desire to ban guns, but as I have said before on previous threads, I have seen gun accidents hurt two families (one of them my own). So even honest good people can be careless with their guns. Not to mention my sister lived next door to a guy that kept an arsenal practically in semi Automatics, historical guns, and even some automatics (he had them before the ban). I unknowingly witnessed the break in while I was at her house, they took the huge gun safe and nothing else. Who knows what hands those weapons made it into? It was a rather big deal, in fact they sent over an artist for me to try to make a composite drawing of these men. So guns are not guaranteed to stay in the hands of nice folks just because they were issued to them. They can be used by kids or stolen. Not that this is enough to ban them, just sayin

mistoferin -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 7:01:37 AM)
julia, A criminal could steal your Lexus and run someone down with it. They could steal your gourmet kitchen knives and murder someone with them. They could steal your baseball bat and beat someone to death with it. They could steal your Bic lighter and burn down a building full of people with it. A person with criminal intent is going to commit crimes. As to accidents due to carelessness....they could also happen with all of the above and more. Hurt is hurt and dead is dead....the way you get there is pretty irrelevant after the fact.

juliaoceania -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 7:25:51 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mistoferin julia, A criminal could steal your Lexus and run someone down with it. They could steal your gourmet kitchen knives and murder someone with them. They could steal your baseball bat and beat someone to death with it. They could steal your Bic lighter and burn down a building full of people with it. A person with criminal intent is going to commit crimes. As to accidents due to carelessness....they could also happen with all of the above and more. Hurt is hurt and dead is dead....the way you get there is pretty irrelevant after the fact. My point was that the premise of the OP was flawed. There is no way to keep criminals, loonies, and innocent kids from getting into the guns. Here is the opening line of my own post quote: I have no desire to ban guns I was just making the point that guns can be stolen from their rightful sane law abiding owners, or that little kids can still obtain access to them, as well as mental family members. There are several students that have shot up schools with their parent's, or grandparent's weaponry..Now whether one wants to make the case that they should be banned is another story. I did not open the door to that debate with my observations that there is no way to restrict the access of guns to those who should not have them, because they can get access to them through "the law abiding citizen"....just an observation

mistoferin -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 7:33:43 AM)
I understood [;)]. I am pretty familiar with how you feel on the subject and I wasn't really trying to imply that I thought you were in favor of banning guns. I only used your post (as I have frequently seen those arguments used FOR a need to ban) because it provided an opportunity to say that "theft" and "carelessness" are not really valid reasons to support denial of ownership to people who meet the rest of the criteria defined by the OP. I apologize if it appeared that I misunderstood or was trying to debate you.

juliaoceania -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 7:41:02 AM)
To be honest I am kinda sick of the debate. Americans love their guns, I live here, and it seems kinda fruitless to try to swim against the current in this regard. There are plenty of other things that I can be concentrating on that would be more productive. I do not own guns, I will not own them, and I will just have faith that no one I love will be murdered with one, because there will be those who will be murdered with them. But I know that if me and mine continue to eat the food they sell in the grocery store it will give us terrible diseases, like diabetes, high blood pressure, heart disease, and possibly cancer... so I concentrate on those issues[:)]

meatcleaver -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 7:44:39 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mistoferin julia, A criminal could steal your Lexus and run someone down with it. They could steal your gourmet kitchen knives and murder someone with them. They could steal your baseball bat and beat someone to death with it. They could steal your Bic lighter and burn down a building full of people with it. A person with criminal intent is going to commit crimes. Tell me you wrote this with your tongue firmly in your cheek?

Alumbrado -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 7:45:31 AM)
quote: Instead, I want to discuss as to why an everyday person with no criminal record and no history of psychological/psychiatric issues, who is a tax paying, responsible citizen, should not be permitted to own a firearm, should he/she want one? Given the parameters above, what arguments can be found to deny such a person ownership? A couple of thoughts, not particularly embracing any of the arguments, just trying to answer the question by listing possible viewpoints. > Assuming the future behavior of others.. People as decribed above have inexplicably abused the right to possess guns in the past by using them to harm others, and presumably such things will occur again. The 'better safe than sorry' argument. > Projecting their own fears onto others... The feeling some people hold that if they had a gun, they might end up in a tragic incident, so other people cannot be trusted with guns. The 'evil guns cause violence' argument. > Fear of 'the other'...people who don't like the notion of guns at all will objectify those who do as 'them', and assume characteritics not in evidence in every case in order to conveniently erase any paradox that might exist if they admitted that there are gun owners who don't fit a stereotype. The anti 'gun nuts' argument. > Need for power over others.... Guns aren't known as equalizers for nothing, and one's place in the pecking order is threatened if guns are in the hands of just any old body. Why they might use those guns to overthrow the monarc... errr, the lawfully established status quo.The 'comfort zone' argument. Again, I'm not a proponent of a particular viewpoint in this thread, I'm just attempting to answer the OP question by identifying some possible rationalizations.

LadyEllen -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 8:33:42 AM)
Thanks Alumbrado - wonderful response, and all reasons as asked for, without referring to the usual arguments which I purposely tried to avoid in setting the parameters in the first place! So what it seems to boil down to is fear of others and a perceived need to control others arising from that. Why then, are we all so frightened of one another? I'm asking that from the point of view of the UK, where we dont have guns remember. I want to take the debate away from the US circumstances specifically, so that we can try to get to the heart of the issue. E

juliaoceania -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 9:59:10 AM)
quote: Why then, are we all so frightened of one another? I'm asking that from the point of view of the UK, where we dont have guns remember. I want to take the debate away from the US circumstances specifically, so that we can try to get to the heart of the issue. This question cuts both ways, doesn't it? For everyone that owns a handgun for self defense, why are they so afraid? On the other side of it, those who want to ban all handguns, why are they so afraid of those who do?

hisannabelle -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 10:12:42 AM)
greetings lady ellen, the fact is, the majority of responses are likely to be "none" from people who are all for people owning guns. and at least from me, as someone who believes very strongly in gun control, i just don't think it's right for -anyone- to own a gun unless it's in a professional capacity (as law enforcement, military, public safety, etc.). they can be clean as a whistle, won't make any difference to me. it's kind of like putting qualifications on the death penalty...i believe the death penalty is always wrong, period, end of story. the fact that guilt was proved beyond a reasonable doubt is worth about as much to me as a potential gun owner's taxpaying, responsible citizen status. still doesn't make it right, imho. annabelle.

mistoferin -> RE: not another US guns thread (5/3/2007 10:21:34 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: hisannabelle i just don't think it's right quote: i believe this is the perspective that the majority of answers by those who are opposed to guns will come from....personal feelings

Page: [1] 2 3 4 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.03125