• Wayfarer
    20.6k
    I think the nuance here is that guns with the capacity to kill large numbers of people in a very short amount of time are much more readily available in the USA than in many other developed countriesGRWelsh


    Agree, but it’s hardly a ‘nuance’. It is a glaringly obvious fact. There was a feature by a journalist a couple of years ago about the process of acquiring a gun in Japan. Several exams, written questionnaires and more than one interview, taking more than a year in all. Of course Japan and America are vastly different culturally and socially, but then, Japan has almost zero gun deaths and I can’t recall ever reading of a mass shooting. (The assassination last year of Shinzo Abe was with a home-made weapon.)

    One thing I’ll never understand about the Second Amendment argument is why there is complete deviation from the original wording, which talked of ‘well-regulated militias’. If a well-regulated militia was given control of AR15 assault rifles, it would presumably keep them under lock and key and the control of a responsible officer. Not make them freely available to anyone who happens to want to take one home. There was apparently another Supreme Court ruling some time back which interpreted ‘well-regulated militia’ to mean practically unlimited rights to own any kind of weapon. Which is another thing I don’t understand - why the US Supreme Court has such a libertarian attitude towards gun ownership.
  • tim wood
    8.7k
    (1)There are limits to the 2nd Amendment and I don't think it is unreasonable to be able to have a fact-based discussion about where those limits should be. (2)Being able to defend yourself is a reasonable expectation,GRWelsh

    1) Agree, absolutely.
    2) Being able to drive nails yourself is a reasonable expectation, therefore (?) everyone should be able to have a hammer? It is immediately obvious to anyone who has driven nails that owning a hammer and being able to drive nails are two completely different things. Indeed, the beginner with a hammer and nails is a danger to life (not-so-much), limb, and property. Similarly with a car, an ax, with all kinds of things. The lesson being that possession does not at all constitute or establish competence. And it is "not unreasonable" to require competence as a condition for possession.
  • ssu
    7.9k
    An interesting take just on how much actual gun culture means. Something that isn't obvious to many, actually.



    To put it simply: In the US people have guns to protect them from other fellow citizens (and for hunting and sport). In Switzerland (and in Finland) they don't have them to protect from other fellow citizens. With the militia system of the Swiss this is more evident.

    And the video tells clearly the obvious: 2nd Amendment means now something else than it originally was meant to.
  • Relativist
    2.1k
    One thing I’ll never understand about the Second Amendment argument is why there is complete deviation from the original wording, which talked of ‘well-regulated militiasWayfarer

    I agree with you in principle, but it is an unfortunate fact of life that the Supreme Court has so ruled (District of Columbia v. Heller, 552 U.S. 1229 [2008]). We can take the long view, like "pro-life" advocates did after Roe, and go a multi-decade quest to change the makeup of the Supreme Court.

    In the meantime, we can only seek means to reduce the damage.
  • Relativist
    2.1k
    It’s not the guns. There are more guns in the US today than ever before yet crime and murder are the lowest they’ve been since their peak in the 1990s. Clearly there is something deeper at work than the mere existence of firearms. Not only that but even if you remove firearm homicides the US still has a higher homicide rate than most developed countriesCaptain Homicide

    Is that bolded part true? In recent years, 70% of homicides are by firearms (per FBI stats) Even if your statement is true, the statistics suggest homicides could be reduced with more controls on access to guns.

    IMO, gun ownership by those who are responsible and emotionally stable aren't the problem. So the ideal would be to reduce ownership by the irresponsible and unstable. Training and exam (analogous to getting a driver's license) might help, as well as laws that support responsible ownership.
  • ssu
    7.9k
    IMO, gun ownership by those who are responsible and emotionally stable aren't the problem. So the ideal would be to reduce ownership by the irresponsible and unstable. Training and exam (analogous to getting a driver's license) might help, as well as laws that support responsible ownership.Relativist
    That is not going to be easy when you have the 2nd Amendment and the current gun lobby. And the current political system where lobbies can have very much political power.

    There's the obvious reasons when a lot of people have guns: If people have guns around to protect their homes and property, you will have problems. That's a lot of loaded guns lying around in drawers. If people who don't otherwise care at all about guns (don't hunt, don't go to the range), but still own especially small handguns, you will have problems.

    Yet in the US example the whole culture around guns is one leading issue, and you simply don't change culture by exams and policy adjustments. For many Americans, the right to own a gun is part of being an American and what the US is all about.

    news1-4-ecfbaa43a3217d6c.jpg
  • Relativist
    2.1k
    That is not going to be easy when you have the 2nd Amendment and the current gun lobby.ssu
    I don't think my proposal violates the 2nd Amendment, although I agree the NRA would oppose anything that constrains gun ownership.

    you simply don't change culture by exams and policy adjustments. For many Americans, the right to own a gun is part of being an American and what the US is all about.ssu
    It would be a political struggle, and require framing the issues in ways that more people could accept it. I'd open with my earlier statement: gun ownership by those who are responsible and emotionally stable aren't the problem.

    I expect that nearly 100% of gun owners believe thaty they themselves are responsible and stable. If you're responsible and stable, you have nothing to fear! An example of a "responsibility" law is a law that requires gun owners to prevent access by children. 34 states already have such a law - even Texas(!), where I live. Laws like this are low-hanging fruit - but let's not overlook chipping away at the problem by harvesting it.
  • RogueAI
    2.4k
    The problem is intractable in America unless truly draconian measures happen. A society reaches a tipping point where there are so many guns floating around, it becomes trivial for anyone (including criminals) to get their hands on one. That then creates an "arms race" where law-abiding people buy guns on the off-chance an armed person breaks into their house/apartment. That increases the number of guns, making it even easier for criminals to get one, etc. America reached that tipping long ago.
  • ssu
    7.9k
    I agree the NRA would oppose anything that constrains gun ownership.Relativist
    This is the unfortunate strategy that the gun lobby, or nearly every lobby, follows. Fight everything, every inch. Assume there never will be a consensus and that the other side will be demanding a total ban on every kind of firearm for any use or ownership, hence trying to compromise will be useless and counterproductive.
  • Wayfarer
    20.6k
    That then creates an "arms race" where law-abiding people buy guns on the off-chance an armed person breaks into their house/apartment. That increases the number of guns, making it even easier for criminals to get one, etc. America reached that tipping long ago.RogueAI

    :100: That's why there's a huge surge of gun sales after every particularly heinous mass murder event. The most vicious of vicious circles.
  • ssu
    7.9k
    That's why there's a huge surge of gun sales after every particularly heinous mass murder event. The most vicious of vicious circles.Wayfarer
    The only thing that decreases gun sales last time was when Trump got elected.

    Yes, the urge to buy a gun is all between ones ears.
  • LuckyR
    378
    It's not about guns it's about fearmongering.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment