Guns, the other side

[Karnak]

Jigster,
Actually Iceland has the longest standing government in the world.  Since 990AD or therabouts.

England also is longer standing, since about 1660 or 70.

But I think we in the US are doing a bit better than they are on most issues.

Sisu
-Karnak

[Udie]

 Here's a prime example of why we need the 2nd amendment and no permits....

 About 3 months before I started college I moved to Killeen, Tx.  My best friend ran a car lot with his grand father and I needed to get out of Houston.  Well I was driving to K-mart one day to aply for a job, when I was passed on the freeway by 2 cops going at least 150mph, the wind from their cars blew me into the emergency lane.  Sadly it turns out that they were on their way to Luby's in Killeen where George Hennard was in the middle of his shooting spree.

 Well about 3 years later my friend and me were playing cards in his office when a man walks in wanting to buy a van for his church.  We got to talking to him and found out that he was actualy shot in the Luby's killings and that he had almost died himself.  He had a lady from his church with him that day that was there at Luby's too.  

 Guess what,  she had a gun on her person the day of the shootings. She made alot of bank deposits for her job so she kept a gun with her during the day.  Now this was before we had the concealed carry permit here in Texas, so it was a felony for her to have the gun.  So she left the gun in her glove box while she went into Luby's to eat. She said she was trained and knew how to shoot and went to the shooting range quite often.  So she knows that had she had her gun with her she could have stopped him after his 1st or 2nd shot.  

 She said that she was in the middle of the resteraunt eating and that there was no clear line of sight from him to her, so she could have gotten her gun out of her purse with no problem. Before the shooting there was a lattice wall with an ivy plant growning all over it.  Alas all she could do was crouch under the table and watch him kill 23 people hoping that she would not be one of them. She was EXTREMELY angry that she didn't have the right to carry that gun with her, she has ever since that day. She also helped lobby the state for the concealed carry permit.  

 23 people died that day that didn't have to, 24 if you count the killer. She could have and would have stopped it had she not been afraid of her governments reaction to her using her 2nd amendment right.

udie

[StSanta]

Udie, and the perpetrator used what to kill?  

Does it not strike you as odd that apart from some very isolated and rare occurences, this does not happen in well developed industrialized countries with much more strict gun laws?

There are two options, and I believe one of them *must* be used to "fix" the problem. One  is tougher handgun legislation. The other is letting citizens pack a gun *at all times* for self defense.

I never saw the idea behind letting a guy own a gun in his home (we have that here, with shotguns and so forth), but *not* lettimg him carry it during the time he is most vulrenable to attack - when he is out of the home.

You don't need a handgun at home - shotguns do the job quite nicely. handguns are much better suited for personal defense when *outside* the home due to their small and compact size. So why not allow citizens to carry it on them when you allow hem to own and have them in their house?

If they're law abiding, no problem. If they ain't, big time problem.

Guess letting people carry guns around would make the police much more jumpy, and the occupation more dangerous than it already is.

Despite readin negative press about bad cops in the US, I gotta say that I admire the good guys. Dangerous job that can turn into total chaos in an instant. Much more pressure than their European counterparts in terms of personal safety. Think the good cops need more recognition than they're getting.

------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
"Trespassers will be shot. Survivors will be shot again"

[Toad]

 

Originally posted by figaro:
Literaly (word for word), the right to hold guns is not absolute.  I stand by my original statement.figaro

There is an awful lot of evidence that suggest you are incorrect.

There is a topic "The Second Amendment" in this O-Club, dated 8/8/00 that deals with this subject and gives many references that you might find enlightening.

 
Give it a read from start to finish and then see what you think.

 


[This message has been edited by Toad (edited 09-20-2000).]

[Ripsnort]

StSanta:"There are two options, and I believe one of them *must* be used to "fix" the problem. One is tougher handgun legislation. The other is letting citizens pack a gun *at all times* for self defense."

Did you know that 96 % of all crimes committed with a handgun, the person got that handgun thru unlawful or non-registered means?  So , what good would tougher legislation do?  Then only the criminals have the guns.

Give me a few, I post the new data released showing how crime is down in the states that have concealed weapons permits that can be issued without a past criminal behavior...crimes are WAY down for those states, so, I would guess you would probably support allowing more CWP's?

[This message has been edited by Ripsnort (edited 09-20-2000).]

[StSanta]

Rip

Handguns are so readily available due to a flooded market that getting one is so easy, even for criminals. Enormous black market compared to here.

I seriously doubt a situation like in Europe can develop in the US because of this. So I ain't advocating banning handguns in the US.

But, at the very least, with a handgun, ya should go through something similar to a driver's license IMHO. And not yer wussie driver license tests; make it DK style.

