auxilary Posted January 22, 2004 Author Share Posted January 22, 2004 If nothing good ever came of guns.... I beg to differ. Backtrack to muskets, which later evolved single shot rifles followed by semiautomatic and automatic weapons. Further use in wars, resulting in a partially related nuclear weapon development, resulting in nuclear power plants and power you're using right now to post this. Simply put: war causes technology advances. Look at WW1: first use of airplanes in combat, which evolved from initially being scout vessels to dropping mustard gas to fighters, to early bombers. Forward to WW2, and we have advanced prop fighters and bombers (did I mention the B29 had computer controlled remote gun turrets?). Germans were experimenting with V1 and V2 guided rockets, and had first functional jet (ME-262) and rocket (ME-163A) fighters. Without war, and without guns, we wouldn't be where we are today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 How is it that Canada has as many or more guns per person, and we have significantly less shooting deaths/crimes per person? (by about a factor of 100... I'm talking PER PERSON here, so population doesn't really count in this sense) I you look at some more basic information like violent crimes per 1,000 of population you'll see that the US has a greater rate then Canada. I think the deaths by guns are a part of that statistic, but the overall violent crime rate is a much more important number. Personally, I think the US has a higher violent crime rate because its part of the price we pay for a more culturally diverse society. The US has the highest legal immigration rate in the world and when you mix races, ethnicities, etc. you have problems. These problems are inter and intra race and have a lot to do with class. And no, I'm not anti-immigration. If you want to work and are not a felon, I think you should be able to come into this country legally. But, what most folks miss and the media fails to report, is that the overall violent crime rate has been tending down for decades. We are a significantly safery society then back in the 1960s when I was a kid. You wouldn't know that by watching TV but I was in much greater danger of being kidnapped, assaulted, hurt, or murdered as a child in the 1960s then any child growing up today. I think this trend has nothing to do with gun control or gun ownership. It has a lot to do with television and the homogenizing effect that it has on people's morals. Over the decades certain societal norms are propogated through a common medium (TV) and parents re-inforce those norms as they raise their children. In the US , those norms are basically Judeo-Christian ideas of right, wrong, and punishment in an afterlife. The discussion of guns and gun control is a distraction from looking at ourselves and our behavior. Its an easy thing for politicians and pressure groups (on both sides) to use for their own advantage. Like flag burning, its a litmus test that has no affect out in the real world. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 What good has the gun done for humanity? How about helping develop the means of manufacturing that gave us the Datsun Z... http://www.uh.edu/engines/epi101.htm Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaparral2f Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 I stillthink that its too bad that some can't wee further than the second amendment. Since 911, the government has steadily eroded the bill of rights. and I have yet to hear the NRA moaning about that. I feel that someone should maybe be bitch about the infringement of fundamentalist religion on government, and the attack on the right to privacy. The rest of that document( the constitution) is every bit as important as whether some hack actor with alzhiemers can have an anti tank weapon. ( You do realize that Heston wasn't really moses don't you? ) Oh yeah, I have been a gun owner since I was ten. Don't even get me started on abortion. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 I think it's weird that anyone regardless of "liberal" or "conservative" bias would want the govt to infringe on any of their rights, but that seems to be the trend. So I for one am right with you Chap. But, the 1st and 2nd Amendments are the most important because without them the rest are just empty promises. They are #1 and #2 because they are the most important. Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Chaparral2f Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 We are in complete agreement on that. I would love to stay and discuss this further but I gotta go now, the FBI is here to clean up the static on the wire tap. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David K Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 WOW, check out the gun cam, its not even real!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jasonfen Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Here is a scenario for those against any guns at all. I'm driving down a dark ally and come across 4 guys and 1 woman. The 1 woman is your Mother/Sister/Wife etc. They are getting ready to have their way with her. What do I do? I like to think that I can take care of myself, but I'm no Superman. If I am unarmed, the best I can do is 1)yell. Who would help? 2) run and get help. Too bad for her they don't need much time to do what they want. Now if I am armed...it's target practice time. You might say this sounds too ridiculous. Why? It could happen to anyone. People base their judgments without questioning what they would do if it were personal. As was said before. Guns are tool. Yes they have the capability to do greater harm than other means of protection. However, few things offer the advantage they can give if needed. What good is pepper spray or a knife going to do me in the above situation? Not much. