Hautlle Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Yeah, I mean its good to still recognize that its a minority who are gun nuts, but there is a majority who accept the current viewpoint on owning guns, moderates, even some liberals. The United States is a very unique example AFAIK, where the right to own a gun has been incorporated into the whole "America is apple pie and baseball" cultural background. I can tell you from personal background, that Im sort of on the fence about gun ownership, as I can see the pros and cons of both sides...but heres the interesting part As the US Constitution stipulates the right to bear arms, and having been successively interpreted as having the right to own arms, it balls itself up into the validity of the rest of the Constitution...so if we "attack" one, we risk "attacking" the whole thing (ie. the "end of the Constitution=the end of democracy". Yeah, its a pretty risky slippery slope argument, and Im not saying its necessarily right, but Americans by and large have been culturally attuned to this line of thinking. I mean, think about it this way. AFAIK (and feel free to correct me if this is wrong), there has never been a law in British or English history that stipulates every subject has a right to own a firearm. Lets assume for the sake of argument that this law in fact did exist from the Magna Carta on to present day. Do you think the transition to a gun-free public would be an easy one? No.. You're absolutely right. It's not happening over night. But it's possible, just like it is in the rest of the world. But you wrote something in the lines of (before you edited): "some people can handle owning a gun, and some people don't". That alone should be reason enough to invest all the time and money in the world to outlaw gun ownership. It's as simple as that if you ask me. But again, I'm born in a society with an entirely different opinion on the subject. So what do I know. It's just disgusting how some people can develop a fetish for something that's used to kill people with. I don't get it *polishes halo* Guns and the right to bear arms have been romanticized in this country. The Wild West days and the American west were founded on guns. Look at how train robbers, sheriffs like Wyatt Earp, gun fighters, etc are exalted in older films. Firearms, being a "man", and protecting ones self/family is constantly promoted even in current media. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keltoi Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 What kind of dirty motherfucker shoots a baby? Motherfucker. aye! but who takes a baby to see batman? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keltoi Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 at 12.30am? for a 3 hour long film. 6 years old! edit - wtf there was 3 month old there too! a 3 month old's eardrums shouldn't be subjected to the loudness of a movie theatre. i realise this is not the big issue here but wtf people? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest mafted Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 edit: It makes it hard not to feel like I need to own a gun to protect my self from people who own guns, who own guns to protect them selves from people who own guns. this is what i was about to say. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Rabid Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 If there are psychological/social issues in your country then surely the last thing you want is for guns to be freely available? Okay I didn't get through the entire thread - posts like this were angering me a little. I know you're from the UK so you're kind of ignorant about this topic, but please don't make embarrassingly retarded posts like this. Especially since the UK has worse social problems than the US, and the UK has a higher crime rate despite no guns. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Roksen Creek Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 If there are psychological/social issues in your country then surely the last thing you want is for guns to be freely available? Okay I didn't get through the entire thread - posts like this were angering me a little. I know you're from the UK so you're kind of ignorant about this topic, but please don't make embarrassingly retarded posts like this. Especially since the UK has worse social problems than the US, and the UK has a higher crime rate despite no guns. OK. When I said "your country" I meant if any country in general, if your country, no matter what country that might be, had psychological/social issues, surely if you lived in that country, you would want guns to be banned. (I didn't bring up the psychological/social problems, I was replying to that). It wasn't an attack on the US. I feel the same about the UK, which is why I am glad we have the law. And really, the UK has a higher crime rate? Source please? I think I better stop posting, my intention was not to have a go at the US but to understand why any country would allow the right to bear arms. Oh and by the way, I have no patriotism whatsoever, I knew I shouldn't have put my country on my profile! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keltoi Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 the UK has worse social problems than the US, and the UK has a higher crime rate despite no guns. can you elaborate/expand on this statement please? what worse social problems? surely a more relevant comparison is the murder rate which is about 5 times higher in the US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
roasty Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 This is crazy. What is the motive to this one d'you think? new stage in viral campaigning portraying batman's incapacity. no need for that, DKR was already set to make a killing at the box office.