It's the Guns, Stupid

It's the Guns, Stupid

There are 103292 comments on the Truthdig story from Apr 20, 2007, titled It's the Guns, Stupid. In it, Truthdig reports that:

“And that's the end of the issue”

Why do we have the same futile argument every time there is a mass killing? Advocates of gun control try to open a discussion about whether more reasonable weapons statutes might reduce the number of violent ... via Truthdig

Join the discussion below, or Read more at Truthdig.

GunShow1

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#107318 May 11, 2013
spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
s
“The best definition of citizen, according to European writers, which I have been able to find, is a "native or inhabitant of a city vested with its freedom and liberties." The "freedom and liberties," or "privileges and immunities," essential to a citizen, were those I have mentioned; and although the name was original confined to the inhabitant of a city, yet when these principles were diffused among, and conferred on, the inhabitants of the country, they, having the same attributes, took the name. The rights of an American citizen are essentially the same: to elect, be elected, and bear arms in his defence; they are essential, for, divest him of these, and you divest him of his citizenship. He has other essential rights, those of property and personal security under the protection of laws fairly administered; but he has these in common with foreigners, and in some respects with slaves."

- Senator John Holmes, of Maine, Dec. 9, 1820.[Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856. FROM GALES AND BEATON'S ANNALS OF CONGRESS, FROM THEIR REGISTER OF DEBATES; AND FROM THE OFFICIAL REPORTED DEBATES, BY JOHN C RIVES. Pg. 681.(John Holmes (March 14, 1773 – July 7, 1843) was an American politician. He served as a U.S. Representative from Massachusetts and was one of the first two U.S. Senators from Maine).
FormerParatroope r

Kansas City, MO

#107319 May 11, 2013
Ahomana wrote:
<quoted text>
You make up the many that have allowed America to become a cesspool of death and murder by not caring enough for those injured or dead in death by gun...you have become like all those who live in a war zone...desensitized to the horror and death of even the children, where nothing shocks you...where when a massacre occurs on the level of Sandy Hook...you don't say let's stop this from happening again...you and all you gun loving buddies start whinging ..well now the government will try and take our guns you wait and see...see, no you don'[email protected] have become desensitised to the death of your babies and those who lead the war are the NRA and those like them who are being aided by you to ignore the voices of the victims...over 30.000.000 every single year...you are running a death lottery...good luck and good riddance.
Of course. I who demands personal responsibility for your actions, better mental health programs, prosecution of criminals, I see how I am at fault when others fail. Am I responsive le for your lack if intelligence as well?
BTW. I do not belong to the NRA.

GunShow1

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#107320 May 11, 2013
spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
Y.....as
"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 ask the committee to pause for a moment and to reflect on the character of these prohibitions. What must have been the jealousy of those who deemed it necessary to guard against the abuse of power, by such restrictions, on a Government of limited, defined, and delegated authority? Under what pretence could Congress dare to interfere with affairs of religion--with the freedom of speech or of the press? Under what state of things could it be presumed to be necessary for the sovereign people of the United States to retain to themselves the poor privilege of assembling peaceably to petition, not their sovereign lords and masters, but their public servants and agents, for a redress of grievances? To what daring usurpations must they have looked, when it was deemed necessary to secure freemen the privilege of keeping and bearing arms? But, sir, constitutional securities against the abuse of power, of delegated and limited power, seem to be but beautiful and splendid illusions."

- U.S. Rep. James Johnson, of Virginia, Feb. 10, 1820,[Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856. FROM GALES AND BEATON'S ANNALS OF CONGRESS, FROM THEIR REGISTER OF DEBATES; AND FROM THE OFFICIAL REPORTED DEBATES, BY JOHN C RIVES. Pgs. 545-46]

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#107321 May 11, 2013
Sir Bucking Fastard wrote:
<quoted text>
The cops in LA ARE the organised criminals, not to mention that they are racist in the extreme.
Correction for those that can't extrapolate...the Mafia...which is now nearly almost non existent in LA...thanks to the cops relentless monitoring of their gang members and activities, a number of rival deaths, imprisonment and informants etc, they lost their strangle hold on LA...

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#107322 May 11, 2013
FormerParatrooper wrote:
<quoted text>
Of course. I who demands personal responsibility for your actions, better mental health programs, prosecution of criminals, I see how I am at fault when others fail. Am I responsive le for your lack if intelligence as well?
BTW. I do not belong to the NRA.
That would be your lack of intelligence for opposing a law simply through the fear of losing your gun rights when you fail to realise they are not at risk, but your ignorance like many is stifling progress and makes you look staid, stale and backwood...when most other civilised countries are moving to use guns strictly for sport and hunting. It is like how a lot of third world countries appear on womens rights...and god know you have some areas to work on, even there.

