Another school shooting in Murrica (Oregon edition)

[GRANDMOM]

Since the Columbine High School shooting in 1999, there have been 31 school shootings in the United States and only 14 in the rest of the world combined.

http://o.canada.com/news/interactive-mass-shootings-around-the-world-since-1996

What is the answer to your problem?

Im sure there is a lot of things to consider, but surely the easy access to guns must at least be a factor on the subject even for those that say "dont touch our guns". I think, cant be arsed to look up, that more or less all European nations has some kind of regulation on guns, Im sure it differs from country to country but still some sort of regulation.

If owning a gun, and from I have read almost half of the households in USA do, prevents crime - howcome when looking at police recorded cases per 100000 population USA ends up looking pretty bad compared to countries with gun control?

Howcome homocide in USA is so high only Mexico and Estonia has a higher rate in the whole of OECD, and that comparing countries like Sweden/Spain/Germany with your homicide rates USA has a  5 times higher rate per 100000 pop?

Perhaps starting out by prohibiting guns that has a sole purpose of killing humans and not used for hunting would be start?

 

[Overdriven]

The official controlled well-regulated Militia already exists. Every state has a National Guard at their disposal which is armed and funded by the home state and under the command of the state's government. It can also be mobilized and used by the Federal government when needed.

If they refused to comply who would enforce it? The majority of Law enforcement and Military personnel are pro 2nd Amendment, as well as a large majority of citizens.

Well there you go. If that's the case there is 0 need for other citizens to own a gun.

If such a high profile law is passed I expect that law enforcement would have to enforce it. Unless law enforcers in the US are more unprofessional than most...

[[ptx]]

A thread with Jeade is always a pleasure.

Because of the avatars, right?

[Grytviken]

Well there you go. If that's the case there is 0 need for other citizens to own a gun.

If such a high profile law is passed I expect that law enforcement would have to enforce it. Unless law enforcers in the US are more unprofessional than most...

And those organizations took an oath to uphold and protect the constitution. Law Enforcement are more reluctant than they were before to enforce laws in certain communities now it's true.

[Grytviken]

Since the Columbine High School shooting in 1999, there have been 31 school shootings in the United States and only 14 in the rest of the world combined.

http://o.canada.com/news/interactive-mass-shootings-around-the-world-since-1996

What is the answer to your problem?

Im sure there is a lot of things to consider, but surely the easy access to guns must at least be a factor on the subject even for those that say "dont touch our guns". I think, cant be arsed to look up, that more or less all European nations has some kind of regulation on guns, Im sure it differs from country to country but still some sort of regulation.

If owning a gun, and from I have read almost half of the households in USA do, prevents crime - howcome when looking at police recorded cases per 100000 population USA ends up looking pretty bad compared to countries with gun control?

Howcome homocide in USA is so high only Mexico and Estonia has a higher rate in the whole of OECD, and that comparing countries like Sweden/Spain/Germany with your homicide rates USA has a  5 times higher rate per 100000 pop?

Perhaps starting out by prohibiting guns that has a sole purpose of killing humans and not used for hunting would be start?

 

  The culture of America is always changing, but probably for the worse. Violence is glorified and portrayed as the number one solution to problems, and I think this message the media and entertainment industries put out rubs off on unstable people, and people with no moral guidance. No country in Europe glorifies violence as much as the US or is as obsessed with guns. America has yet to accept that it also has a large unfounded mental illness and behavioral problem as well, because nothing is being done about it.

[Grytviken]

Due to the numbers in circulation already, guns will still exist. But saying 'criminals will still get them' seems simplistic as not all criminals are equal, and even if still 'available' the guns in circulation would rocket in price if made illegal. Some 'criminals' may potentially happen to have underworld connections and a large float of surplus cash sufficient to get a gun, but a lot of petty criminals (your bog-standard home invader or carjacker) wont. Getting shot less is a generally a good thing.

Americans always like to say they do things 'bigger' and 'better' than everyone else, so let them brag about clearing up a larger number of guns than anything the lame Europoors ever had to deal with, 'US so stronk we got rid of way more guns than u', that seems like the natural outcome.

  Yes lets isolate the large majority of law abiding and responsible citizens by taking away their rights and voiding the one important thing they believe makes the United States unique and prosperous, that one thing the entire Military and every Law enforcement agency upholds and protects by oath. That will go over well, just as well as it went over in jolly old England. Except in England there weren't 317 million guns in circulation, and your entire nation's history was not based and founded upon a Constitutional compact between the state's and the government.

[Vibe]

  Yes lets isolate the large majority of law abiding and responsible citizens by taking away their rights and voiding the one important thing they believe makes the United States unique and prosperous,

Wait so guns make US unique and prosperous or what am I missing here?

