The American Gun Law

[Cricko]

I have a shotgun and an assault rifle. They are kept in a secure locker and my children have never even seen them. If somebody ever broke into my house, I would shoot them, and my kids would be safe. That is a right that I cherish, and I'm not having it taken away because some people are too stupid to look after their guns properly.

Do you go, eeny meeny miny moe at the first sound of trespassers?

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

Rusty

I understand the right to bear arms is the 2nd Amendment, Is the right to shoot someone for trespass, in the Constitution also or is it something which has been set by legal precedent , maybe as in "addition" to the 2nd ?

It isn't part of the constitution, it varies state by state. In Texas, you can shoot a mofo for giving you a nasty look.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

So none of you want one of these?

 

[South Bank Hank]

So none of you want one of these?

Ah yes. Perfect for when you've lost the remote control. Reach forward, extend arm, push, done. Just as perfect for pointing at your beloved other if she thinks she can change channel without permission.

 

[Pubey]

So none of you want one of these?

There's a difference between wanting one for yourself and wanting every other nutjob to have one.

I don't want one enough for that, so for that reason I'm out.

 

[Firestorm]

Cheers,
I am intrigued how it all works , Am I right in thinking that Laws are set mainly at a State level thus making National legislation a lot harder to roll out than, say , over here ?

 

[MK Shrimper]

So none of you want one of these?

Is it a super soaker? If so it's a lovely day for a water fight.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

Cheers,
I am intrigued how it all works , Am I right in thinking that Laws are set mainly at a State level thus making National legislation a lot harder to roll out than, say , over here ?

Laws are becoming increasingly federalized under Obama, the power of the States is a rallying call for conservatives. Issues like gay marriage and legalization of marijuana could well be resolved on a state by state basis.

 

[Cricko]

Karl, a serious question here. How can you not see the logic in the utube links that londonblue put up earlier in this thread?

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

Karl, a serious question here. How can you not see the logic in the utube links that londonblue put up earlier in this thread?

I see the logic and the argument behind gun control, but I don't agree with it. My support for gun ownership isn't due to some blind devotion to the Constitution, it's purely utilitarian. I like to shoot for sport, and I like to protect my home and my family. If some people misuse guns, they should no longer have the right to own them, in the same way careless drivers are banned from using a deadly weapon. I don't believe that the government's role is to deprive the careful and diligent gun owner because some ghetto trash are too messed up to look after their firearms.

 

[Firestorm]

. I don't believe that the government's role is to deprive the careful and diligent gun owner because some ghetto trash are too messed up to look after their firearms.

To a degree that is the crux of an awful lot of debates. ..Should legislation be about protection of the vunerable at the expense of Liberty for others or vice versa

Dangerous dog legislation is one such current topic.
Interestingly there seems to be the a complete reversal of the two "main camps" when it comes to legalising drugs

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

To a degree that is the crux of an awful lot of debates. ..Should legislation be about protection of the vunerable at the expense of Liberty for others or vice versa

Dangerous dog legislation is one such current topic.
Interestingly there seems to be the a complete reversal of the two "main camps" when it comes to legalising drugs

I believe that dangerous dogs have no utility, other than to fight and to intimidate. My dachshund performs an admirable job as a look out and alarm system, there is no requirement for Pitbulls and other fighting breeds. I would support a ban on the ownership of such dogs.

The drug issue is more problematic, and I agree that conservatives do themselves no favours by citing the libertarian angle when it comes to gun control, whilst opposing any form of responsible and medicinal drug use. I would personally support drug legalization, despite having struggled with drugs in my life, or maybe because of my struggles, I'm not really sure.

 

[Jam_Man]

So none of you want one of these?

If I lived there I would certainly want one and probably would, but then I do also see no good reason why people should own them privately at home. Add to the equation the nutcases that can get them and the law doesnt make a lot of sense.

I was thinking of going to a range when I was in the US recently but never got round to it but will next time. I do like the idea of it as a sport and that could be controlled, but I dont buy the need to have guns to protect your family, we dont have them in the UK and we arent exactly in danger. Its the fact others have guns that US citizens need a gun to protect themselves. Vicious circle.

 

[Jam_Man]

Cheers,
I am intrigued how it all works , Am I right in thinking that Laws are set mainly at a State level thus making National legislation a lot harder to roll out than, say , over here ?

California and New York are actually quite strict on them from what I understand.

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

I dont buy the need to have guns to protect your family, we dont have them in the UK and we arent exactly in danger. Its the fact others have guns that US citizens need a gun to protect themselves. Vicious circle.

Would you think you were in danger if you lived in one of the less salubrious outposts of our home nation? Cluny Square for example. I would suggest that some of the residents there would appreciate some level of home defence that went beyond a bread knife.

 

[Cricko]

Would you think you were in danger if you lived in one of the less salubrious outposts of our home nation? Cluny Square for example. I would suggest that some of the residents there would appreciate some level of home defence that went beyond a bread knife.

They already use knives in this country on far to many occasions, what do you think would happen if they were replaced by guns?

 

[Jam_Man]

Would you think you were in danger if you lived in one of the less salubrious outposts of our home nation? Cluny Square for example. I would suggest that some of the residents there would appreciate some level of home defence that went beyond a bread knife.

Vicious circle again.

I wouldnt feel safe, but Id also feel less safe if those residents had easy access to guns.

The reality is that most areas arent dangerous, so allowing the whole nation to arm themselves just isnt logical.

 

[Gremlin]

If some people misuse guns, they should no longer have the right to own them

Isn't there a debate about gun control because withdrawing that right after the owner has blown away some innocents and then turned their weapon on themselves doesn't achieve a great deal?

 

[Rusty Shackleford]

Vicious circle again.

I wouldnt feel safe, but Id also feel less safe if those residents had easy access to guns.

The reality is that most areas arent dangerous, so allowing the whole nation to arm themselves just isnt logical.

http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/01...imes-higher-than-united-states/#ixzz2HrnwE4MO

 

[Mad Cyril]

They already use knives in this country on far to many occasions, what do you think would happen if they were replaced by guns?

You would shoot yourself in the leg if you ate your dinner from your lap in front of the TV.

Unless you just used a fork.