Gun control II.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Ser Mix,

I was not only talking about the 2nd Amendment. Lev wants to eliminate the warrent requirement for searches too. If y'all want to eliminate the 2nd, amend the Constitution. Heck, depending on the languageI might even support the amendment.

[SerMixalot]

Fair enough,

As an aside, if the CNN reporters use the expression, "one can only imagine" one more time I will throw my shoe through the TV, you are fucking news organization not imaginarians

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Lev,

Then amend the Constitution or keep testing what constitutes a "reasonable regulation" because the Court has held, very clearly, that blanket bans are Unconstitutional.

[Robin Of House Hill]

Lorien,

Killing people because they are mentally ill is as absurd as eleiminting warrent requirments before police searches.

Ser Scot,

Sorry, cull is an ambiguous term. I meant it as removing from, not killing. Incarceration is appropriate for those who are a threat to themselves and others. Perhaps it is time for mandatory testing to find out who the ticking time bombs are.

[drawkcabi]

Lev,

Respectfully, atitudes toward Constitutional protections, like those you are offering, led to the internment of Japanese Americans after Pearl Harbor. Hence, in my opinion kneejerk reactions to horrible events like those that occured today are generally bad ideas.

Which is why I'm glad it would take 2/3 of Congress to repeal the 2nd amendment if we did it. We need the stopgaps to prevent kneejerk reactions from taking full effect. Even if we found a way around 2nd amendment issues we then have the Supreme Court to say those other circumventive means we take are unconstitutional as another stopgap until we repeal the 2nd amendment and it's back to square 1.

The talking begins today. The movement begins today. There is no reason not to want to change things.

It will be frustrating at times and I know I will find myself cursing the very measures I just said I'm glad we have to prevent rashness, but now it's like this, I can no longer hear any of the arguments that are pro gun and pro 2nd amendment, the cries of 27+ familes have deafened me to them.

[The Progressive]

Lev,

Then amend the Constitution or keep testing what constitutes a "reasonable regulation" because the Court has held, very clearly, that blanket bans are Unconstitutional.

Oh scot, you know perfectly well that the hurdles to amend the constitution is much much higher than simply passing a piece of legislation.

Why do you keep throwing up obstructionist hubris like that instead of answering where do you stand on the issue of the ban of gun? There is no middle ground Scot, I think you should at least be honest about it.

[ShowOverBooks]

Ser Scot,

Sorry, cull is an ambiguous term. I meant it as removing from, not killing. Incarceration is appropriate for those who are a threat to themselves and others. Perhaps it is time for mandatory testing to find out who the ticking time bombs are.

Still, very prone to abuse. Psychological tests are not subject to the same rules of evidence as criminal trials.

I wonder how many on this site would fail such a test.

No need to imprison those who are 'a threat to themselves', either.

[Res ipsa loquitur]

You want 27 lives to counter this? What of a few thousand to a few million, depending on site and study and criteria used?

Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz 1990s study "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun." By Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Fall 1995. showed that between 830,000 and 2 million defensive gun incidents happened a year.

A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard. http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp reference citation is "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun." By Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Fall 1995.

CATOS paper cites this. Some dispute the findings and methodology in this research.

CATO has a neat web site that tracks when guns have been used to prevent a crime, be it anything from a minor offense to major felonies. Many times, just the sight of the gun itself sends the would be criminal running. You will note FAR more than 27 points on the map: http://www.cato.org/guns-and-self-defense/

On average in 1987-92 about 83,000 crime victims per year used a

firearm to defend themselves or their property. Three-fourths of

the victims who used a firearm for defense did so during a violent

crime; a fourth, during a theft, household burglary, or motor

vehicle theft.http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/ascii/hvfsdaft.txt

CATOs study confirming that guns have prevented a great deal more than 27 crimes or killings: http://www.cato.org/publications/white-paper/tough-targets-when-criminals-face-armed-resistance-citizens

http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp has many studies and statistics on how very often guns are used to deter crime.

A specific: college kid stopped a massacre, saved his own life and 11 more: http://www.wsbtv.com/news/news/college-student-shoots-kills-home-invader/nD9XG/

Attempted burglar fended off by a gun: http://www.wlox.com/story/20250551/victim-shoots-attempted-burglary-suspect

71 year old guy stops a hold up of an internet cafe, and possiby saves the lives of the dozens of people there when armed robbers tried to rob the place: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2175170/Harrowing-moment-elderly-internet-cafe-goer-guns-robbers-chases-door.html

A little lady shoots and kills the large man trying to rape and probably kill her: http://www.federaljack.com/?p=91083

With his gun, man stops robbery at an AutoZone store: http://www.theindychannel.com/news/police-customer-opens-fire-on-armed-robbery-suspect

These stories are endless on Google.

So...you want to take away guns from people who not only use them safely most of the time, but use them to prevent hundreds of thousands of crimes, which would have IF committed, maybe led to the death of the victim? It is sad and tragic that 20 kids and 7 adults were killed...but banning guns would see MANY and more die. The cost is too high in safety to ban guns.

[SerMixalot]

You want 27 lives to counter this? What of a few thousand to a few million, depending on site and study and criteria used?

Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz 1990s study "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun." By Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Fall 1995. showed that between 830,000 and 2 million defensive gun incidents happened a year.

