It's the Guns, Stupid

It's the Guns, Stupid

There are 103299 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.

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#104614 Apr 14, 2013
DavidQ762 wrote:
<quoted text>
The Right to Keep and Bear Arms, for one.
Separation of church and state for another.

“I am an ALIEN!!!”

Since: Dec 06

KREUZBERG...

#104615 Apr 14, 2013
Antique weapontry SHOULDN'T lose such beautiful tool that was once used to feed a flock and shoot some too...

It's the ammo...and the fuel the feed these days what stuffs a revolver??????????

Hello are you sain...

According to ?????????? placement in lock down up???

Ok can I get a taser???? I hanf the gun on my wall oh no wait it's in a drawer and under the porch...:) In a suitcase a tasche a boot and oh and one at my FORT!!!!!!

“I am an ALIEN!!!”

Since: Dec 06

KREUZBERG...

#104616 Apr 14, 2013
We don't even hear a much of I don't think in Frankfurt what happens in Berlin or vise versa...

How united so we are and then though we are not....
So it seems to me anyway...

Local and world news now I get it they are just mixed up...
GoGoBar

Chiang Mai, Thailand

#104618 Apr 14, 2013
DavidQ762 wrote:
<quoted text>
The Right to Keep and Bear Arms, for one.
Australia has that.
Canada too!
England, they are ahead of the game.
Scotland...they get to have a vote if they want to depart the UK.
Arent there 30 states who want to leave the USA? I saw a news report where one woman wanted Texas to move to Australia. LOL!

So what else? "In God we trust"
The QUICK FIX IT TEAM

Mclean, VA

#104619 Apr 14, 2013
[QUOTE who="DavidQ762 Scottsdale, AZ "]<quoted text>
'Gun Control' laws have been proven to cause crime, rather than stop it. In fact the crime rates usually rise dramatically AFTER gun control is implemented. And that same trend has occurred EVERY place it has been implemented, not just the U.S.
Our governments in the U.S. were expressly forbidden from enacting ANY 'gun control' PERIOD. The ONLY thing they can do is ENFORCE the penalties for ABUSE or MISUSE of that right.
Which brings up the way to stop the violence. Go back to ALL people being armed, as was Constitutionally INTENDED. More Guns - Less crime. And the fear of possible immediate retribution for the threat of violence. Is a very strong deterrent indeed.(That same fear was intended to keep our government(s) in check. Which is of course the reason they want to disarm us).
Stop slapping criminals hands and PUNISH them. The criminals should WORK - HARD, while incarcerated. Instead of just lying around watching TV and gang-banging in prison. Make the fear of going to prison so great, that NO ONE will want to go there.[/QUOTE]

Hey "DavidQ762" thought you said you only post from Phoenix, AZ.

Are you sure you're not someone else?
GoGoBar

Chiang Mai, Thailand

#104620 Apr 14, 2013
DavidQ762 wrote:
<quoted text>
'Gun Control' laws have been proven to cause crime, rather than stop it. In fact the crime rates usually rise dramatically AFTER gun control is implemented. And that same trend has occurred EVERY place it has been implemented, not just the U.S.
Our governments in the U.S. were expressly forbidden from enacting ANY 'gun control' PERIOD. The ONLY thing they can do is ENFORCE the penalties for ABUSE or MISUSE of that right.
Which brings up the way to stop the violence. Go back to ALL people being armed, as was Constitutionally INTENDED. More Guns - Less crime. And the fear of possible immediate retribution for the threat of violence. Is a very strong deterrent indeed.(That same fear was intended to keep our government(s) in check. Which is of course the reason they want to disarm us).
Stop slapping criminals hands and PUNISH them. The criminals should WORK - HARD, while incarcerated. Instead of just lying around watching TV and gang-banging in prison. Make the fear of going to prison so great, that NO ONE will want to go there.
You mean the dangerous gunnuts terrorising America. Lock them up?
You have tried thatr.
You cannot afford to lock any more up.
You just dont have the money!

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#104622 Apr 14, 2013
GoGoBar wrote:
<quoted text>
I fully agree.
Action should have been taken long ago in the USA.
Statistically the massacred dont count. They are insignificant compared to the corporate profits and jobs created by the gun culture.
This economic benefit includes hollywood, video games, survival food and the largest prison population the modern world has ever known.
It cannot be stopped overnight, there are too many vested interests.
But it would be irresponsible to not try to minimise the effects of this culture. I am beginning to think that the USA is stuck with figures like this.
33,000 firearm deaths per year.
225 Justifiable Gun Homicides per year (Self defence)
35,000 motor vehichle deaths per year.
Well, then we should start with the MOST serious problem first then, right ?