In other words, sure, you can have a handgun, if you've completed proper training.

------------------
StSanta
JG54 "Grünherz"
 
"Trespassers will be shot. Survivors will be shot again"

[This message has been edited by StSanta (edited 09-20-2000).]

[Fariz]

 

Originally posted by Fishu:
Ripsnort, but swimming pools less likely pops in front of you asking for your moneys... (with somewhat undenyable handgun assist)

One day I was assault by the swimming pool. Well, had too much vodka, but still, this one pool was really agressive  

Fariz

[Maverick]

 

Originally posted by StSanta:
Rip

Handguns are so readily available due to a flooded market that getting one is so easy, even for criminals. Enormous black market compared to here.

I seriously doubt a situation like in Europe can develop in the US because of this. So I ain't advocating banning handguns in the US.

But, at the very least, with a handgun, ya should go through something similar to a driver's license IMHO. And not yer wussie driver license tests; make it DK style.

In other words, sure, you can have a handgun, if you've completed proper training.

StSanta,

What you have just proposed is giving the government the ability to deny a right. This is what some of us have been trying to explain to you. Once a system has been put in place where a citizen must prove to an agency they are worthy to enjoy that right, it no longer is a right. It becomes an option. This means it can be denied. If something can be denied without court action it is no longer a right. In the US,the Bill of Rights is not a document that grants rights. It is a document that restricts the government from interferring in those rights. It is a subtle difference. Americans are in the position to have an expectation that the government is not in the position to grant or give things. It can make some guarantees based on requirements placed on it through the constitution, such as common defense etc. but it (the government) does not grant rights. The Government was not given any authority to do so.

If a thing can be restriced, it can be denied. Drivers licenses are an issue in example. There is no constitutional right to drive. This is a priveledge granted by the individual states. This priveledge can be and is regularly denied. The fact that licensing is a requirement to legally operate a motor vehicle has not controlled the misuse of them. The number one cause of death for young people in the US is auto  collisions.

I regularly found people who had their driving priveledges removed (suspension of license) who were still driving. I made 3 arrests of the same person in 6 weeks for drunken driving. Each time he was so drunk he could not stand still or walk on his own. The first arrest automatically suspended his license. He continued to drive. As far as I know this person is still driving. Short of keeping him incarcerated there is no way to keep him from behind the wheel.

I have a question for you. Your cross in a slashed circle. Are you saying that Chritianity is prohibited???

Mav

[mietla]

 

Originally posted by Maverick:
I have a question for you. Your cross in a slashed circle. Are you saying that Chritianity is prohibited???

Mav

Maverick,  I share your concern but don't bite.



[This message has been edited by mietla (edited 09-20-2000).]

[Dowding]

   

Originally posted by Karnak:


England also is longer standing, since about 1660 or 70.

But I think we in the US are doing a bit better than they are on most issues.

Good point Karnak - we do have the 'Mother of all Parliaments'

But the last part; what issues are those, please?

No Maverick, Christianity isn't prohibited, it's prohibitive. But seriously StSanta - it's out of order (as if you didn't know).



[This message has been edited by Dowding (edited 09-20-2000).]

[Udie]

Santa,

 He used a couple of guns a bunch of ammo and his truck. Well nobody got killed by the truck, but he drove it through a window to get into the resteraunt. It was a gun that stopped him too.  Officer Al Morris shot and wounded him. Then he went into the restroom and shot himself in the head. Ironicly, Al Morris was a detective not a patrolman.  He investigated auto thefts, my roomate had a car stolen off his lot one time and Mr. Morris was the investigating officer.  

 He pulled into Luby's for lunch just after the shooting had started, before any other police got there.  He was a cop so he had his gun on him and he stopped the murdering.  Had he not shown up there's no telling how many would have died, the killer had alot of ammo left.

 On more gun legislation. Here's the 2nd amendment...
 "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."

 The way I read it there should be NO legislation on weapons at all.  Most probobly think I'm crazy for that.  I'm talking full automatic too baby! Would you brake into my house if I had an uzi?   And in Texas I think it legal to holster a weapon and go outside with it, as long as it's not concealed. I know I can walk down the street with a rifle and shotgun and it's perfectly legal    That's not to say the police won't stop me and ask about it though.

 But you know what the funny/sad part is.  90% of the gun laws that der slickmiester klinton got passed were already laws on the books since the late 60's that have never been inforced.  So hey let's reword them a bit and repass them! Then we can use the issue to "school lunch" the Republicans.

 I'm not too worried though, if my government ever tells me I can't buy a gun, I'll just drive down by the Astrodome and go buy me a $50 pistol or find a friend with a gun for sale and I won't register it either   why?  because I don't have too. It's my 2nd amendment right and there's nothing anybody can do about it. I will be getting a shotgun soon, I'm going to do some quail hunting this season I think.  All this talk of guns has made me want to go hunting again.

