Gun "control" - to protect or disarm the citizens?

Post Reply New Topic

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the people's right to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed." The Preamble to the Bill of Rights, Amendment II, by the Congress of the United States march 4, 1789.

This sentence is the concentrate of America to me. The right to protect yourself, your property, freedom and life, with firearms, as an undisputable right, as a free man, not a privilege, that you have to ask Big Brother for as a cowardly subject.

The idea of this amendment to the Constution was (originally) that if the president ever became a tyrant, the people had the right to take their arms and kill him and his hirelings. This law was and is unique in the world. As far as I know, it is the only positive gun law on the planet still functioning, even if it would never be considered legitimate to kill the president these days.

In Europe we don't have this unique right in most countries. I'm not sure if one can legally by a gun in any country in Europe without a f*****g license. You could do it in Switzerland until about 2000, but not any more. In Sweden, you haven't been able to have a gun without a license since 1934. You need a so called hunting exam to get a license for a rifle in my country. To get a pistol, you first have to get a membership in a shooting club, which at first isn't very easy. If they accept you as a member, you will have to shoot with a 5.56 mm (cal .22) pistol for the first six months. If you are able to get the gold medal in shooting, which isn't easy, you will get the possibility to get a pistol caliber 7.65 mm (cal .32) or maybe, if you're lucky, a caliber 9 mm (cal .38 ). Then finally you can get a license and have the gun in your home. But you must stay an active member of the club or the license will be revoked. It must also be renewed every 5th year. You don't have the right to keep the gun in public other than between your home, the shooting club and the gun store.

The Swedish shooting associations' members are merely cowards. They accept as good as every encroachment from the authorities. They don't, for example, demand it being seen as a right to bear arms, "We mustn't protest to loud, or the government can take our licenses away."

The criminals, of course, can get any gun they want. They steal or smuggle them.

In my opinion, it is obvious that (negative) gun laws aren't made for protecting citizens from killing and hurting each other. They are made up so that citizens can't kill Big Brother and his hirelings. About a dozen of people are killed in crimes with guns in Sweden every year, legal or illegal ones. But over 300(!) Swedes commit suicide every year with their licensed guns! Almost one a day. Why don't they bother about that? And 500-600 Swedes are killed by cars every year, but no one demands it being by far as hard to get a driving license as a gun license. Why? Because you can't kill politicians with your car (mostly, anyway) and you cant shoot back at criminals with your car, so why would Big Brother bother about 600 people getting killed in the traffic each year?

I know that you have some "liberal" jerks trying to make the US gun laws as hard as those here in Europe and that they have partially succeeded in some states. Please, stop them, before every civilian on the planet is disarmed and helpless.

I would like your opinion on gun laws. My opinion is that they are made up to make citizens helpless subjects and obedient cowards.

How many gun deaths in the US? Compared to other countries?

And are any militias well-regulated (this is a serious question. I am curious)?

You may not need gun control per se, but I think you should go with what Chris Rock once said.

Get some bullet control. Make it so bullets cost an exorbitante amount.

Accidental gun deaths are lower than most, homicides are lower than most of latin america and africa.



The second half of the Second Amendment is to stablish the National Guard. So the answer to your question in yes.




Funny, but not realistic. I own 3 ammo presses along with bullet moulds. over half a million Americans load their own ammo.

Many people who shoot a lot do their own reloading it's not hard so I don't realy think that would work. As far as gun deaths go I'm sure it's more than any European contry but so are the traffic deaths,drug overdose deaths and many other things. Criminals will get guns no matter the laws agaist them they are criminals so laws mean little to them. If you take the legal right to have them away they would still have them anyway and turn many otherwise law abideing gun owners criminals as many would not part with them. I got an idea lets lock up people who commit gun crimes a long time making room for them by setting free the non violent drug offeneders an decriminalize drugs to take away the profit from the underground traffiing of them

I live in Australia, and we haven't had anything as major and as often as anything in the US. Why is this?

We have no steekeeng Second Amendment!

Sure, we have guns, and we have shooting deaths by homicide, accident, etc. But when you compare it to the US, who is on top? Hmm?

A gun is an extremely dangerous thing in the wrong hands. It gives too much power to those who do not know how to wield it (ie the power over life and death). I'm not saying that there aren't responsible gun owners, just that these are available to those who do not understand the value of a human life!

In addition, your poll choices are restricted as to what sort of gun controls are available.