Since possession of firearms is a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT in the U.S., and motor vehicles cause FAR MORE deaths in the U.S. than do firearms, AND given that there is NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to possess a motor vehicle, then logic dictates that motor vehicles should be BANNED FIRST. Don't you agree ?
GoGoBar

Chiang Mai, Thailand

#104625 Apr 14, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, then we should start with the MOST serious problem first then, right ?
Since possession of firearms is a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT in the U.S., and motor vehicles cause FAR MORE deaths in the U.S. than do firearms, AND given that there is NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to possess a motor vehicle, then logic dictates that motor vehicles should be BANNED FIRST. Don't you agree ?
No, that is your only quasi logical way to escape the fact that gun deaths are set to overtake motor vehichle deaths for the first time in any English speaking country.
LOL> Motor vehichle deaths to be overtaken by gun deaths.

"The laughing stock of the world"

“ WOOF ! ”

Since: Nov 12

Coolidge, AZ

#104626 Apr 14, 2013
I was just watching Senator John Cornyn being interviewd about a number of issues, including the Seante "gun control" bill and he correctly pointed out taht EVEN IF the Manchin-Toomey "gun control" measures were passed by congress, and signed into law by The Obamaniac, those provisions would STILL NOT have prevented any of the mass shootings of the recent paast, which were ALL committed by mentally unstable people.

The Profesisonal Left has STILL NOT explained HOW their infringments of teh Second Amendment are going to prevent gun violence deaths, nor adequately protect law-abiding citizen's Second Amendmet RIGHTS.

Are they going to explain these things or not ?(My money's on "NOT".)
Sir Bucking Fastard

UK

#104628 Apr 15, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
<quoted text>
Well, then we should start with the MOST serious problem first then, right ?
Since possession of firearms is a CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT in the U.S., and motor vehicles cause FAR MORE deaths in the U.S. than do firearms, AND given that there is NO CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHT to possess a motor vehicle, then logic dictates that motor vehicles should be BANNED FIRST. Don't you agree ?
I should like to make a few corrections to your observations.

The first is that the keeping and bearing of arms isn't a 'constitutional right.'
Rather, it is a 'constitutionally protected' right.
For reference, see the the ninth amendment.

Virtually none of your rights are 'constitutional rights,' for to say that they are comes with the implicit statement that they are therefore removable by mere repeal. They do not therefore, come from that document. Rather, to they come to you by birthright as a human being.

The reason for the enumeration of certain rights in the Bill of RIghts, is because it was those rights which suffered the greatest degree of depredation under the British Monarchy, and founders of your nation knew what mischief would ensue if there were no emphatic statements prohibiting government action regarding all rights.

Next, you have every right to own as many automobiles as you might, all without any kind of licensure. It is one of those innumerable rights which falls under the ninth amendment. You have every right to buy all the tools your heart desires (automobiles being amongst them), and keep them without whatever license.

Where the conflict arrives is that matter of using the automobile on public thoroughfares, themselves being owned by the state, and so therefor an operator's license is required for liability purposes in most instances.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#104630 Apr 15, 2013
DavidQ762 wrote:
<quoted text>
'Gun Control' laws have been proven to cause crime, rather than stop it. In fact the crime rates usually rise dramatically AFTER gun control is implemented. And that same trend has occurred EVERY place it has been implemented, not just the U.S.
Our governments in the U.S. were expressly forbidden from enacting ANY 'gun control' PERIOD. The ONLY thing they can do is ENFORCE the penalties for ABUSE or MISUSE of that right.
Which brings up the way to stop the violence. Go back to ALL people being armed, as was Constitutionally INTENDED. More Guns - Less crime. And the fear of possible immediate retribution for the threat of violence. Is a very strong deterrent indeed.(That same fear was intended to keep our government(s) in check. Which is of course the reason they want to disarm us).
Stop slapping criminals hands and PUNISH them. The criminals should WORK - HARD, while incarcerated. Instead of just lying around watching TV and gang-banging in prison. Make the fear of going to prison so great, that NO ONE will want to go there.
When you say "'Gun Control' laws have been proven to cause crime, rather than stop it." Chicago and Washington DC have proven that and was the reason behind the SCOTUS cases of Washington DC v Heller & McDonald v Chicago because law abiding citizens had to fight the Modern Pseudo Liberal failed gun control policies in Federal Court to be able to protect themselves from the Criminals that the Modern Pseudo Liberals created the ideal environment for the Criminals in society to thrive in Chicago & Washington DC and are wanting to turn the whole United States into a Society like Chicago & Washington DC with high crime rates.
Sir Bucking Fastard