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR4 Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 I think I better stop posting, my intention was not to have a go at the US but to understand why any country would allow the right to bear arms. Well I can answer that one. The times and situation in which it was written. American colonists were completely dependent on firearms as a means of hunting and protection against a number of things (predator wildlife, hostile natives, neighbors looking to get your land by "other means"). Secondly, the founding of the nation was done through an incredibly violent revolution, a revolution that surely would have failed without the use of firearms, homemade firearms/generational stockpieces that the majority of an incredibly poor populace had on them when they came to enlist in the Continental Army. Thirdly, even though as I stated previously there is no AFAIK universal right to own firearms in English history, but there was a brief period of time under James II when they considered adding such a clause, as it was considered an "ancient right". Lastly, the second amendment was arguably placed in the Constitution as a reaction against the recent Shays and Whiskey Rebellions, which depended on state militias within the Confederacy even more than it did on General Washington's military force. The Continental Army had been in shammbles since the conclusion of the Revolutionary War, and Washington being sent with a huge number (of relatively poorly equipped) soldiers was a political ploy, to demonstrate the "shock and awe" of the new American Confederacy. The writers of the Constitution thus believed that a right to bear arms would protect the government almost as much as it could be helped to prevent the government's tyranny. Now, do these points still apply today? edit: sorry, Shay's was during the Confederacy, the Whiskey Rebellion was post-Constitution, but my point would still be relevant. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktait2 Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 moore's comparison in bowling for columbine is better: Moore attempts to contrast this with the attitude prevailing in Canada, where (he states) gun ownership is at similar levels to the U.S. He illustrates his thesis by visiting neighborhoods in Canada near the Canada-U.S. border, where he finds front doors unlocked and much less concern over crime and security. i haven't checked this claim about similar gun ownership pattern but in case he's right, then yes, usa is just more homicidal (definitely not "by nature" though).Not so similar. It may be similar in terms of general numbers of 'gun' owners, but there's a few major differences. In Canada, getting a handgun is near impossible. Concealed carry is illegal, flat out.Handguns and automatics fall under restricted licensing. They're a bitch to get, only a real gun enthusiast would put forth the effort. Plus, Canadians don't really see owning a gun for self-defence a valid justification. What that does is remove the majority of gun owners from dense urban areas, putting them outside the areas of high violence. I found this little bit, touches upon a few good points. The crime and violence rate in the United States is not uniformly high among all population groups. Looking only at American states which border Canada, the homicide rate in those states is generally no higher, and often lower, than in adjacent Canadian provinces.[203] Similarly, if one excludes Americans residing in southern states from overall American crime statistics, America's crime rate is comparable to Canada's.[204] Other studies have attributed the difference in Canadian and American crime rates to the contrasting sociological mix of the two nations. The death rate for non-hispanic white Americans from all types of shootings (murder, suicide, accident, etc.) is comparable to the Canadian rate.[205]One study compared twenty-five Canadian cities with twenty-five comparably-sized American cities. When the covariates of "percent black" and "city size" where considered, the difference between American and Canadian samples diminished to the point of insignificance.[206] In other words, the higher American homicide rate was attributable to the fact that America is much more densely urban than Canada, and that America has a much higher percentage of blacks in its population.[/size]The fact that any number of sociological differences, including race, urbanization, and the presence of southerners, can statistically account for the difference in homicide rates between the two countries suggests that the new Canadian gun law is itself ineffective. In other words, if Americans and Canadians, statistically stripped of sociological differences, have the same homicide rate--even though the Americans have much looser gun laws--then certainly the Canadian gun laws are not a satisfactory explanation of Canada's lower (p.33)homicide rate. The data offer little reason to believe that the Canadian gun laws reduce homicide.While the data undermine the claims of the Canadian gun control activists, they do not necessarily rule out the need for American gun control. Because America is more urbanized, suffers from more racial tension, and is perhaps influenced by a southern subculture of violence, the United States might be all the more in need of tighter gun control. Perhaps some areas of the United States are so mired in a culture of violence that they would benefit from tighter control or disarmament.[/size]On the other hand, if statistics show that gun density does not correlate with crime levels, then reducing gun density is probably not the most effective way to reduce crime. Since gun laws per se are not associated with crime reduction (as the Canadian experience and comparison with the United States seems to indicate), it is likely that other strategies would better address America's problem of urban and ethnic violence. Perhaps the effort should be to deal directly with the social conditions that make southerners, blacks, hispanics, and urbanites so much more likely to be victims and perpetrators of crime. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR4 Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 to taint: i have a weird offshoot question for my friends in the North...is hunting legal in Canada, and if so, by what means? Ive been curious about this for some time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
keltoi Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 the UK has worse social problems than the US, and the UK has a higher crime rate despite no guns. can you elaborate/expand on this statement please? what worse social problems? surely a more relevant comparison is the murder rate which is about 5 times higher in the US. found this on comparing stats from US V UK with different parameters... The UK crime rate includes common assault -- simple assault, no injuries, the lowest level of assault. The US rate does not. The crime survey data shows that 37% of the "violent crimes" reported were "common assault (no injury)". The UK figures include "sexual offences". The US figures include only "forcible rape". 8% of the recorded crime figure for violent crimes in the UK is "other violence". Where is that in the US figures? 15% of the recorded crime figure for violent crimes the UK is "harassment". Where is that in the US figures? 5% of the UK survey-reported crime is "snatch theft" as distinct from "robbery". Is that covered by "robbery" in the US figures? Have you attempted to find out? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