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#107323 May 11, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
“The best definition of citizen, according to European writers, which I have been able to find, is a "native or inhabitant of a city vested with its freedom and liberties." The "freedom and liberties," or "privileges and immunities," essential to a citizen, were those I have mentioned; and although the name was original confined to the inhabitant of a city, yet when these principles were diffused among, and conferred on, the inhabitants of the country, they, having the same attributes, took the name. The rights of an American citizen are essentially the same: to elect, be elected, and bear arms in his defence; they are essential, for, divest him of these, and you divest him of his citizenship. He has other essential rights, those of property and personal security under the protection of laws fairly administered; but he has these in common with foreigners, and in some respects with slaves."
- Senator John Holmes, of Maine, Dec. 9, 1820.[Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856. FROM GALES AND BEATON'S ANNALS OF CONGRESS, FROM THEIR REGISTER OF DEBATES; AND FROM THE OFFICIAL REPORTED DEBATES, BY JOHN C RIVES. Pg. 681.(John Holmes (March 14, 1773 – July 7, 1843) was an American politician. He served as a U.S. Representative from Massachusetts and was one of the first two U.S. Senators from Maine).
No! it is the best version that fits with your belief system of what a citizen is...I am sure there are many countries that disagree with your idea of what freedom and immunity are, they would need to know that freedom means that someone like Assange has the right to his freedoms...you NO...so therefore I don't believe you would know what freedom was if it jumped up and bit you on the arse...Assange who has committed NO crime in the US yet you would hand him for his right to open media reporting...even to the point of getting top military heads together to invent a crime to charge him with....like I said, back wood and ignorant.

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#107324 May 11, 2013
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>
Monash University shooting
The Monash University shooting refers to a shooting in which a student shot his classmates and teacher, killing two and injuring five. It took place at Monash University in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia on 21 October 2002. The gunman, Huan Yun Xiang, was acquitted of crimes related to the shootings due to mental impairment, and is currently under psychiatric care. Several of the people present in the room of the shootings have been commended for their bravery in tackling Xiang and ending the shooting.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monash_Universit...
Yeah it is not like that is held up as the poster child since the end of gun control in Aus by just about every gun owning dick on this thread...it is illogical to use this, because it is not to say we don't have shootings, we still have guns...we don't have a gun ban so that is the perfect reason there should be one!...It is not a massacre people, the crime sydicates have killed and injured more innocents in there gang related crimes here...there have been no massacres since gun control was introduced this is classed as a gun shooting not a massacre!!!
GoGoBar

Thailand

#107325 May 11, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
"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 ask the committee to pause for a moment and to reflect on the character of these prohibitions. What must have been the jealousy of those who deemed it necessary to guard against the abuse of power, by such restrictions, on a Government of limited, defined, and delegated authority? Under what pretence could Congress dare to interfere with affairs of religion--with the freedom of speech or of the press? Under what state of things could it be presumed to be necessary for the sovereign people of the United States to retain to themselves the poor privilege of assembling peaceably to petition, not their sovereign lords and masters, but their public servants and agents, for a redress of grievances? To what daring usurpations must they have looked, when it was deemed necessary to secure freemen the privilege of keeping and bearing arms? But, sir, constitutional securities against the abuse of power, of delegated and limited power, seem to be but beautiful and splendid illusions."
- U.S. Rep. James Johnson, of Virginia, Feb. 10, 1820,[Abridgment of the Debates of Congress, from 1789 to 1856. FROM GALES AND BEATON'S ANNALS OF CONGRESS, FROM THEIR REGISTER OF DEBATES; AND FROM THE OFFICIAL REPORTED DEBATES, BY JOHN C RIVES. Pgs. 545-46]
In the councils of government, we
must guard against the acquisi
tion of unwarranted influence,
whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous
rise of misplaced power ex
ists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combinati
on endanger our liberties or democratic processes.
We should take nothing for granted. Only an al
ert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the
proper meshing of the huge industrial and milita
ry machinery of defense with our peaceful
methods and goals, so that security
and liberty may prosper together

Another factor in maintaining balance involves th
e element of time. As we peer into society’s
future, we--you and I, and our government-mus
t avoid the impulse to live only for today,
plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the
precious resources of
tomorrow. We cannot
mortgage the material assets of our grandchildre
n without risking the loss
also of their political
and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to surv
ive for all generations to come, not to become
the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.

