Is it time for gun control in Washington?

Good luck throwing acid onto a crowd from a hotel window hundreds of metres away.

 

Put your house on a second term, if he wants it.

If he doesn’t, can we borrow him?

 

"..among likely US voters?" So only 50% of the people likely to vote for him will vote for him

 

Yep, he'll be a shoe-in for a 2nd term. I'm just hoping the "never-Trump" RINO's in congress will accept reality and stop enabling the cultural marxists.

 

You can't defend yourself with acid, either.

And Timothy McVeigh killed a lot of people from a few hundred meters away... with fertilizer and diesel fuel.

And somehow, all the gun laws in Australia didn't seem to matter to Man Haron Monis, Farhad Khalil Mohammad Jabar, or Yacqub Khayre, all of whom shot and killed people in terrorist attacks there. There are a good many stabbings in Australia. I wonder, why take the one tool capable of making a 5' 100lb woman equal to the task of defending herself against a 6'6" 250lb rapist?

The right to self defense is fundamental to a free state. If, by dictate of the state, it is unlawful to defend your own person, you are not a citizen nor even a subject; you are property.

 

Typical US logic.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

When has cowering while muttering pleas of submission ever been an effective tool of defense?

 

And all the guns in the US didn't seem to stop McVeigh, either. And I guess with guns everywhere, there is no rape? A bloke tried to rob a pharmacy here yesterday, holding a hammer - the pharmacist told him to F off, and he did. It's not that easy for a druggie to lay his hands on a gun - that's a good thing. I'm not sure if he tried to make the hammer more lethal with a bump stock. Your founders specified a well armed, regulated militia - go get some regulation.

 

Please be free to comment on our list of shootings in comparison to the OOESSAY's......problem is,Wiki can't keep up,they haven't listed the last few...including one today in California.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Mass_shootings_in_Australia

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mass_shootings_in_the_United_States......and this list only shows 10 or more deaths.

 

I feel pity for you

The gun situation in your part of the world is likely to be even worse by the time your children reach your age

 

If they do.

 

A little lesson in history and the meaning of the words...

If you've ever wondered why we have this:

"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." (Second Amendment to the Constitution)

The simple answer is this:

"But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." (The Declaration of Independence)

But it goes deeper than that.

The First Amendment to the US Constitution protects our right of conscience (religion), our right to speak out about our government (speech), our right to investigate and report on the actions of our government (press), our right to gather for the purpose of discussing our government (assembly), and our right to demand our government return to its Constitutionally bound functions (redress of grievances).

The men who founded this country also understood that both the Constitution and the First Amendment were written on paper, and that governments had a habit of ripping up paper whenever they found the writing on it to be inconvenient. To ensure this could not happen, and in recognition that the United States had bee founded by the removal of a tyrannical power, these men enshrined "it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security." into the new Constitution by way of the Second Amendment.

"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."

Now, this is written in language we do not use very often today, so let me define a few of the words and phrases.

The phrase "Well regulated," was used well into the Twentieth Century as meaning "properly functioning." It would be correct to use the phrase thus, "Any man with a well regulated brain would understand the concepts here being explained."

The word "militia" did not mean any sort of regular army, but in fact the whole of the people. "I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials." -George Mason (VA Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788)

A "free State" was one whose core doctrine was liberty.

"Infringed" means impinged upon, limited, tampered with.

Consequently, we can reconstruct the sentence using less archaic language so as to make it more understandable.

"A citizenry capable of effectively using arms, being necessary to the security of a State whose core doctrine is liberty, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be limited nor tampered with."

The Second Amendment was written to give teeth to the First, and both were written to ensure the government stay on its Constitution footing. Together they constitute the final checks and balances against tyranny, ensuring the US remains a Constitutional Republic whose core doctrine is liberty.

And just as the First Amendment was never intended to protect pornography or other obscenities, the Second Amendment was never intended to protect personal defense arms (they were assumed to be protected by one's natural rights to life and liberty). The Second Amendment is about weapons useful in warfare (read US vs Miller-1939).

As Patrick Henry put it, "Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are inevitably ruined."