murve33 Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Don't take Bowling for Columbine seriously in any regards. Most of the scenes are staged, and the unlocked doors were in one small city in Canada and the local police were cracking down on it. Michael Moore is a fuck, it's a shame so many liberals worship him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ktait2 Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 to taint: i have a weird offshoot question for my friends in the North...is hunting legal in Canada, and if so, by what means? Ive been curious about this for some time. Very legal, and a lot of fun.To start you need to take both a Canadian Firearms Safety Course exam and the Ontario Hunter Education Course exam. They're pretty easy and happen quite frequently through government services. It's a weekend course on how to kill animals, not people. From there you buy your tags, they're basically written permissions to hunt a specific species and contain certain restrictions there within (something like 2 bucks only, no under age or female deer) during the open hunting season. Deer, bear, elk, moose, geese, turkey and other small game are all accessible. In terms of where you can legally hunt, I'm a bit unsure. Private property is fine if you have the open land for it, and I think government land is also accessible (excluding National parks). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
YELLOW Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 This is a real tragedy for those who passed and for those who were injured. I feel bad too because the movie and this shooting will now always be thought of in the same sentence Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cruising for burgers Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SR4 Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Candiru Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 The government taking away the right to own a gun. This has always led to great things in history... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
FLA FUR BIS FLE Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 there should be NO LOLs in this thread! THIS IS A TERRIBLE THING :[ *plays Call of Duty. doesn't care about the world* Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
auxien Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 i only browsed over most of these posts, so forgive me if someone else brought this up. but the constitutional right to bear arms in America will never be changed. it may be restricted more over time, but it will never ever be illegal for a general citizen to own a gun. the reasoning behind this, as someone brought up, is partially a logistics issue. enforcing a ban would be about as useful as enforcing the illegality of marijuana...anywhere in the US it can be found, despite the fact that it's been illegal for a very long time. the issue of enforcing a ban was already discussed though. what i hadn't seen discussed is the fact that the main reason for our right to bear arms is so that the citizens can keep the government in check, if it were to ever overstep its bounds. this is one of the main arguments that America as a nation is founded on. this is exactly what happened during the Civil War; a group of states thought the federal government was imposing too much control by trying to ban slavery and other reasons, so they acted by seceding from the union and protecting their borders with their own weapons. now i'm not arguing the validity of that, because fuck slavery, but the option of action by the people when its government doesn't listen to it anymore is why personally owned arms will always be legal in this country. i'm not a militia supporter or anything of the sort, so don't get the wrong idea. but there's been this uneasy line we've been treading for a few decades now...where there are groups of people who think the government is already crossing that line or soon to cross it, and these groups are arming themselves heavily in case. that's their right, but the government has been keeping these groups in check for the most part. when they get too big, they go in and break it all up. the incident at the Koresh compound in Waco, TX (while not entirely about its militia leanings) is the most public, and perhaps the most upsetting, of these skirmishes. but i bring that all up because THAT is what gun ownership is about for Americans. not just personal protection (guns generally aren't useful in many personal protection situations) but more so about protection of the people, the citizens and their rights, as a whole. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
eugene Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 quality info, taint. i guess expecting scientific accuracy and standard from moore is just plain silly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chenGOD Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 Smetty - yes hunting is legal. I have a friend who's big on guns (he posted a picture of his 5 year old daughter holding a shotgun (unloaded)), he's always trying to get me to go out shooting or go to the range. He is very responsible with his guns though (and he does have handguns) - always locked in a gun safe unloaded with trigger locks, and the ammunition is locked separately from the guns. He has the only key to the gun safe. Now a question - regarding the constitution (and obviously I'm no constitutional scholar). Wasn't the second amendment created with regards to a well-armed and organized militia? Is that relevant in this day and age? Secondly, isn't the Constitution "a living document"? Surely it makes sense to adjust portions of it as social organization changes - otherwise would the founders have allowed for creating amendments at all? Keltoi - taking babies to the theater is just part of the problem. Lack of social responsibility - "oh i gotta get my batman - never mind the child I'm supposed to be raising!". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest Enter a new display name Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 At least, the suspect didn't kill himself and get away with this. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vamos scorcho Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 i really cant wait to find out this guys motives Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest uptown devil Posted July 20, 2012 Share Posted July 20, 2012 weird shit to wake up to. that theater is like ten minutes from my house. has anyone checked to make sure mr. mcgriff is alive and well? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.