Dwight-President

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#107326 May 11, 2013
Teaman wrote:
<quoted text>
I don't think so. The Italian Mafia might be gone but replaced by Russian or other eastern block crime syndicates.
http://www.fbi.gov/losangeles/press-releases/...
I'm not sure if the Chinese Triads are still around.
The black gangs, Crips and Bloods, were big there. I'm not sure if they are as big as they once were.
Then there are bikers like the Hell's Angles. You don't hear much about them lately though.
I suppose LA was taken over by Mexican gangs.
There's always another Mr. Big to take the place of the previous one.:-)


Yes but they managed to get rid of the Mafia, it took them four decades but it took that long to find an honest cop...if they could do that then they can get rid of the others...if they have a want to...they proved it. Just saying all things are possible.

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#107327 May 11, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
Monash University shooting
Oct 2002
PS....that is not a mass shooting.

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#107328 May 11, 2013
Armed Veteran wrote:
<quoted text>
It wasn't a double shooting. 2 were killed, 5 were injured.
Four people or more SHOT DEAD is what is regarded by America and Australia...before it is labelled as a mass shooting you ignorant PROPAGANDARIST...get educated...in Aussie lingo that means go and get f#cked.

GunShow1

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#107329 May 11, 2013
spocko wrote:
<quoted text>
Yias
Hey, democtat party HYPOCRITES.

Care to explain THIS?

BUCHANAN AND BRECKINRIDGE

THE DEMOCRATIC HAND-BOOK,

COMPILED BY

MICH. W. CLUSKEY,

OF

WASHINGTON CITY, D.C.

RECOMMENDED BY THE

DEMOCRATIC MATIONAL COMMITTEE.

The success of the Democracy essential for the preservation of the Union and the protection of the integrity of the Constitution

WASHINGTON:

PRINTED BY R.A. WATERS
1856

Mr. COLFAX. What is the date of that?

Mr. STEPHENS. Last November. Now ....

"... I will not go to the gentleman's State, or to any other gentleman's State, to find laws that I do not approve. We have plenty of them in my own State. And the gentleman ought to feel highly blessed if he has none in Indiana that he disapproves. We have a great many in Georgia I do not approve. There is one in particular which I fought in the legislature and opposed before the courts with all the power that I had. It was a law making it penal to bear concealed deadly weapons. I am individually opposed to bearing such weapons. I never bear weapons of any sort; but I believed that it was the constitutional right of every American citizen to bear arms if he chooses, and just such arms, and in just such way, as he chooses. I thought that it was the birthright of every Georgian to do it. I was defeated in our legislature. I was defeated before our courts. The question went up to the highest judicial tribunal in our State, the Supreme Court*, which sustained the law..." [*Nunn v. State, 1 Ga.(1 Kel.) 243 (1846).]

[Hon. Alexander H. Stephens, June 28, 1856, U.S. House of Representatives.(Mr. Stephens served as a U.S. Representative from Georgia,(before and after the Civil War). He was also Vice President of the Confederate States of America, and the 50th Governor of Georgia from 1882 until his death in 1883).]

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#107330 May 11, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
Not quite, troll. The major population centers, which are also the highest crime centers. Have all been severely limited on bearing arms. Those numbers would be drastically reduced if all states had Constitutional carry. And THAT is a FACT.
No they would be severely limited with gun control...problem is a few states with it does not stop the many without running havoc in their cities by bring their guns across state lines....for that you would have to build a wall around the city and stop all flying aircraft, or make everyone subject to gun control.

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#107331 May 11, 2013
Anonymous of Indy wrote:
<quoted text>We already do have gun regulations in place it the BS the Federal Government is and has been involved with that no one knows about just look at what happened in Tucson and Phoenix where the US Federal Government purposely allowed licensed firearms dealers to sell weapons to illegal straw buyers so what is more Regulation going to do when the US Federal Government is involved in BS like this and putting the public safety at risk besides at the same time creating a gun crisis for political purpose.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/ATF_gunwalking_s...
The Gun Show "Loophole:" More Gun Control Disguised as Crime Control
Federal law requires that any person "engaged in the business" of selling firearms possess a valid Federal Firearms License. This is true whether one is selling guns for a living at a gun store or at a gun show. Licensed dealers must conduct an NICS check prior to the transfer of any firearm - regardless of where that transfer occurs. The majority of sellers at gun shows are licensed dealers and do conduct checks.
http://www.ncpa.org/pub/ba349
The majority I take it doesn't mean all...and you only need one with the right contacts.

