Serious gun control questions

[Blue Dawg]

The NRA solution (more guns) is just as ineffective as Obamas (no more guns). Both *might* save a few lives, and one of them is essential to establishing a martial state and socialist regime (see Hitler's demilitarization of Austria).

However, both solutions are really the same. "Guns are the issue." Guns are not the issue. People are the issue. Both the NRA and Obama are saying guns are both the problem or the solution (whether too many or not enough).

There will be no end to gun violence until we recognize a vital truth of history - people are idiots. The problem is not with our surroundings or our circumstances...the problem is with ourselves. If a criminal can't get a gun, he'll get a baseball bat or a hammer...both of which are responsible for more domestic violence than guns.

Part of the media problem is that the NRA is composed of a small amount of anarcholibertarians who want zero government, and the Obama administration is composed in part of people who want alllll the government. Little attention is payed to the libertarians who want limited government.

Nothing will change until we take responsibility for our actions and stop blaming guns, weed, alcohol, hammers, or what have you.

[T1]

The NRA is just a large group of American citizens who want to uphold the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution.

[Blue Dawg]

The NRA is just a large group of American citizens who want to uphold the 2nd Amendment of the US Constitution.

Right. I should have said "partly composed of anarcholibertarians." They get all the attention, but the good American citizens might as well not exist for all the media cares.

[T1]

Right. I should have said "partly composed of anarcholibertarians." They get all the attention, but the good American citizens might as well not exist for all the media cares.

I think you're on to something there!

[DawgyNWindow]

Right. I should have said "partly composed of anarcholibertarians." They get all the attention, but the good American citizens might as well not exist for all the media cares.

Are you saying you have no fear of tyranny and the impact guns in the hands of citizens will have in preventing it?

Our founders were pretty smart. They saw this coming and put this second in the bill of rights, right behind free speech (I like to think this right baks up and protects the right to free speech).

anarcholibertarians indeed! The first folks to fight and die for the freedoms you have today were anarcholibertarians.

[Blue Dawg]

Are you saying you have no fear of tyranny and the impact guns in the hands of citizens will have in preventing it?

Our founders were pretty smart. They saw this coming and put this second in the bill of rights, right behind free speech (I like to think this right baks up and protects the right to free speech).

anarcholibertarians indeed!

Quite the contrary - I understand the point of the 2nd A. and also what happens when those rights are violated (Nazi Austria).

What I'm referring to are the people who want no laws whatsoever, who want no government authority at all, who want to do what they please when they please. This is untenable...and since it is untenable, that's what the liberal media paints the entire NRA and 2nd A rights movement as - anarchists...which some of them are (but not all, and certainly not me). There is a place for government...the issue is with that government overstepping its bounds - which is what the 2nd A among others seeks to prevent.

[JuBru]

How? I'm not being snarky, I really want to know. What is reasonable for a private citizen who wants to sell something that's dangerous? What should I require of the buyer? I can ask if they'll sign a bill of sale, but should I be required to administer a background check?

I don't know how far to take it. The only thing I know is there should be more known than just a "hey, you have money, I have a gun, give me your money, I give you my gun" aspect of it. This is why discussion is necessary.

[Guisslapp]

Are you saying you have no fear of tyranny and the impact guns in the hands of citizens will have in preventing it?

Our founders were pretty smart. They saw this coming and put this second in the bill of rights, right behind free speech (I like to think this right baks up and protects the right to free speech).

anarcholibertarians indeed! The first folks to fight and die for the freedoms you have today were anarcholibertarians.

Not all of them. Madison and the Federalists didn't particularly want a Bill of Rights and argued that it was unnecessary (whether they actually believed it was unnecessary is up for debate - I personally don't think they truly believed it, they just wanted a stronger Federal government). You can thank Jefferson and the Anti-Feds for Amendments that follow the Articles.

[Guisslapp]

I don't know how far to take it. The only thing I know is there should be more known than just a "hey, you have money, I have a gun, give me your money, I give you my gun" aspect of it. This is why discussion is necessary.

Apart from the 2nd Amendment problems with background checks, there could also be another Constitutional "takings" problem with requiring non-dealers to do background checks before selling their property.

[JuBru]

Blue Dawg, Hitler didn't demilitarize Austria. Austrian military and people were incorporated in the Wehrmacht and SS.

[Blue Dawg]

Blue Dawg, Hitler didn't demilitarize Austria. Austrian military and people were incorporated in the Wehrmacht and SS.

http://blog.beliefnet.com/on_the_fro...n-america.html

Take it how you will.

[JuBru]

http://blog.beliefnet.com/on_the_fro...n-america.html

Take it how you will.

Maybe you should read it again?
“It was compulsory for young people, male and female, to give one year to the labor corps,” remembers Kitty. “During the day, the girls worked on the farms, and at night they returned to their barracks for military training just like the boys.
“They were trained to be anti-aircraft gunners and participated in the signal corps. After the labor corps, they were not discharged but were used in the front lines.

Here's something you should read. Most relevant part(s) starts around page 17 but the whole thing is an interesting read.http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/fi...rt_fordham.pdf

Now, the people the Nazi's hated had their gun rights and more taken away, but that did not disarm or demilitarize Austria. The general acceptable Austrian public and the Austrian military became German. If anything, he rearmed Austria.

Most of the stuff about Hitler in regard to gun rights is usually wrong.

[Blue Dawg]

Maybe you should read it again?
“It was compulsory for young people, male and female, to give one year to the labor corps,” remembers Kitty. “During the day, the girls worked on the farms, and at night they returned to their barracks for military training just like the boys.
“They were trained to be anti-aircraft gunners and participated in the signal corps. After the labor corps, they were not discharged but were used in the front lines.

Here's something you should read. Most relevant part(s) starts around page 17 but the whole thing is an interesting read.http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/fi...rt_fordham.pdf

Now, the people the Nazi's hated had their gun rights and more taken away, but that did not disarm or demilitarize Austria. The general acceptable Austrian public and the Austrian military became German. If anything, he rearmed Austria.

Most of the stuff about Hitler in regard to gun rights is usually wrong.

Thanks. Always good to get a second opinion.

[TYLERTECHSAS]

Maybe you should read it again?
“It was compulsory for young people, male and female, to give one year to the labor corps,” remembers Kitty. “During the day, the girls worked on the farms, and at night they returned to their barracks for military training just like the boys.
“They were trained to be anti-aircraft gunners and participated in the signal corps. After the labor corps, they were not discharged but were used in the front lines.

Here's something you should read. Most relevant part(s) starts around page 17 but the whole thing is an interesting read.http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/files/harcourt_fordham.pdf

Now, the people the Nazi's hated had their gun rights and more taken away, but that did not disarm or demilitarize Austria. The general acceptable Austrian public and the Austrian military became German. If anything, he rearmed Austria.

Most of the stuff about Hitler in regard to gun rights is usually wrong.

I don't know if I can believe anything out of Chicago anymore much less that site.

[FishingBack]

I haven't seen anything proposed that would have prevented Sandy Hook. Even the AWB wouldn't have stopped it.

I take that back, an armed guard would have prevented it.

You don't need Rambo. Allow school districts the flexibility to tailor their own security plan. It may just be allowing one official to keep a gun in a safe on the campus. The Sandy principal confronted Lanza unarmed. I bet she wished she had something, even if just a taser. Instead of creating a position, allow a current employee to get extra training.

Many districts are developing "active shooter scenarios" and that will help more than anything. Had the teachers at Sandy all locked the doors it would have reduced the body count far more than limiting Lanza to a pump shotgun.