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest bluex_v1 Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 How is it that Canada has as many or more guns per person, and we have significantly less shooting deaths/crimes per person? (by about a factor of 100... I'm talking PER PERSON here, so population doesn't really count in this sense) Population density? The tighter you enclose an animal, the more easily agitated they become. ...and its just too damn cold to try to go out and jack someone in Canada. I do think it is cultural mainly. It was competative, adventurous, risk-taking people that began immigrating to what would become the USA (American Indians included). I would think there is probably some genetic predilection for this personality that continues in these people's decendants (us). If a particular person can't complete, they may take that energy and apply it elsewhere in a violent manner. Although this argument doesn't apply so strongly to Canada, it certainly works for European nations. I suppose you could argue that on average, Canadians had slightly less of this pioneering drive since they didn't go independent as we did. I know that's pretty weak, but its all I got. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BigWhyteDude Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 There is no right to privacy in the U.S. constitution. I am 19 and have been raised around guns of all types my whole life. Heck since i was 10 i have been cleaning my dads service weapons. My dad has tought me and my brother the right way to shoot, firearms safty and the responcibility of owning a firearm. If A person wants to carry a weapon they should have to go through some sort of training to impose the responcibility's and consequenses of their actions on them. In Ga you have to be 21 to carry a consealed weapon. When i turn 21 i plan on getting one. Its a person right to chose if they want to own and or carry a firearm. Andrew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 There is no right to privacy in the U.S. constitution. Amendment IV: The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers and effects, against unreasonable search and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. I think you're wrong... Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
johnc Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Actually, he's right. The right to privacy does not explicitly exist in the Constitution. It has been inferred by the courts through interpretations of the 1st, 4th, and 5th amendments in the Bill of Rights. Some of the most cited case examples: 1890 - Warren & Brandeis. Privacy and the press 1967 - Supreme court. Wiretapping 1974 - Supreme court. Bank records In addition, there's been some legislation codifying the concept: The Privacy Act of 1974 Electronic Communications Privacy Act of 1986 (ECPA) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
gramercyjam Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 ...... Simply put: war causes technology advances. .....Without war' date=' and without guns, we wouldn't be where we are today.[/quote'] I assume you are FOR technological advances. I can't say that I agree 100% that technology is good and where we are today is anything to celebrate. Of course that may explain why I am one of the crusty old triple Weber lovers. I work in technology but that doesn't mean I am in love with it. But I do like my guns. But I like them simple, like my cars. Mine are just for hunting and self protection of course. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Actually, he's right. The right to privacy does not explicitly exist in the Constitution. It has been inferred by the courts through interpretations of the 1st, 4th, and 5th amendments in the Bill of Rights. Some of the most cited case examples: Well the 4th Amendment looks pretty clear to me, but I have no doubt that the issue has been argued in court. In searching online, it looks like those who challenge the right to privacy say that the word "privacy" doesn't occur in the Constitution. Apparently neither does email or telephone, and that is the type of loophole the Big Bro types are trying to use to violate our rights. The wording in the 4th Amendment is pretty clear, but hey, we also have all kinds of gun control laws that are a violation of the 2nd Amendment. That doesn't make it right, or make the Amendments any less clear. Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest stpdfst_in_TN Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 I am strongly against guns. Nothing good has come from them. How about your freedom? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mikelly Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 Uhm... Let's see how I can do this without pissing off those of our breatheren who are of the liberal mindset... Guns, much like hammers, saws, screw drivers, rusty sheet metal (Remember the artery I severed and almost died from??? ) and almost ANY OTHER T-O-O-L in your garage should be viewed as just that... a T-O-O-L. Are you guys with me so far? Now, Not unlike a gun, I can take a screw driver or a hammer, or a sawzall and do creative and good things. I can also take those same impliments and create harm and or death to any living thing, person, or animal... Much like a G-U-N. They are tools. Period. Would you let your child play with a sharp knife, hammer, saw or other dangerous tool? OK, Then HOW IN GODS NAME can we as a society point the blame for gun related deaths on guns and their makers? When will we as a society require US HUMANS to be RESPONSIBLE for OUR actions... No, lets all go out and SUE the gun makers and drive YET ANOTHER manufacturer or business away from american soil so we can pay YET MORE import tax on TOOLS. If we outlaw guns, we will ultimately take them away from LEGAL citizens. We WILL NOT take them away from those whoe illegally own them ANYWAY! New York City and Washington DC are case studies of THIS VERY FACT. ... And before you guys jump on me here or at my inbox, a little back ground... I HAD an FFL license that allowed me to own and sell submachine guns back in 1990. I turned the license in once all the high profile cases with nuts killing children and innicent people broke around the country. I also sold my stash of legal assault rifles. I ALSO cancelled my membership in the NRA. Two reasons... They (The NRA) scared me & the government who was tracking activities within the NRA and its membership scared me. I now hold NO affiliation to any gun related group. I also do NOT own any assault rifles. However, I'm always amazed at how our society is so quick to blame the system, yet so quick to do NOTHING relevant to make society a better and safer, and more accountable place to live. Go on and blame TV, the media, entertainment, hollywood, teachers, hell blame me while you are at it... But god forbid, DO NOT blame the individual who actively decided to take a tool and use it in a manor to prey upon another human being... NO, don't do that. Mike 8) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tim240z Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 When will we as a society require US HUMANS to be RESPONSIBLE for OUR actions... Mike 8) Now that is the question!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JMortensen Posted January 22, 2004 Share Posted January 22, 2004 When will we as a society require US HUMANS to be RESPONSIBLE for OUR actions... No, lets all go out and SUE the gun makers and drive YET ANOTHER manufacturer or business away from american soil so we can pay YET MORE import tax on TOOLS. You answered your own question. I think the answer to that is that people will start being responsible as soon as we stop PAYING them for being irresponsible... Jon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pop N Wood Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 I was going to stay out of it, but there is actually some rational dialog rather than just emotional bickering. How is it that Canada has as many or more guns per person, and we have significantly less shooting deaths/crimes per person? (by about a factor of 100... I'm talking PER PERSON here, so population doesn't really count in this sense) Actually that statistic is an excellent argument against gun control. The other two statistical arguments are Sweden and Switzerland. They are two of the most heavy armed populaces in the world, and yet they have gun death rates that are a fraction of the US. Contrast this with Mexico, which has some of the strictest gun control laws in the world, and a gun murder rate that is more like the US. The discussion of guns and gun control is a distraction from looking at ourselves and our behavior The problem with gun violence in the US goes beyond the guns themselves. Maybe if we as Americans could honestly face our problems we might have a chance to solve them. Heading into shaky ground here so I hope people will hear me out. But I think examining the demographics of gun deaths can help us understand the nature of the problem. In 2000, Baltimore had one of the highest per capita homicide rates in the world. Yet of the just over 300 homicides that year, fully 95% of the victims were black males between the age of 16 and 35, while 97% of the suspects were in the same demographic category. One police detective summed up Baltimore's problem with the observation that if you don't spend time standing on a Baltimore street corner either selling drugs or attempting to buy drugs, then you probably don't have to worry about the high homicide rate. Nationally, over 50% of all handgun murders committed in the US are black males shooting other black males. These are facts. What does this tell me? Maybe if we address the problems facing young black males living in the city of Baltimore, then maybe we just might make some real progress reducing gun violence in our country. Food for thought. Oh BTW, watching Bowling for Columbine to gain an understanding of the problem is like watching the Flintstones to learn how cave men lived. Obviously a tongue in cheek exaggeration, but referencing Hollywood make believe to support a contention is a sure way to lose all credibility (and yes I know Moorer works out of Canada). Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BigWhyteDude Posted January 23, 2004 Share Posted January 23, 2004 Thats one thing about the constitution, some parts of it can be interprited in many different ways. Im no expert on Constitutional law or anything but from what i have read of it, interprited, and listened to others interpritation of it(none of which were experts either) thats just how (I) interprit it. Im not saying im right but thats just my view on it. And i agree, Big Bro is starting to get to intrusive into ppls lives. Man, i loath politics, and here i am in the middle of a political discusion Andrew Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.