 Welp I need to go out and get some business done.  The local Republican party headquarters had put a new quota on us. I now have to starve 5 children and kill 5 old people a month. But hey ya gotta do what ya gotta do for that good ole "evil right wing conspiracy"


Udie

 

Originally posted by StSanta:
Udie, and the perpetrator used what to kill?  

Does it not strike you as odd that apart from some very isolated and rare occurences, this does not happen in well developed industrialized countries with much more strict gun laws?

There are two options, and I believe one of them *must* be used to "fix" the problem. One  is tougher handgun legislation. The other is letting citizens pack a gun *at all times* for self defense.

I never saw the idea behind letting a guy own a gun in his home (we have that here, with shotguns and so forth), but *not* lettimg him carry it during the time he is most vulrenable to attack - when he is out of the home.

You don't need a handgun at home - shotguns do the job quite nicely. handguns are much better suited for personal defense when *outside* the home due to their small and compact size. So why not allow citizens to carry it on them when you allow hem to own and have them in their house?

If they're law abiding, no problem. If they ain't, big time problem.

Guess letting people carry guns around would make the police much more jumpy, and the occupation more dangerous than it already is.

Despite readin negative press about bad cops in the US, I gotta say that I admire the good guys. Dangerous job that can turn into total chaos in an instant. Much more pressure than their European counterparts in terms of personal safety. Think the good cops need more recognition than they're getting.

[Jigster]

 

Originally posted by Karnak:
Jigster,
Actually Iceland has the longest standing government in the world.  Since 990AD or therabouts.

England also is longer standing, since about 1660 or 70.

But I think we in the US are doing a bit better than they are on most issues.

Sisu
-Karnak

Let me rephrase. A Legitimate government. ( or a single form of government, stablity)
Name a single country that has had a supreme law that has stood longer then the US Constitution. I'm not trying to be antagonistic towards the other countries, but... no government I am aware of has ever been as stable as the US's, or that hasn't removed, changed, or destroyed major parts (sweeping changes) without the consent of the governed.

i.e. a government that governs with the power, authority, and consent of the people.

That was the reason the colonies revolted. They were being governed with no way to effect how they were goverend (no seats in parliment)

A legitimate government is defined by it's supreme/ fundemental laws (aka a constitution)

A constitution:

a) defines the structure of the government.
b) defines the power of the government.
c) defines the rights of the citizens.
d) makes a government legitimate

The US government has stood for over 200 years. The Athenians had the oldest form of legitmate government, but it perished.

Most of the governments of Europe have been ultimately unstable, not by choice of course. Enland alone has had both monarchy and oligarchy previously. Then you get into the world wars where the "old governments" were sent sprawling from invasions and conquering.

Most industrial nations now have some form of a constitution. The UK really didn't move to a legitimate form of government till did away with it's colonies (or allowed those colonies participation) As did France during it's revolution.


 

- Jig

[Igloo]

I can't believe people still resort to the US constitution as a justification of insane gun lobbying.  It is absolutly ignorant.  

Do you know when the United States Constitution was signed?  Do you know the history of the events that led up to its signing?  Do you know the situtation the americans of the late 1700s were facing with the British Empire?  

Get a grip people.  The Constitution also says that people of colour are half a man.  Are you going to use that to support your views too?  

THINGS CHANGE - THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA WAS FOUNDED ON THIS FACT.

Geez, why does absolutly everyone on earth see his, except americans?  What is your obsession with guns?

[Toad]

 

Originally posted by Igloo:
Do you know when the United States Constitution was signed?

Yes, I'm sure we all do.

Do you know the procedure for amending it?

Rule of law....go figure why anyone would want that.

 

[Dowding]

Jigster - I really don't think you can call the British government unstable; we've had pretty much the same form of goverment since 1660, when the monarchy was reinstated after the failure of Cromwell's Commonwealth.

We have never been invaded or conquered since 1066; no populist revolution has taken place on these shores.

We have never had a written constitution, and we do not have one today. Yet there is no rioting in the streets or anarchy. Would you call our government illegitimate then, by your definition?

 

...or that hasn't removed, changed, or destroyed major parts (sweeping changes) without the consent of the governed.

This describes Britains government quite well also. It's true that people in our colonies did not get a vote or have representation in parliament; I'm not mud-slinging here, but wasn't that true for your black population until this century? Also, what about your civil war, when the government went against the wishes of a large proportion of its population (I'm sure I don't need to remind you  )?

I'm not trying to start a war on this, Britain vs US, just pointing out some inaccuracies in your post.