• Thanks for stopping by. Logging in to a registered account will remove all generic ads. Please reach out with any questions or concerns.

The Great Gun Control Debate

Status
Not open for further replies.
Shamrock said:
I suspect that I'm commenting in the wrong thread and with the wrong tone, but how will the ammendment to an ammendment of an American constitutional right domino through the "whole worldwide firearms community?"

One of the US courts ruled correctly that the right to bear arms and self defence does not flow from the 2nd amendment, but that the 2nd amendment is designed to prevent governments from impeding those rights. The right to bears arms and to self defence flows from Common law. So far the courts here have been consistent with their belief that Canadian’s still have the right to self-defence, however they have ruled based on the past precedent to favour the government abilities to limit our ability to do so. However the past precedents are appearing to clash fundamentally with the principles of the Canadian constitution and charter of rights. I think it is the Sparrow case that speaks of “imaginary licences” as being unconstitutional (ie a licence so hard to get becomes impossible to ever get.) The Feds have spent millions to prevent people from challenging things such as this, trying to wear people down rather than risk the courts ruling against them.

A clear win for the 2nd amendment in regard to restricting gun laws would deal a serious blow to the lobby groups that push a anti-firearm agenda, just as a major loss for 2nd amendment would create a lot of traction for them. Canadian courts have historical used precedents set in both the US and UK for guidance as our laws are all based on Common Law.
 
The US Constitution listed rights - it did not invent them.  The framers viewed those rights as God given and inalienable.  They did recognize that a common thread of democratic thought and writing had stretched from antiquity through the Magna Carta, the English Bill of Rights of 1689 and so on.

Most importantly, they knew that most people are killed by their OWN governments, not others, and nothing in the last 250 years would serve to change their minds on that.

Gun ownership is a garuntee of democracy.  The sooner we forget that, the sooner we fold like the sheep we are and accept a police state that allows it's supreme court to pick it's own cases, that limits free speech using kangaroo human rights tribunals, that hides the identity of criminals using privacy as an excuse...
 
Wesley  Down Under said:
I am hoping for a Rudy/McCain ticket. That would be good for the country.

Ghouliani is likely the worst of the Republican candidates in terms of 2nd Amendment rights. He imposed the NY handgun ban and is responsible for maintaining AWB legislation even after the sunset of of the AWB. He's also a cross-dressing big government spending left-of-center socialist.
 
TCBF said:
Gun ownership is a garuntee of democracy.  The sooner we forget that, the sooner we fold like the sheep we are and accept a police state that allows it's supreme court to pick it's own cases, that limits free speech using kangaroo human rights tribunals, that hides the identity of criminals using privacy as an excuse...

Couldn't have said it better myself.

An armed populace is the only thing protecting us from a police state. If a government passes a law that the people do not agree with, and the people have no recourse, what are the people to do? The only answer is to remove the problem at its source. This is what happened during the American Revolution; the people had no recourse to the taxes imposed by the British government, so they unseated it. This is why there is a 2nd Amendment; to make sure that the people cannot have their only tool left to defend themselves from a tyrannical government taken away.

An interesting coincidence: The Nazi government created a firearms registration program in the late 30's. They were praised for doing so. At the beginning of the Holocaust, all the firearms of Jewish families and dissenters were taken away, so that they would have no way to defend themselves. I am not making connections between gun control laws and Nazism here, just stating a fact.

"Germans who wish to use firearms should join the S.S. or the S.A. -- ordinary citizens don't need guns, as their having guns doesn't serve the state."
- Heinrich Himmler

"The people of the various provinces are strictly forbidden to have in their possession any swords, bows, spears, firearms or other types of arms. The possession of these elements makes difficult the collection of taxes and dues, and tends to permit uprising."
- Toyotomi Hideyoshi, Shogun of Japan, August 29, 1558
 
Simonov said:
Ghouliani is likely the worst of the Republican candidates in terms of 2nd Amendment rights. He imposed the NY handgun ban and is responsible for maintaining AWB legislation even after the sunset of of the AWB. He's also a cross-dressing big government spending left-of-center socialist.

With a name like Siminov, I would have expected more. Judging  by the way you spelled Rudy's sur name, that smells like some type of hidden agenda/piss poor attitude to me.

Either way, I like RG because he brought NYC back to a liveable place, and handled himself well during 11 Sep 01 attacks. As for McCain, he spent his time in hell at the Hanoi Hilton. Both are Republicans, and will still tow the party line. Both have earned my respect, and handled themselves accordingly. Out of the rightwing side of things, I view both as good chances for getting in. Time will tell.

If you prefer Obama, or Hilliary, guns will become smelt.

This is your first post since Nov 2005, and your 3rd in total since 2005. You're going well. With such a lack of posting with your TI here, I would expect a more polite approach, with something called manners, and some semi-decent ethics, not stomping in rudly, with jack boots brandishing what appears to be a 'krystalnacht' mentality, and towing an empty profile to boot.


Wes
 
hmmm arent' you mixing up simonov with fullmetalparka? Sim didn't say anything about Nazism that was full.....
 
Nope, not mixed at all.

What I said has got nothing to do with Hitler's gun registry.

To me, attitude means everything, and you only get one chance at a first impression.

Cheers,

Wes
 
Wesley  Down Under said:
With a name like Siminov, I would have expected more. Judging  by the way you spelled Rudy's sur name, that smells like some type of hidden agenda/piss poor attitude to me.