[Molly]

  Yes lets isolate the large majority of law abiding and responsible citizens by taking away their rights and voiding the one important thing they believe makes the United States unique and prosperous, that one thing the entire Military and every Law enforcement agency upholds and protects by oath. That will go over well, just as well as it went over in jolly old England. Except in England there weren't 317 million guns in circulation, and your entire nation's history was not based and founded upon a Constitutional compact between the state's and the government.

Proves my theory that only the idiot Brits/French/whoever-there-was ventured to the new land and those with a proper dosage of common sense stayed behind.

[Vovka]

one important thing they believe makes the United States unique and prosperous,

WWI and WWII? 

[Grytviken]

Wait so guns make US unique and prosperous or what am I missing here?

No, the agreement that the Federal government can't override the checks and balance system in the Constitution to pass laws by itself without the authorization and representation of the states, essentially putting us back to square one where we were ruled by a King in London. The US isn't a pseudo-dictatorship like the Russian Federation where the government can just pass laws and regulations without a clear majority of representatives from the state's agreeing on it.

[Bronto]

No, the agreement that the Federal government can't override the checks and balance system in the Constitution to pass laws by itself without the authorization and representation of the states, essentially putting us back to square one where we were ruled by a King in London.

OBAMACARE YOU TWAT!!!! and I quote Nancy Shitbag Whoreface Pelosi “But we have to pass the [health care] bill so that you can find out what’s in it....” So that's exactly what they fucking did. Big pharma. Fuck don't even get me started.

We need stricter gun control laws or just eliminate pistols all together. Fuck what you think, it's the right thing to do. Sick of still arguing this shit. Open your fucking eyes you dumb cunts. And fuck off for good measure.

[Grytviken]

Proves my theory that only the idiot Brits/French/whoever-there-was ventured to the new land and those with a proper dosage of common sense stayed behind.

And all those Hessian mercenaries fighting for England that George Washington captured decided to stay and live here too.

[Bronto]

The 2nd amendment was an amendment of your constitution (specifically the 2nd one), it was not in the original when the nation was based and founded. And you pledge to uphold the constitution, this constitution is a legal document that is changed and revised (hence the multiple amendments) so what's the big deal? We're not saying tear the constitution in half and use it as toilet paper, just amend it like you always do.

'Right to Bear Arms' is vague and already limited beyond the purest interpretation of that clause (you cant privately own an atomic bomb or ICBM in the US, are these not technically 'Arms'?). Considering there is already a risk/value judgement on scale and types of 'Arms' that have been invented since the amendment was made, why not clarify it further? To make you die-hard constitution fans happy why not 'Right to Bear Arms, specified as the arms readily known and available at the time of this constitution's signing', you can all protect yourselves with muskets then as your precious founding fathers intended.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


but but but HESKEYTIME what about all those criminals armed to the teeth! They're going to shoot me and my freedoms with their superior firepower!

[Grytviken]

The 2nd amendment was an amendment of your constitution (specifically the 2nd one), it was not in the original when the nation was based and founded. And you pledge to uphold the constitution, this constitution is a legal document that is changed and revised (hence the multiple amendments) so what's the big deal? We're not saying tear the constitution in half and use it as toilet paper, just amend it like you always do.

'Right to Bear Arms' is vague and already limited beyond the purest interpretation of that clause (you cant privately own an atomic bomb or ICBM in the US, are these not technically 'Arms'?). Considering there is already a risk/value judgement on scale and types of 'Arms' that have been invented since the amendment was made, why not clarify it further? To make you die-hard constitution fans happy why not 'Right to Bear Arms, specified as the arms readily known and available at the time of this constitution's signing', you can all protect yourselves with muskets then as your precious founding fathers intended.

It's not the amendment it's the violation of the compact that's important. Read the 10th amendment.

[Bronto]

The Tenth Amendment (Amendment X) to the United States Constitution, which is part of the Bill of Rights, was ratified on December 15, 1791.[1] It expresses the principle of federalism, which undergirds the entire plan of the original Constitution, by stating that the federal government possesses only those powers delegated to it by the Constitution. All remaining powers are reserved for the states or the people. In drafting this amendment, its framers had two purposes in mind: first, as a necessary rule of construction; and second, as a reaffirmation of the nature of the federal system.

LOL if you believe that common folk actually influence any type of decision our government makes! Like for real dude. The only time it matters what people think is when it's time for re-election. Then, they placate us by showing us numbers on heavily influenced media programs that our votes matter, etc, etc; but where is the fucking proof eh? It's still the electoral college (allegedly) that has the final say in the end. Furthermore, it's how much financial backing, by whom this backing comes from, and what lobbying groups they've catered too that determines any sort of outcome in everything our government does. It's all about the money guy, and keeping the American public ignorant and feeding us placebo so we don't question it. Just watch any late night tv show where they ask people random questions and see how dumb, on average, the American public is.