The purpose of the 2nd admendment is to make sure that the American people are not
oppressed by our own government. Its not about self-defence, hunting, national defence,etc. Do people die each year at a higher rate than other places with fewwer
guns ,sure. Random violence kills tens of thousands a year. Evil out of control governments (nazi's, communist, etc) can kill that many in a single day and be home
in time for dinner.

I think no one will deny the US is the worlds only superpower and if it turned to the
darkside you would be in for a major a$$ kicking. So maybe we should keep the 2nd
amdmendment.

One, of course there are oppressive governments. But in those with governments that do not fall into that category (Western Europe, Australia in particular), do you see as many gun deaths?

Two, hasn't the US already gone over to the dark side? It's like Episode III Anakin, just on the verge....

No I was agreeing we have alot of gun death in the US and you can say its 90% due
to the available supply of guns. The guns in people hands is insurance that we want be
loaded on rail cars like people in Europe were(its that simple). Here in Texas gun ownership is two guns per person. Which means nearily everbody has one gun. I have two my mom has two or more. My dad has two or more.



No question the US trying to police the world is counterproductive.

Actually, more people getting killed by commiting suicide on percentage with legal guns in Sweden than get killed by crimes with guns in the US...

11000 people are killed by guns in the US every year. In percentage that would be about 225 Swedes, if as many Swedes as Americans had guns (in percentage) and were as "trigger happy". In 2002 332 Swedes blew their brains out with legal guns, but that doesn't seem to upset the authorities. They don't investigate the reasons why so many people commit suicide in this country (with guns or otherwise). Last year 480 Swedes died from car accidents, the lowest rate since 1945. About 600 killed by cars yearly is more common. That doesn't upset Big Brother either...Since I took my license 1989 people drive worse and worse, but that doesn't bother anyone. Just unlicensed guns are dangerous in Sweden and rest of Europe...

So, how would you defend yourself if an Aussie Hitler or Stalin came to power? With your bare hands? With words?

They're not on top in percentage, and another interesting thing is that the most gun liberal states are those with the lowest rates of gun crimes, while NYC, with gun laws almost like them in Sweden, have the highest. The criminals are often members of black and latino gangs, by the way (ooops, how politically incorrect. If this was a Swedish site, I would now be prosecuted...)

My car weighs 1,5 tons and can make 200 km/h (125 mph). If I just would kill as many people as possible on random, I would much easier do so by driving as fast as I could through a crowd of people than with a pistol. And you don't even need a license to buy a car. Think about that and figure why that is. If you can.

I wouldn't suggest more expensive ammunition, that's correct.

Awesome!

If this had been a European forum, the poll results would have been reversed. I feel ashamed that so many of my countrymen and other Europeans are either naïve suckers or obedient cowards.

Well, the fourth one is what is actually already the case in Europe, Australia etc. If you're not allowed to bear a one hand gun in public, even with a license, there really is no point to have a gun legally.

And I say to that first point, if the US President became a tyrant, would an armed citizenry be able to stand against his military? Think realistically! Were Abe Lincon or JFK tyrants? Yet they were overthrown by citizens who had guns.

I understand the car issue. But remember, an automobile has a purpose other than to wound and maim and kill. I think there are more imbeciles given licenses than there should be. I am aware (more than most people my age) that I am driving something potentially deadly. In fact, I might even make my own post on that matter. More people, again are probably killed by cars than guns, but how many car deaths are due to wanton malice, compared to gun deaths, hmmm? Even proportion wise.

The reason why the Second Amendment fails is that those who cannot understand how to use a gun, or rather, understand the consequences of this usage can still obtain them. I'm glad there's no Amendment for automobiles, like "every citizen has the right to an automobile, so that they may act like a total ####, kill people wantonly and profit the oil companies".

I consider myself a responsible automobile driver. However, a car, I say again, has a purpose other than to wound or kill. A gun is basically something that is designed to be lethal. Give me an M9 with tranq capabilities, like in the Metal Gear Solid games, and I'd readily have it, if my country had a Second Amendment style-law. But Australia doesn't, and I'm glad of it.

And by the way, what of terrorists, both foreign and home-grown (think McVeigh, the Unabomber, though they used explosives in lieu of guns), who think that George W is a tyrant (minor despot yes, unwanted, yes, but tyrant, I doubt it), and would therefore use the Second as their excuse to overthrow him, and kill him? Now, while I'd like to see Dubya kicked out, the silly bastard doesn't deserve to die. Censured and given hell for the Iraq and Patriot Act stuff, yes. But killed? Not really.

And I would still suggest more expensive ammo in any case.