I want to be clear that I am not against the use of firearms in USA. I don't think the doctrine/culture can ever be changed now... it's who you are... rooting tooting Americans.
lol are you against them or not? I'd rather you say you are than say you are fine with it, only because you "expect this sort of beahvior from such awful Americans."
I wouldn't have thought it in me to thump someone but no, you're right, I'm pretty certain I could not have pulled a trigger on him Elubas... as much as I disliked him.
Elubis, I think the gun debate will rage forever and I'm not in a position to judge it; having never lived in a country such as yours where to own a gun is the 'norm'. I personally am happy living in a country with strict gun control. I do believe your constitution is misinterpreted with regard to 'right to bear arms' and this needs to be brought up to date and written in such a way that misinterpretation and misunderstanding of it cannot be used as a defence to kill/own a gun.
If I owned a gun to protect my property it would ironically be one of the few things I own worth stealing.
Elubis, I think the gun debate will rage forever and I'm not in a position to judge it; having never lived in a country such as yours where to own a gun is the 'norm'. I personally am happy living in a country with strict gun control. I do believe your constitution is misinterpreted with regard to 'right to bear arms' and this needs to be brought up to date and written in such a way that misinterpretation and misunderstanding of it cannot be used as a defence to kill/own a gun.
Those this is running far afield of the original intention of the topic, the contemporary statement of the Founding Generation in the USA are quite clear that ownership of adequate arms was an individual right, not to be infringed by government.
"I do believe your constitution is misinterpreted with regard to 'right to bear arms' and this needs to be brought up to date and written in such a way that misinterpretation and misunderstanding of it cannot be used as a defence to kill/own a gun."
I'm fine with your opinion, although I'm a bit confused as to how many ways there are to interpret "right to bear arms." Do you mean to suggest it was only meant for people in the army or something? :)
If I owned a gun to protect my property it would ironically be one of the few things I own worth stealing.
Of course the invader can find the gun to use against you (unlikely), but the risk of that is probably not as bad as the alternative of having to rely on your own fighting skills against a person who probably at least has a knife.
Still, if guns make society more violent in general, that's a problem of course.
"I do believe your constitution is misinterpreted with regard to 'right to bear arms' and this needs to be brought up to date and written in such a way that misinterpretation and misunderstanding of it cannot be used as a defence to kill/own a gun."
I'm fine with your opinion, although I'm a bit confused as to how many ways there are to interpret "right to bear arms." Do you mean to suggest it was only meant for people in the army or something? :)
This is rich.
Maybe she thought it was only intended to apply to hunting or something, but anyway, wikipedia would not agree:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_keep_and_bear_arms
First paragraph.
Maybe she thought it was only intended to apply to hunting or something, but anyway, wikipedia would not agree:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_keep_and_bear_arms
First paragraph.
She's just being a typical foreigner snob liberal who thinks she's some kind of legal scholar regarding the constitution of the United States.
"The laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes." - Thomas Jefferson
"The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able may have a gun." – from debates during the Constitutional convention (later quoted with approval by George Washington), as quoted in Elliot’s Debates, 1836 - Patrick Henry
"... whereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them." – Constitutional Debates of the Massachusetts Convention of 1788 - Samuel Adams
"Little more can reasonably be aimed at with respect to the people at large than to have them properly armed and equipped." – Federalist # 29 - Alexander Hamilton
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote." - Benjamin Franklin
"Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed, as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword, because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States" - Noah Webster
In many ways I feel more at home in Europe than the USA, but their paranoia about firearms is something I cannot relate to. Sure more people get blown away for no reason in the USA but who really cares? It's just the way it is round these parts, brah.
"The right to move out of your home without getting consent from town council"??? Where the hell does THAT come from.? Are we talking about some kid in his parents's basement??
After some research, I can find no source about the part "town council", (except Hugo's Les Misérables, not exactly a reliable thing) but there has been multiple periods in history where the authorities restricted travel possibilities even within the same country.
Serfdom is a blatant example but even "free men" have been subject to passport systems within the same country in Prussia, France, etc.
It has never been the case in the US, and it is no longer the case in any European country, as far as I know.
In "Of mice and men" there´s a reference to the main characters getting work permits when they arrive to a new city.
Maybe she thought it was only intended to apply to hunting or something, but anyway, wikipedia would not agree:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_keep_and_bear_arms
First paragraph.
She's just being a typical foreigner snob liberal who thinks she's some kind of legal scholar regarding the constitution of the United States.
Who is "she?"
To Jamie, mus et al ...You Americans are clearly more knowledgeable about your second amendment than I, as you are about most things. I just figured as it's taken about a couple of hundred years of debate and Supreme Court rulings about its meaning, that maybe it has slight misinterpretation problems but hey... what would I know... I'm merely a typical foreign snob liberal with no reading abilities when it comes to American constitution and no law degree so therefore have absolutely no rights to make such observations.
I suppose when you think about it... it WAS written in the flintlock days ... maybe you should now all be more up to date with your rights to bear 'arms' ... dash-it-all, you should really be thinking Exocet and grenade launchers these days... Now that could really be some death threat. (Purely for defence purposes of course). And Jamie, since you made a statement in your OP concerning death threats and did NOT make it into a clear topic but went onto discuss armed defence, how can you plead 'off topic' at mention of the 2nd amendment? Now talking about cheese! THAT's off topic! I loike a bit of Cheddar myself.
Elubis, I think the gun debate will rage forever and I'm not in a position to judge it; having never lived in a country such as yours where to own a gun is the 'norm'. I personally am happy living in a country with strict gun control. I do believe your constitution is misinterpreted with regard to 'right to bear arms' and this needs to be brought up to date and written in such a way that misinterpretation and misunderstanding of it cannot be used as a defence to kill/own a gun.
Those this is running far afield of the original intention of the topic, the contemporary statement of the Founding Generation in the USA are quite clear that ownership of adequate arms was an individual right, not to be infringed by government.
Quoting this, but, also referring to your last post.
You can remind everyone of what our founders wrote.
Fine, except, we live in a different world than 1780.
In many ways I feel more at home in Europe than the USA, but their paranoia about firearms is something I cannot relate to. Sure more people get blown away for no reason in the USA but who really cares? It's just the way it is round these parts, brah.
Written as the tool you are.
People living in bad neighborhoods can't afford to move. Furthermore, people worried about armed assailants invading their homes must stay vigilant and sober at home at all times. You can be armed to the teeth but if you're all droopy eyed and out of it on hashish, xanax, and fish tranquilizer, all those guns will serve you no use.
People that are known to keep large amounts of cash and/or drugs in their homes are targets of home invasion but not getting high at home is too much of a price to pay for home security.
True. Some cannot afford to move.
However, if the focus is worrying about a home invasion....
Get out.
Post 427: Babytiger, face it, on this point, you were simply wrong. The founding fathers couldn't have put it more literally that it is a right to have a gun for the purpose of defense. They definitely said and meant that.
Now, they may have not had good reason to think so, but that changes the subject. If you want to argue that go ahead, but then concede the previous point.
Although, reading those wise sounding quotes does remind me of the coolness of liberty. As irontiger said, one part of the debate is safeness, the other is how much is it worth to take away someone's freedom. We generally try to strike a balance between those two things.
"if I had a gun in my hand ... who knows‽"
You seriously think there is even a tenth of a percent chance you would shoot him? Surely you have more faith in yourself than that!