I understand your logic but the bad guy will always find a way to get a gun, legally or illegally. — ArguingWAristotleTiff
Thank you for helping me understand your question. Your idea would be apply if we had to have a reason to own a firearm but we don't because owning a firearm is a right. — ArguingWAristotleTiff
The killer had a felony on his record and so owned firearms illegally. So how could this shooting have been prevented, except with greater vigilance in enforcing already existing gun control laws? — Thorongil
The only solution would be to ban all guns, but this isn't really a solution for a variety of reasons, which I shall summarize once more — Thorongil
I doubt the majority of those good guys have spent or will spend the time necessary to learn to shoot accurately — Ciceronianus the White
The organization's overall revenue, which includes membership dues, program fees and other contributions, has boomed in recent years – rising to nearly $350 million in 2013. The majority of this money funds NRA initiatives like member newsletters, sporting events and gun safety education and training programs.
The NRA leadership, with its ties to the gun manufacturers, sanctions the "good guy with a gun" argument for only one reason, I think--to sell more guns. — Ciceronianus the White
Some political funding comes from big corporations, many within the gun industry, which donate millions to the NRA. But companies are barred from donating to the NRA’s political action committee, which the agency uses to fill campaign coffers, run ads and send out mailers for and against candidates.
Contributions came from nearly 30,000 donors, with around 90% of donations made by people who gave less than $200 in a single year. According to the NRA, the average donation is around $35.
Only one person has donated even close to the maximum amount allowed by federal law, which is $5,000 per year: a computer programmer from Houston.
In addition to its PAC, the NRA also has a powerful lobbying arm, the nonprofit NRA Institute for Legislative Action, which lobbies for new laws and runs issue-based campaign ads of its own.
Unlike the PAC, it isn’t able to donate directly to candidates. But it is able to receive millions of dollars in donations from corporations. The group is not required to disclose the names of its contributors or the details of these contributions, though some major gunmakers like Smith & Wesson and Sturm, Ruger & Company have announced large donations in the past (though the NRA says that the vast majority of money comes from individual donors just like the PAC).
like this interpretation of the second amendment as a so-called natural right for just about any old schmuck to own a firearm — Sapientia
The principled reason is that we have the second amendment, which is based on the natural right to self-defense. The pragmatic reasons are that 1) there are hundreds of millions of guns in circulation, such that it would be impossible to confiscate all of them, 2) those who would do the confiscating, the police and military, are themselves made up almost entirely by people who privately own guns and support the second amendment, such that they would never follow an order to confiscate guns, and 3) even if such an order were followed, armed citizens would defend themselves with their guns to prevent the latter from being confiscated, which would force the government to engage in mass murder of its citizens in order to confiscate their guns, such confiscation originally being meant to prevent... mass murder by guns. — Thorongil
But said right doesn't and ought not apply to just any old schmuck. Convicted felons, the psychologically impaired, and, I would add, the untrained don't possess it. They have forfeited it. — Thorongil
It is comparatively true that in the U.S.A., just about any old schmuck can get their hands on a gun. That ought to change, and that ought to be the goal, irrespective of the finer details about the means. — Sapientia
What, in addition to the things I listed, does UK law include that bars someone from legally owning a firearm? — Thorongil
Your idea would be apply if we had to have a reason to own a firearm but we don't because owning a firearm is a right. — ArguingWAristotleTiff
Do you support stronger gun laws in America? — Brian
I was under the impression this was an international forum. How local issues may be discussed here until the moderators take action? May I start a thread on the selection of mayor in my home village? Where is the line drawn? — BlueBanana
to what extent is it likely that those who scamper to get handguns and concealed-carry permits whenever there's been a shooting and the NRA and others are shouting that they're gonna take our Second Amendment rights away, spend significant time training in their use? — Ciceronianus the White
What actual basis is there to ban the guns or limit them? — BlueBanana
Can the issue be discussed before we discuss the necessity of laws, society, even morals or value of human life first? — BlueBanana
What if we just eliminate the real problem, which seems to be people? As Stalin (I think) said, "no people, no hunger". — BlueBanana
You're more optimistic than I am. But, perhaps you're right. Then we may take comfort in the fact that, e.g., only 40% of those carrying guns have no training in their use.I think a majority of them. The people who fall into the category you describe above are the people who would likely be found at gun ranges practicing, at education events, gun safety events, etc. — Thorongil
Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.