Gun Ownership : Gun Control Around the World: A Primer

Discussion in 'Law Forum - Prisons - Gun Ownership' started by Liberty, May 23, 2016.

  1. Liberty

    Liberty going above and beyond PREMIUM MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2015
    Messages:
    5,891
    Likes Received:
    1,131
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +3,254
    Lessons from Canada to Japan

    [​IMG]

    The debate over gun control in the United States has waxed and waned over the years, stirred by a series of mass killings by gunmen in civilian settings. In particular, the killing of 20 schoolchildren in Newtown, Connecticut, in December 2012 fueled a national discussion over gun laws and calls by the Obama administration to limit the availability of military-style weapons. However, compromise legislation that would have banned
    semiautomatic assault weapons and expanded background checks was defeated in the Senate in 2013, despite extensive public support.

    Gun-control advocates sought to rekindle the debate following another string of deadly mass shootings in 2015, including the killing of nine people at a church in Charleston, South Carolina, and 14 at a community center in San Bernardino, California. These advocates often highlight the stricter gun laws and lower incidence of gun violence in several other democracies, like Japan and Australia, but many others say this correlation proves little and note that rates of gun crime in the United States have plunged over the last two decades.

    In January 2016, President Obama took a series of executive actions intended to curb gun violence, including measures to expand federal background checks to most gun buyers.

    Read more

    http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2016/01/worldwide-gun-control-policy/423711/
     
    • Inhospitable Inhospitable x 1
    • List
  2. Liberty

    Liberty going above and beyond PREMIUM MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2015
    Messages:
    5,891
    Likes Received:
    1,131
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +3,254
    UBNaturally

    Ok, let's examine this one. I know the NRA, hate groups and survivalists, are stuck on their 2nd Amendment rights. But, it seems clear to me that all the violence in the USA would come to a halt if we did as the England did and outlawed firearms. Even the police don't carry firearms there.

    Black on Black crime would decrease dramatically. People talk about gun control over automatic weapons, etc. Controlling who can and can't buy firearms.... But, why can't we overturn the 2nd Amendment and have a gun-free society? Is it impossible, or just highly unlikely because our citizens love their guns?
     
  3. Sluggo

    Sluggo New Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    May 31, 2016
    Messages:
    1
    Likes Received:
    1
    Gender:
    Male
    Ratings:
    +1
    If guns can't be banned because of the Constitution we can ban ammo. Why isn't ammo banned?
     
  4. WARRIOR

    WARRIOR BAMN - By Any Means Necessary PREMIUM MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Apr 28, 2009
    Messages:
    850
    Likes Received:
    276
    Gender:
    Male
    Occupation:
    RETIRED
    Location:
    STRONG ISLAND , NY
    Ratings:
    +299
    OVER 400 OF UNARMED BLACK PPL.....KILLED....IN 2014...BY THE POLICE
    OVER 750 OF UNARMED BLACK PPL.....KILLED....IN 2015...BY THE POLICE

    THE GUN....AND A WILL TO DIE....IS HOW THE EUROPEANS TOOK OVER THIS COUNTRY......

    NO WAY IN HELL ARE THEY GONNA DISARM THEMSELVES.....NO MATTER WHAT GUN LAW IS PASSED....THERES AT LEAST A MILLION OF GEORGE ZIMMERMANS OUT THERE......READY TO SHOOT...

    THE ELITES CAN STEER OBAMA IN ANY DIRECTION THEY WANT .....FOR ALL KINDS OF FACE VALUE.....BUT THEY WILL MOST DEFINITELY MAKE IT POSSIBLE FOR WHITE MEN TO OBTAIN GUNS.....KEEP THEM.....CARRY THEM.....AND USE THEM....

    ITS ONLY SAD THAT NOT ENOUGH BROTHAS....WANNA INVEST IN GUNS....MERELY FOR PROTECTION FROM OPEN SEASON.......BECAUSE ITS JUST PLAIN BACKWARDS , TO BE OK WITH BEING A POTENTIAL VICTIM , ONLY TO END UP EITHER ACQUIESCING , OR BEING A STATISTIC.....INSTEAD TAKING NOTES FROM THE DEACONS FOR DEFENSE....

    BLACK ON BLACK CRIME ??? ---> HASNT IT DECREASED STEADILY OVER THE LAST 12 YEARS ??

    HASNT THE RATE OF YOUNG BLACK MEN IN COLLEGE RISEN CONSISTENTLY EVERY YEAR SINCE 2003 ??...ISNT THIS THE MAIN REASON WHY BLACK MEN UNDER 35 ARE THE HIGHEST NUMBER KILLED FROM 2014 - 2015 ?

    WE ARE DEALING WITH TWO MINDSETS OF WHITE FOLKS IN AMERIKKKA.....

    ONE THAT COLLECTIVELY PLANS OUT OUR OPPRESSION WITH HIS PEERS....
    AND ONE THAT IS JUST PLAIN STUPID....ONLY SMART ENOUGH TO ENSURE RACIAL AGGRESSION IN EVERY WAY IMAGINABLE.....LIKE HES INSTRUCTED TO DO...

    BECAUSE SOCIALLY......WE ARE DEALING WITH THE OFFSPRING OF THE POOR , THE VERY FILTHY , AND THE INCARCERATED CRIMINALS , FROM EUROPE.....

    REMEMBER....AFTER OUR PPL WERE DONE BUILDING AMERIKKKA , EUROPE DECIDED TO GATHER 60% OF THEIR POOR , ALONG WITH ALL OF THEIR TRASH IN THEIR JAILS.....SHIP THEM HERE , AND PLACED THEM IN CHARGE OF US.....

    WHY ??

    BECAUSE WE KNEW ALL OF THE TRADES.....WE OUTNUMBERED THE ELITES , AND WE WERE IN A POSITION TO ECONOMICALLY TAKE OVER THIS COUNTRY......SO THEY HAD TO CALL FOR REINFORCEMENTS....

    IN MY OPINION....THIS TOPIC IS A CASE OF --> " if i can sell you a problem , then you HAVE to purchase my solution "
     
    • True True x 2
    • Respectful Respectful x 1
    • List
  5. MS234

    MS234 Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2010
    Messages:
    4,063
    Likes Received:
    3,380
    Gender:
    Male
    Ratings:
    +3,901
    The problem is not gun control, it's mind control
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  6. crwn

    crwn Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Jan 22, 2011
    Messages:
    914
    Likes Received:
    295
    Ratings:
    +458
    How Gun Control Made England The 'Most Violent Country In Europe'
     
  7. UBNaturally

    UBNaturally Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2014
    Messages:
    6,497
    Likes Received:
    1,017
    Gender:
    Male
    Ratings:
    +1,736

    This is more complicated than one response will suffice.

    Based on constitutional design, and liberties of the people within the lands that are governed by it, it presents an opposing argument that people have the natural right to defend themselves.

    If there was an all out ban on projectile weaponry within one nation, this would create a security issue unless there was a unanimous treaty with every nation, to do so as well.

    This is one of the major reasons other countries consider the need for nuclear ballistic programs, to counter any attempted aggression by foreign elements to remove the sovereignty of said countries.

    The issue is not the weapon itself, but the premise into which the weapon is perceived to be created for.
    When someone uses them as an offensive tool, it goes against the nature implied within constitutional ordinances (aside for war treaties).

    Before we start to look at stats that compare and contrast "pro-gun" states and gun violence beside "anti-gun" states and gun violence, the one thing we cannot look past is the term "society".

    See EU Army (would go into this further here, but would override the thread).

    The idea that civilians would have highly limited or completely restricted access to defensive arms, while the military allegiance can (shooting unarmed civilians), imposes a conflict with the safeguard again any type of slow tyrannical buildup.

    I really don't get into this discussion much, because the creation of the projectile weapon was for the use against a larger predator or enemy.

    I've always seen anyone that uses a projectile weapon in an offensive and aggressive manor as a weak coward... like throwing a shoe at a spider, instead of stepping on it.

    So what goes on with so called "black on black" gun violence, has to do more with cowards and fearful young people, than it has to do with guns or gun control.

    See Zulu Conquest

    A true warrior isn't violent (emotional) because of what someone says to them (put some respek on my name), they are violent because they are trying to survive an offensive onslaught by an enemy.

    Can you imagine going to war because someone said "your shoes are dirty"?
    "Black on Black" conflicts are mental illness wars that are funded by (gun trade markets) the same ones trying to push for "gun control".

    The "War on Drugs" was manufactured by some in the same factions of those that were helping to bring the narcotics in from Columbia and Afghanistan.

    Profiting from both the "illness/chaos" and the "cure/calm".
    upload_2016-6-1_14-28-35.png

    When some say "the system is rigged", it's talking about the system of geopolitics.
    The strategy is deep and wide, and as stated at the beginning, it cannot be expressed fully in one post, and probably not in one thread.


    Respect
     
    • Like Like x 1
    • Agree Agree x 1
    • List
  8. Liberty

    Liberty going above and beyond PREMIUM MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2015
    Messages:
    5,891
    Likes Received:
    1,131
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +3,254
    But, the constitution only protects the rights of "militias" to own and bear guns, not individuals.
     
  9. Liberty

    Liberty going above and beyond PREMIUM MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Aug 28, 2015
    Messages:
    5,891
    Likes Received:
    1,131
    Gender:
    Female
    Ratings:
    +3,254
  10. UBNaturally

    UBNaturally Well-Known Member MEMBER

    Country:
    United States
    Joined:
    Jan 15, 2014
    Messages:
    6,497
    Likes Received:
    1,017
    Gender:
    Male
    Ratings:
    +1,736
    Militia would constitute any male civilian that could hold or shoot a projectile weapon, that was not part of any organized federation (Federal Army).

    This could be considered a "state army" (State Trooper) or "city army" (Sheriffs or Patrol).
    That's for the "militia" in the context of "groups" then and now.

    What is a militia really though, without "grouping"?
    http://cap-n-ball.com/fathers.htm

    So when one reads the writings as:

    “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed.”

    This is much of the debate between what the intent behind this was.
    What constituted a "militia", and does this only apply to those joining them?

    If this is the case, then all guns possessed by all civilians not part of City, State, or Federal governments can be confiscated without any conflict against the 2nd amendment.

    Look at the text again... "being necessary to the security of a free State".

    This language is more about defending against those that would try to conquer an area (State) by force, to protect against potential Federal intimidation. Basically a backup coup if need be if the Federation (elite rulers) decided to turn against the civilian population.

    People probably don't see it, but the Federation is merging with "State" governments when it comes to these "regulated militias".

    upload_2016-6-1_15-49-57.png

    Is this a small Federal Army or a well organized State Militia?
     
Loading...

Users found this page by searching for:

  1. Gun Control Around The World A Primer