Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Sorry I can't make that connection.

Guns can be used to kill people...getting rid guns will reduce the number of deaths and in particular death by guns. (not saying this is right or wrong just that this is the argument and it is logically sound)

Karate is a martial art used for fighting... getting rid of Karate will reduce the number of children who are improperly touched. That argument is not logically sound. If karate was some sort of art which is intended for the improper touching of children, then yes, but otherwise no.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Plus, I'm not aware of any evidence that karate makes people more likely to unlawfully injure others.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

The way i read PAsmiths post was simply people are people , everyone has the capacity to do something stupid when they lose their temper (I know I have in the past) , and the ability to do something stupid is only enhanced with access to a firearm.
We all agree that a wider firearms ban like the UK is not feasible in the US , and no matter what's brought in it will be too much for some and not enough for others.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Moving on, any thoughts on this study?

"Certainly some self defense gun uses are legal and in the public interest. But many are not. The possibility of using a gun in a socially useful manner—against a criminal during the commission of a crime—will rarely, if ever, occur for the average gun owner. By contrast, at any other moment, the use of a gun against another human is illegal, and socially undesirable. Regular citizens with guns, who are sometimes tired, angry, drunk or afraid, and who are not trained in dispute resolution or on when it is proper to use a firearm, have many opportunities for inappropriate gun use. People engage in innumerable annoying and somewhat hostile interactions with others in the course of a lifetime. We might expect that unlawful “self defense” gun uses will outnumber the legitimate and socially beneficial ones."

"Our results indicate that gun use against adults to threaten and intimidate is far more common than self defense gun use by them, and that most self reported self defense gun uses are probably illegal, and may be against the interests of society."

http://m.injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/6/4/263.full
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

This pretty much chimes with my feelings , and the bolded part seems to agree with PAsmith
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Interesting.

Perhaps those who use their guns in defense is not so much covered/reported by the media as those who murder others in cold blood

Therefore a ban on all guns serves who?

If children were dying from ingesting bleach and medicines, and now there are child safety measures, ultimately who is responsible if a child should happen to still misuse?

With guns, perhaps there should be a mandated education-safety-awareness course before purchase

The "type" of gun is not going to matter once a crazed mind has initiated their plan.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Kinder eggs are banned in the USA. But guns are fine. I think that just about sums up the whole situation.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

People keep directing questions to me specifically, and it's somewhat rude to ignore them. And even when people attack my integrity or intelligence, I try not to respond in kind but respond to the question I've been asked. So when you ask me a direct question, LIKE YOU JUST DID, I'll generally respond. Don't play this game where you ask me a direct question and then flame me if I have the common courtesy to respond.

Right now I'm using loaner guns, but I'm rearranging funds to buy myself a Browning BPS Hunter. 12-gauge pump-action field gun.



I'm a pretty darned good shot if I say so myself. Right now I'm focused on picking clay pigeons out of the air on the trap range, though I'll probably eventually start hunting with it as well. As someone pointed out, wild game is more ethical than grocery store meat (and tastier too). The added security of having a twelve-gauge in the house is icing on the cake but not the primary reason for gun ownership.



I'm also not aware of any evidence that owning a gun makes people more likely to unlawfully injure others. It's not like you buy a shotgun and as you sleep, it whispers in your ear, causing you to decide to kill a child the next day. The repeated insinuiation in this thread that owning a gun makes you "more likely to unlawfully injure others" is what makes comments like "people just like you will shoot up schools, kill their wives, shoot themselves" make me bristle. I'm being told that gun owners are more likely to be violent than non-gun owners (there's no basis for that), and then told that people like me kill women and kids. How am I supposed to take that?
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

How about people kill people. That was the way I read it. Having a gun just makes it easier for people to kill people. Having the right tool makes all the difference.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

What kind of world do we live in when a "BIRD" cannot have an egg!

Oh what a world...what a world...
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

To inject some humour...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=RIiTKNok7xA#!

1:20
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

I didn't know I wasn't allowed to ask you questions. But thank you for that reply. Given that your reason for owning a gun or wanting to own a gun is sport. Why focus your arguments on self defence?

I realise it might seem counter intuitive. But self defence isn't really a valid reason for a country like America to advocate gun ownership. Most people don't live in the wilderness where a bear might bite their head off. They live in towns and cities where the police should be able to provide the require law enforcement. If that isn't being delivered then the answer is not to arm everybody. The answer is to build a better police force.

Such a thing cannot be done quickly. But it can be done. It would also be easier to do if people would stop pretending they want a gun for self-defence. Only when gun owners are honest about their reasons for owning a gun can a country build a reasonable, open and fair frame work that allows them to do that.



Owning a gun doesn't make it more likely that a given individual will injure or kill someone out of the pure act of ownership. It however does make the act of injuring or killing someone easier. And it's the ease of committing the act that makes it more likely.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Because I care about the rights of all Americans, not just me. I defend the First Amendment right to practice a religion of your choice even though I'm not religious. I defend the Second Amendment right to bear arms for everyone use uses firearms lawfully, not just people situated like me. I oppose "driving while Black" traffic stops as against the Fourth Amendment even though I'm an upper-middle-class white guy who isn't directly affected by those Constitutional violations.



If Americans don't need self-defense, how about we also shut down all the martial arts schools. Who needs jiu-jitsu when you have a cell phone and 911? We shouldn't be practicing choking people ourselves, we should just be practicing using our iPhones to call the local law enforcement officer to come save us. If we don't "need" self-defense, we don't "need" martial arts.

And I don't think most Europeans understand that the issue of police response times is not something that really can be fixed. Our geography is just so much different than yours. Particularly in the rural American west, we're spread out so that if you live outside of a metro area, the cops aren't going to get to you for 30+ minutes after you call 911. There's simply no way for the population of Wyoming (576,000 people in 97,814 sq mi (253,348 km2)) to pay for enough police stations and enough officers so that no matter where you live in Wyoming or where you call for help, the cops will be there in five minutes.

If you live in the rural American west, calling 911 about a crime in progress is dial-a-prayer. That's not a knock against cops; it's just a comment on our geography.



offtopic doesn't make you physically assault people, but it makes the act of physically assaulting someone and severely injuring or killing them in the process much easier. Kali doesn't make you knife someone, but it does make you much deadlier if you pluck a steak knife off the table at a restaurant. So should we ban martial arts too because they also magnify the damage that someone who has chosen to hurt innocent people can do?
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Okay then. Well I've looked around for the exact wording of the Second Amendment. And apparently it reads "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

It does not say anything about the types of weapons or indeed refer to individuals owning their own weapons. So, so long as a fire arm is available to you as part of a militia isn't the second amendment being satisfied? Are you part of a well regulated militia?
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Like the UK, the US uses case law as binding precedent for what constitutional and statutory provisions mean. Here's the leading case on what the Second Amendment means and why.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District_of_Columbia_v._Heller

The relevant excerpts from the suofftopicry:

The “militia” comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense. The Antifederalists feared that the Federal Government would disarm the people in order to disable this citizens’ militia, enabling a politicized standing army or a select militia to rule. The response was to deny Congress power to abridge the ancient right of individuals to keep and bear arms, so that the ideal of a citizens’ militia would be preserved.

Neither United States v. Cruikshank, 92 U. S. 542 , nor Presser v. Illinois, 116 U. S. 252 , refutes the individual-rights interpretation. United States v. Miller, 307 U. S. 174 , does not limit the right to keep and bear arms to militia purposes, but rather limits the type of weapon to which the right applies to those used by the militia, i.e., those in common use for lawful purposes. Pp. 47–54.

Complete text: http://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZO.html
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

I love it. "We must live our lives by the words of the Constitution, except where we can convince a judge to change the clear worded meaning of the Constitution"
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

I don't agree with your reading, and I certainly don't agree that your reading iis the only "clear worded meaning" of the Second Amendment.
 
Man arrested for 2x4 labeled "High Powered Rifle"

Come now, certainly we can all agree that outlawing more than 1 bullet and one gun per person goes against the spirit of the 2nd Amendment.

----

Objectively, is is wholly hypocritical and illogical for martial artists to be anti-gun, anti-2nd Amendment. Plain fact.
 
Back
Top