UK

#104631 Apr 15, 2013
Fa-Foxy wrote:
I was just watching Senator John Cornyn being interviewd about a number of issues, including the Seante "gun control" bill and he correctly pointed out taht EVEN IF the Manchin-Toomey "gun control" measures were passed by congress, and signed into law by The Obamaniac, those provisions would STILL NOT have prevented any of the mass shootings of the recent paast, which were ALL committed by mentally unstable people.
The Profesisonal Left has STILL NOT explained HOW their infringments of teh Second Amendment are going to prevent gun violence deaths, nor adequately protect law-abiding citizen's Second Amendmet RIGHTS.
Are they going to explain these things or not ?(My money's on "NOT".)
Perhaps he should have mentioned that should the legislation become law, it will be immediately challenged by several states attorneys general on constitutional grounds.

The question of what guns are appropriate for the citizens is well spelled-out in the famous U.S. v Miller case.
United States v. Miller (No. 696)
26 F.Supp. 1002, reversed.

Here follows a relevant excerpt, but I very strongly suggest that you read the whole syllabus:

"In the absence of any evidence tending to show that possession or use of a "shotgun having a barrel of less than eighteen inches in length" at this time has some reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia, we cannot say that the Second Amendment guarantees the right to keep and bear such an instrument. Certainly it is not within judicial notice that this weapon is any part of the ordinary military equipment, or that its use could contribute to the common defense. Aymette v. State, 2 Humphreys (Tenn.) 154, 158."

http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/histori...

Missing from the evidentiary materials (a purposeful act of omission by the prosecution) was the fact that the sawn-off shotgun taken from Miller was in fact a common instrument use in both the U.S. Civil War, as well as in WWI, where they were referred to as 'trench sweepers.'

If that case were to be ruled upon in this day, Miller would certainly have won. But as it turns out, he predeceased the Supreme Court hearing, and he was not represented. So, only the government's side was heard.

So as you may see, all the past jurisprudence on the subject will come to bear against any such law, should it see the light of day.

Since: Dec 10

Glandore, Australia

#104632 Apr 15, 2013
DavidQ762 wrote:
<quoted text>
I know exactly what mine are. And spend much of my time fighting those who would steal it,(like they did yours).
Stealing is where someone takes something without your permission...our government had our overwhelming support and permission to enforce tough restictions for gun control, so you calling it stealing is a stretch only made by propagandarists and noongs....you appear to be both.

Since: Dec 10

Glandore, Australia

#104633 Apr 15, 2013
DavidQ762 wrote:
<quoted text>
'Gun Control' laws have been proven to cause crime, rather than stop it. In fact the crime rates usually rise dramatically AFTER gun control is implemented. And that same trend has occurred EVERY place it has been implemented, not just the U.S.
Our governments in the U.S. were expressly forbidden from enacting ANY 'gun control' PERIOD. The ONLY thing they can do is ENFORCE the penalties for ABUSE or MISUSE of that right.
Which brings up the way to stop the violence. Go back to ALL people being armed, as was Constitutionally INTENDED. More Guns - Less crime. And the fear of possible immediate retribution for the threat of violence. Is a very strong deterrent indeed.(That same fear was intended to keep our government(s) in check. Which is of course the reason they want to disarm us).
Stop slapping criminals hands and PUNISH them. The criminals should WORK - HARD, while incarcerated. Instead of just lying around watching TV and gang-banging in prison. Make the fear of going to prison so great, that NO ONE will want to go there.
Not so in Australia, maybe because we the government in denying idiots weapons only used in a war zone! It is pretty hard to be a denialist over gun control when the fact support it is reducing gun deaths...unless you are a NFA supporter or a delusional yankee.......read and weep you noong. http://guncontrol.org.au/
a comment

Baghdad, Iraq

#104634 Apr 15, 2013
GoGoBar wrote:
<quoted text>
You mean the dangerous gunnuts terrorising America. Lock them up?
You have tried thatr.
You cannot afford to lock any more up.
You just dont have the money!
Somebody needs to lock you up, pedophile.
Tray

Plantersville, MS

#104635 Apr 15, 2013
Ahomana wrote:
<quoted text>
You learned what? oh you make me laugh so hard it hurts, you either have someone else write your posts or you are suffering from final stage dementia, some of your post look like a man so far out on the edge that there is no need for you to jump.
Tsk tsk tsk. You can degrade me all you like, it will not anger me or make me resort to useless rantings. I still hold out hope for you.