 

Our problem is not the mere access to firearms. If it were, Switzerland and Israel would have the same issues with shootings and murders that we do. London has a serious violent crime issue, including shootings, and it's on the rise. The problem is cultural. Most of our so-called "gun porblems" are centered in large cities with an abundance of gangs and other scofflaws.

"...take all the guns off the street you still will have a crime problem, whereas if you take the criminals off the street you cannot have a gun problem." -Col. Jeff Cooper

 

So if the current situation is allowed to continue what do you think the accidental shooting and gun related homicide statistics look like in 20 years ?

I can see how the arms manufacturers, gun retailers, NRA and other parts of the gun lobby benefit from increased gun sales; however, I fail to see how the general population (including your children and grandchildren) will end up living in a better or safer country as a result.


Sent from my iPhone using FerrariChat.com mobile app

 

Before you can own a military firearm in Switzerland or Israel, you must have completed your national service, and the firearm you have is your service weapon - THAT is what a well armed militia is. I don't know what the crime stats for London are, and I seriously doubt you do either, but (a) you're just constructing a straw man, and (b) whatever they are, they'd be a bloody lot higher if access to firearms was at US levels.

And a pious platitude from even a recognised weapons expert is meaningless if applied outside his expertise (ie, being a good shot does not make you an expert on crime)

 

I see you've conveniently bypassed my contribution......

In the same period of time in OOESAY recorded over 400 deaths of mass shooting,in OZ we recorded 60.
This is the total,all of which in OZ,less the Port Arthur,were less than 10 dead.
All of the USA examples are OVER 10 dead................................................................................................



































Wiki probably ran out of space to list the mass shootings under that number due to the overwhelming amount!

 

It does if you read what Simons stats are actually saying.

The only USA ones noted in those stats are those where more than 10 people were killed.
Imagine what they’d look like if the mass shootings involving less than 10 deaths were included.

In contrast, if you take out Port Arthur (before our gun crackdown) the result would be ZERO deaths in Australia under the same criteria.

So, it would be 400 to nothing since our new gun laws were introduced.

 

Australia: ABS
"NATIONAL OVERVIEW
The number of victims recorded by police nationally increased across all selected offence categories between 2015 and 2016. The largest increases (9%) occurred for Motor vehicle theft and Homicide and related offences, up 4,561 and 36 victims respectively. (Table 1)
Between 2015 and 2016, the number of victims of Sexual assault and Robbery offences increased by 5% (up 1,104 and 435 victims respectively); as did victims of Other theft offences (up 5% or 27,634 victims) who accounted for the majority of victims recorded by police nationally in 2016. (Table 1)"

"Attempted murder
The number of victims of Attempted murder in Australia increased by 27% between 2015 and 2016, from 155 to 196 victims. (Table 1)
Persons aged between 20 and 34 years comprised 36% of Attempted murder victims in 2016 (71 victims), 35% of victims were aged between 35 and 54 years (68 victims).
Three out of five victims (60%) of Attempted murder were male (118 victims), which was consistent with the previous year. (Table 2)"

SEXUAL ASSAULT
There were 23,052 victims of Sexual assault recorded in Australia in 2016, equating to 1 victim of Sexual assault per 1,000 persons. This was the fifth consecutive year, in which, the number of Sexual assault victims have increased, up 24% since 2011 (4,436 victims). (Table 1)

 

The number of murders and attempted homicides has increased despite strict firearm controls, there is data that shows knives are being used in greater proportion.
What this shows is that making access to firearms more difficult has simply changed the means that people use to commit homicides. Instead of getting shot, you are more likely to get stabbed.
Also there is a trend that certain crimes are increasing, the causes of that needs to be addressed to reduce the homicide rate (i.e social inequality, drugs, youth unemployment).

 

Have a look at this little number.
It contains every mass shooting in OOESAY since Jan 1 2013. Red is dead.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/ng-interactive/2017/oct/02/america-mass-shootings-gun-violence

....and this from 1984 to date includes all those under 10 dead.....sort of overbalances...

http://timelines.latimes.com/deadliest-shooting-rampages/