Isn't it about time the USA got rid of their gun mentality? Corrected; If they have one...

491 posts / 0 new
Last post
Jonathan Kay
Jonathan Kay's picture
Online
Last seen: 2 min 20 sec ago
Joined: 17/04/2014

Interesting to read the Effects section of the Wiki document.

Yes.

As noted in this thread mass shootings with "assault rifles" cause a small fraction of deaths by shooting. And it's going to need a wide variety of those incremental improvements, some focussed on specific types of weapon and specific types of use, and others more broad brush.

Jonathan

DougBaker
DougBaker's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 41 min ago
Joined: 17/04/2014

People with mental health problems or people with nasty political beliefs?

I think you might need a venn diagram for this one there is already a wikipedia entry.

Brightonuk
Brightonuk's picture
Offline
Last seen: 1 day 8 hours ago
Joined: 03/05/2018

Bollocks to the constitutional arguments.

People are dying here, wave your constitutional arguments in the face of people who lost loved ones 

I am so fricking pissed off with these A'holes and there "Party before County" attitude and we cant piss off the NRA cause....WHAT? you might upset the Orange Ball Sack you will lose all that blood money. 

What don't they see 70% +/- of people here want some sort of gun control.

New Zealand's parliament voted almost unanimously to ban military-style semi-automatic weapons days after their (only) massacre. 

May be cause of Twats like this:

https://www.thomhartmann.com/bigpicture/nra-god-given-right-own-weapon 

 

Life Can Be Crule

Blokko
Blokko's picture
Online
Last seen: 31 sec ago
Joined: 17/04/2014

Interesting back story about the fact that the Dayton Shooter's gun is classed as a pistol rather than a rifle.  Just goes to show how difficult the legislation behind restriction can be.

Steve.
Proud poster of mindless drivel on BlatChat since 2006.  

Jonathan Kay
Jonathan Kay's picture
Online
Last seen: 2 min 20 sec ago
Joined: 17/04/2014
Tony Whitley
Tony Whitley's picture
Offline
Last seen: 4 hours 52 min ago
Joined: 17/04/2014

I hesitate to bring logic into a discussion of US arms control but if the Dayton shooter can wound over 20 people in 30 seconds, what is the point of arming teachers / having armed police in schools / all the other "solutions" offered ad nauseam?  By the time of any response it's too late - unless they are going to have someone in every room carrying a gun at all times (though there are obvious attractions in that idea to the NRA / gun manufacturers...)

  Freestyle Caterham #1
john aston
john aston's picture
Offline
Last seen: 7 hours 54 min ago
Joined: 17/04/2014

Second amendment reads ' 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. ' 

I always took the second comma to be conjunctive and not disjunctive , explanatory of how the militia would operate, rather than bestowing a universal right.

 

But legalese apart, it was written in 1791 when a state of the art weapon assault was a musket . Even repeat action rifles were 50 years in the future . Time for an amendment to the amendment.

When in Tennessee a few years ago I was amazed not to be able to buy a bottle of Scotch  except from the State Liquor store (which was shut ) but buying a gun ? Easy - not that I did ..

Jonathan Kay
Jonathan Kay's picture
Online
Last seen: 2 min 20 sec ago
Joined: 17/04/2014

My interpretation of the Second Amendment is the same, and we're very lucky to have so much contemporaneous discussion and so many preceding drafts.

Time for an amendment to the amendment.

But this would be as much of a disaster as trying for blanket bans without amendment. There is no way of achieving either without highly polarised politics, and the current and near-future composition of the Supreme Court isn't favourable.

And not succeeding wouldn't only fail, it would entrench opposition and even recruit constructionists who don't care much about guns but do care about their view of the Constitution.

Incremental improvements, both local and national, are much more achievable. And that's the first requirement in harm reduction. 

There are incremental improvements that would reduce the harm from mass shootings. But that's not where most of the harm occurs, and relentlessly publicising the avoidable harm to children and in suicides would also be productive. Removing the ban on Federal funding for research would help and is probably achievable. Although philanthropists could also do a lot of good.

The connection of gun carriage and use in criminal activity to the ridiculous laws on personal drug consumption is also a great opportunity for harm reduction.

As we've seen with the recent right-wing successes in both the USA and the UK moving the point of argument can be extremely effective.

Jonathan

Wrightpayne
Wrightpayne's picture
Offline
Last seen: 6 hours 23 min ago
Joined: 17/04/2014

One of the highlights, for me, of our USA holiday was being asked for ID to buy alcohol, at the age of 52!!

Derek Batty
Derek Batty's picture
Offline
Last seen: 3 hours 14 min ago
Joined: 17/04/2014

There must also be an upper age limit ??

derek