Since: Aug 11

Location hidden

#104636 Apr 15, 2013
Ahomana wrote:
<quoted text>
Not so in Australia, maybe because we the government in denying idiots weapons only used in a war zone! It is pretty hard to be a denialist over gun control when the fact support it is reducing gun deaths...unless you are a NFA supporter or a delusional yankee.......read and weep you noong. http://guncontrol.org.au/
AUSTRALIA: MORE VIOLENT CRIME DESPITE GUN BAN

April 13, 2009

It is a common fantasy that gun bans make society safer. In 2002 -- five years after enacting its gun ban -- the Australian Bureau of Criminology acknowledged there is no correlation between gun control and the use of firearms in violent crime. In fact, the percent of murders committed with a firearm was the highest it had ever been in 2006 (16.3 percent), says the D.C. Examiner.

Even Australia's Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:
•In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
•Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.
•Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.

Moreover, Australia and the United States -- where no gun-ban exists -- both experienced similar decreases in murder rates:
•Between 1995 and 2007, Australia saw a 31.9 percent decrease; without a gun ban, America's rate dropped 31.7 percent.
•During the same time period, all other violent crime indices increased in Australia: assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
•Sexual assault -- Australia's equivalent term for rape -- increased 29.9 percent.
•Overall, Australia's violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
•At the same time, U.S. violent crime decreased 31.8 percent: rape dropped 19.2 percent; robbery decreased 33.2 percent; aggravated assault dropped 32.2 percent.
•Australian women are now raped over three times as often as American women.

While this doesn't prove that more guns would impact crime rates, it does prove that gun control is a flawed policy. Furthermore, this highlights the most important point: gun banners promote failed policy regardless of the consequences to the people who must live with them, says the Examiner.

http://www.ncpa.org/sub/dpd/...

Crime Rate Increases with Australia's gun Ban

Tray

Plantersville, MS

#104637 Apr 15, 2013
Ahomana wrote:
<quoted text>
Stealing is where someone takes something without your permission...our government had our overwhelming support and permission to enforce tough restictions for gun control, so you calling it stealing is a stretch only made by propagandarists and noongs....you appear to be both.
Even when a majority is brainwashed into thinking "it's in your best interest" does not change the name of it. If the majority believes slavery is OK, is it? The government is there to represent not only the majority but to protect the minority from the majority. Even to the point of it being a single citizen. At one point in history the majority believed what they were told, that witches lived among us and caused our daily problems. The majority then (believing what they were told and it being a lie) started burning "witches". People look for excuses to their problems in others. People tend to want to blame someone or some group for all the problems they have. In reality it does not work to infringe on anothers rights in the name of "it's in the public's best interest". Stop the witch hunts and use reality instead of mass hysteria.
Tray

Plantersville, MS

#104638 Apr 15, 2013
Ahomana wrote:
<quoted text>
Not so in Australia, maybe because we the government in denying idiots weapons only used in a war zone! It is pretty hard to be a denialist over gun control when the fact support it is reducing gun deaths...unless you are a NFA supporter or a delusional yankee.......read and weep you noong. http://guncontrol.org.au/
It's pretty hard to support your case when you reduce one crime but multiply another 4x by that reasoning. Violent crime went up 4x in your country after gun control. Burning the witches didn't work.

Since: Dec 10

Glandore, Australia

#104639 Apr 15, 2013
Tray wrote:
<quoted text> Tsk tsk tsk. You can degrade me all you like, it will not anger me or make me resort to useless rantings. I still hold out hope for you.
I don't need to try anything...your posts are the evidence if you bother to check back.

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.

US News Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
News Barack Obama, our next President (Nov '08) 2 min NotSoDivineMsM 1,508,519
Gay Skype !! 4 min Timharding4 80
News BARACK OBAMA BIRTH CERTIFICATE: Suit contesting... (Jan '09) 6 min District 1 239,392
News Paul Ryan accepts it's over: Obamacare is 'law ... 7 min One Womyn Riot 8
Election 'Fox News Sunday' to Host Kentucky Senate Debate (Oct '10) 7 min Pete 261,871
News Young Americans: Most see Trump as illegitimate... 7 min Trump your President 669
News Evolution vs. Creation (Jul '11) 9 min THE LONE WORKER 220,613
More from around the web