Since: Dec 10

Perth, Australia

#107332 May 11, 2013
GunShow1 wrote:
<quoted text>
The fact is, the federal government should have never been involved with our right to arms in the first place. As they are EXPRESSLY FORBIDDEN from doing ANY such thing. We didn't have a problem before the 1968 'gun control' law.(Except for that ex-military sniper in Texas).
In EVERY area in the U.S. where 'gun control' is [perversely] implemented. The crime rates ALWAYS rise. ANY and ALL 'gun control' is UNCONSTITUTIONAL PERIOD.
You didn't have a problem because you were never told NO before...like all control freaks they have a problem with understanding what NO means...like NO! you have too many guns, NO! they need to be restricted because too many people are dying and NO, you don't need so many fast firing assault weapons in one home....NO! it doesn't interfere with your right to bear arms.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#107334 May 11, 2013
Ahomana wrote:
<quoted text>
The majority I take it doesn't mean all...and you only need one with the right contacts.
Right & Documents obtained by CBS News show that the Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives (ATF) discussed using their covert operation "Fast and Furious" to argue for controversial new rules about gun sales.

http://www.cbsnews.com/8301-31727_162-5733854...

ATF "Gunwalking" scandal timeline

http://www.cbsnews.com/2300-31727_162-1000969...

GunShow1

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#107335 May 11, 2013
Ahomana wrote:
<quoted text>
No they would be severely limited with gun control...problem is a few states with it does not stop the many without running havoc in their cities by bring their guns across state lines....for that you would have to build a wall around the city and stop all flying aircraft, or make everyone subject to gun control.
Get put your head back in the toilet.

GunShow1

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#107336 May 11, 2013
^Go put your head back in the toilet.^

GunShow1

“Shall NOT be infringed!”

Since: Apr 13

San Jose, CA.

#107337 May 11, 2013
Ahomana wrote:
<quoted text>
You didn't have a problem because you were never told NO before...like all control freaks they have a problem with understanding what NO means...like NO! you have too many guns, NO! they need to be restricted because too many people are dying and NO, you don't need so many fast firing assault weapons in one home....NO! it doesn't interfere with your right to bear arms.
Not quite, troll:

"The Right of the People to Keep and Bear Arms shall NOT be infringed".

My perverse government is the one that doesn't understand no, or "NOT" as the case is.
Teaman

Abingdon, VA

#107338 May 11, 2013
GoGoBar wrote:
<quoted text>
In the councils of government, we
must guard against the acquisi
tion of unwarranted influence,
whether sought or unsought, by the military-industrial complex. The potential for the disastrous
rise of misplaced power ex
ists and will persist.
We must never let the weight of this combinati
on endanger our liberties or democratic processes.
We should take nothing for granted. Only an al
ert and knowledgeable citizenry can compel the
proper meshing of the huge industrial and milita
ry machinery of defense with our peaceful
methods and goals, so that security
and liberty may prosper together
Another factor in maintaining balance involves th
e element of time. As we peer into society’s
future, we--you and I, and our government-mus
t avoid the impulse to live only for today,
plundering, for our own ease and convenience, the
precious resources of
tomorrow. We cannot
mortgage the material assets of our grandchildre
n without risking the loss
also of their political
and spiritual heritage. We want democracy to surv
ive for all generations to come, not to become
the insolvent phantom of tomorrow.
Dwight-President
Eisenhower sounds like one of those radical tea partiers. You essentially said the same thing as Gun Show. Surely you're not comparing an armed citizenry with the military industrial complex.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Guns Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Obey the police, who are almost always right; M... Nov 21 youll shoot your ... 1
News Paxton's acceptance of shootings is unacceptable Nov 18 youll shoot your ... 1
Texas mass shooting Nov 11 Canlendyou 13
News Massachusetts 1st to ban bump stocks since Vega... Nov 11 Watchdog 3
News Existing laws should have stopped shooter Nov 10 payme 1
News Texas Attorney General: The way to stop mass sh... Nov 9 Brenda Lasley 16
30-06 (7.62X63) vs .308 (7.62X51) (Feb '11) Nov 7 Charlie 122
More from around the web