A 1993 nationwide survey of 4,977 households found that over the previous five years, at least 0.5% of households had members who had used a gun for defense during a situation in which they thought someone "almost certainly would have been killed" if they "had not used a gun for protection." Applied to the U.S. population, this amounts to 162,000 such incidents per year. This figure excludes all "military service, police work, or work as a security guard. http://www.justfacts.../guncontrol.asp reference citation is "Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun." By Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Fall 1995.

CATOS paper cites this. Some dispute the findings and methodology in this research.

CATO has a neat web site that tracks when guns have been used to prevent a crime, be it anything from a minor offense to major felonies. Many times, just the sight of the gun itself sends the would be criminal running. You will note FAR more than 27 points on the map: http://www.cato.org/...d-self-defense/

On average in 1987-92 about 83,000 crime victims per year used a

firearm to defend themselves or their property. Three-fourths of

the victims who used a firearm for defense did so during a violent

crime; a fourth, during a theft, household burglary, or motor

vehicle theft.http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/ascii/hvfsdaft.txt

CATOs study confirming that guns have prevented a great deal more than 27 crimes or killings: http://www.cato.org/...stance-citizens

http://www.justfacts.../guncontrol.asp has many studies and statistics on how very often guns are used to deter crime.

A specific: college kid stopped a massacre, saved his own life and 11 more: http://www.wsbtv.com...-invader/nD9XG/

Attempted burglar fended off by a gun: http://www.wlox.com/...urglary-suspect

71 year old guy stops a hold up of an internet cafe, and possiby saves the lives of the dozens of people there when armed robbers tried to rob the place: http://www.dailymail...hases-door.html

A little lady shoots and kills the large man trying to rape and probably kill her: http://www.federaljack.com/?p=91083

With his gun, man stops robbery at an AutoZone store: http://www.theindych...robbery-suspect

These stories are endless on Google.

So...you want to take away guns from people who not only use them safely most of the time, but use them to prevent hundreds of thousands of crimes, which would have IF committed, maybe led to the death of the victim? It is sad and tragic that 20 kids and 7 adults were killed...but banning guns would see MANY and more die. The cost is too high in safety to ban guns.

TL, 20 children dead, DR

Get rid of all guns

[Hereward]

Ser Scot,

Sorry, cull is an ambiguous term. I meant it as removing from, not killing. Incarceration is appropriate for those who are a threat to themselves and others. Perhaps it is time for mandatory testing to find out who the ticking time bombs are.

For some unaccountable reason, you are ignoring every single aspect of context. I might be totally sane and reasonable, and would test as such. Indeed, I have done. But what would happen if my wife tried to take my kids away, or I felt my country's independence had been compromised, or someone had threatened my children? Nobody has any way of knowing. The key issue is, what can I do about it, violently? In the UK, absent existing criminal links, nothing whatsoever.

Your suggestion is completely irrational.

[MinDonner]

So kinda curious. Those who are anti-gun-control, what is your solution for reducing these incidents? Cos all I'm seeing is "Welp. Nothing we can do. Carry on!" Even Robin's "round up the crazies" is more useful.

[Res ipsa loquitur]

It will be frustrating at times and I know I will find myself cursing the very measures I just said I'm glad we have to prevent rashness, but now it's like this, I can no longer hear any of the arguments that are pro gun and pro 2nd amendment, the cries of 27+ familes have deafened me to them.

The cries of the many THOUSANDS whose lives have been saved by guns are far louder than that of 27. I would rather keep guns and make the nation safer, as responsible gun ownership does.

[Ser Pink of Floyd]

Im not going to add anything to or counter anyones arguments here, I can't. I don't live in America, I'm not an American. I simply live in the UK and am from the outside looking in.

If it was my country (and we had something similar in 1996) then amending part of your constitution is a much smaller price to pay then having any more of your children, or their parents, being killed. You don't need a gun to defend yourself, if no one else has a gun to aim at you in the 1st place.

[pig]

If nothing else, we should be taxing the fuck out of guns and ammunition. Cigarettes are marked up 400% or more. No reason why we can't do the same (x100) for guns and ammo.

Also, no matter what legislation gets pushed through, nothing should be grandfathered in. I don't care if you bought your machine gun before 1984. Get a new hobby Mr. GunCollector.. Buy some baseball cards and stop being a cunt.

[Howling Mad]

The 2nd Amendment is completely obsolete in today's day and age.

Name 1 time when citizens or state militia have stood up to the federal government or state or local police. NEver

Guns are a madness and the justification for the continued lack of control is simply insanity.

You could argue that the 13th amendment is obsolete since institutional slavery is now as common as small pox. Should we repeal the 13th amendment?

[Hereward]

Words fail me once again.

[Ser Scot A Ellison]

Lev,

My answer, as ever, is reasonable regulation. I have said, to Tormund's consternation, I'd be cool with magazine capacity limits. I've never said amendments are as easy as legislation, they aren't but they are the only way to truly eliminate the Constitutional amendments you so despise. Hence, my suggestion.

[SerMixalot]

The cries of the many THOUSANDS whose lives have been saved by guns are far louder than that of 27. I would rather keep guns and make the nation safer, as responsible gun ownership does.

30k americans every year

20 children today

get rid of all fucking guns

[MinDonner]

Stop arguing with RiL's numbers as if they were true. It only encourages her.

[SerMixalot]

You could argue that the 13th amendment is obsolete since institutional slavery is now as common as small pox. Should we repeal the 13th amendment?

Actually no one couldnt argue that the 13thd Amendment is obsolete.

One CAN argue that the 2nd Amendment IS obsolete because the relationship between the citizen, the state and federal government is radically different than it was is 1776.