This is not a post about me, but gun control. You endorsed the least conservative Republican candidate with the worst gun control record and then practically called me a Brown Shirt Nazi thug and dem supporter for disagreeing.. Ghoulianni has no supporter among the gun-owning community, his inly appeal is that the mass public is aware of him as bringing stability to NY and appearing running down the streets of NY on 9-11. That's pretty much it. Fred Thompson would be the ideal nominee IMO, but he lacks the charisma and ability to appeal the wider population. Anyone but Gulianni frankly.

Wesley  Down Under said:
This is your first post since Nov 2005, and your 3rd in total since 2005. You're going well. With such a lack of posting with your TI here, I would expect a more polite approach, with something called manners, and some semi-decent ethics, not stomping in rudly, with jack boots brandishing what appears to be a 'krystalnacht' mentality, and towing an empty profile to boot.

So my arguments hold no weight because I didn't fill out a correct profile? Sigh...
 
IN HOC SIGNO said:
hmmm arent' you mixing up simonov with fullmetalparka? Sim didn't say anything about Nazism that was full.....

I didn't say anything about Nazism. I simply said that dictatorships often take away the people's means of defense, and gave an example. I said nothing of Nazi ideology.
 
koalorka1 said:
This is not a post about me, but gun control. You endorsed the least conservative Republican candidate with the worst gun control record and then practically called me a Brown Shirt Nazi thug and dem supporter for disagreeing.. Ghoulianni has no supporter among the gun-owning community, his inly appeal is that the mass public is aware of him as bringing stability to NY and appearing running down the streets of NY on 9-11. That's pretty much it. Fred Thompson would be the ideal nominee IMO, but he lacks the charisma and ability to appeal the wider population. Anyone but Gulianni frankly.

So my arguments hold no weight because I didn't fill out a correct profile? Sigh...

Mods, my appologies for biting here....

Feel better now?

Attitude, calibre of posts, and no profile. Frankly its equivilant like walking into my living room and shitting on the floor. Get some bloody manners before you attempt to bite me.

I call it as I see it. Its your words not mine. Like I said attitude means everything, and its obvious do got a bee up your ass. Check out the reaction by others on your other posts (the nationalism one). On this thread you came off arrogant and went for my throat, I don't mind that when someone has some TI and experience to back up a good argument. 

What do you know about 9-11 (aside from a few distant memories and the now Michael Moore fiasco of what some refer to as a film) you were what, 13 or 14 then.

Quite frankly, I am a right wing gun owner myself, and I don't need some snot 21 yr old know it all with 5 posts now, over a period of years , to try to tell me about life.

Again, sorry mods, I just won't take shit from people like this.

 
Well, at the risk of feeding the flames, I don't trust Giulianni at all, either.
 
Regardless of that, he is possibly toleratable by the left, and this may keep the Republicans in power. He really the most known and proven of them all through crisis. Either way its better than the Dems getting in. I think the Us citizens seek a leader who can handle things, and I believe RG can do that. In these times, the people seek someone who can handle things win time of need, and is cabable of strong solid leadership.

I think he'll be leaving the gun owners alone, and tow the party line.

Thats my opinion, and soon in 11 months from now, we'll know for sure.

BTW, I trust no politician also.

Cheers,

Wes
 
Wesley  Down Under said:
BTW, I trust no politician also.

The only politician that I will ever trust will be me, when I run.

And even then, I won't be too sure.
 
Wesley  Down Under said:
Quite frankly, I am a right wing gun owner myself, and I don't need some snot 21 yr old know it all with 5 posts now, over a period of years , to try to tell me about life.

Life? We're talking gun control. Even if you're the Sacred Cardinal, Second Level on this forum, the belief that Gulianni has a favourable view of gun ownership is still misguided.
 
I am only saying he is a favourable candidate, who has demonstrated strong leadership, and nothing more, aside from I am sure he will tow the party line, WRT the NRA, etc.
 
TCBF said:
Gun ownership is a garuntee of democracy.  The sooner we forget that, the sooner we fold like the sheep we are and accept a police state that allows it's supreme court to pick it's own cases, that limits free speech using kangaroo human rights tribunals, that hides the identity of criminals using privacy as an excuse...

1+

It is so true; or were you describing our Government? as half of what you said sounds just like it  ::)
 
I am sure the CBC will be reporting this........ ::)

Michigan sees fewer gun deaths — with more permits

January 6, 2008

By DAWSON BELL

FREE PRESS STAFF WRITER

Six years after new rules made it much easier to get a license to carry concealed weapons, the number of Michiganders legally packing heat has increased more than six-fold.

But dire predictions about increased violence and bloodshed have largely gone unfulfilled, according to law enforcement officials and, to the extent they can be measured, crime statistics.

The incidence of violent crime in Michigan in the six years since the law went into effect has been, on average, below the rate of the previous six years. The overall incidence of death from firearms, including suicide and accidents, also has declined.

More than 155,000 Michiganders -- about one in every 65 -- are now authorized to carry loaded guns as they go about their everyday affairs, according to Michigan State Police records.

About 25,000 people had CCW permits in Michigan before the law changed in 2001.

"I think the general consensus out there from law enforcement is that things were not as bad as we expected," said Woodhaven Police Chief Michael Martin, cochair of the legislative committee for the Michigan Association of Chiefs of Police. "There are problems with gun violence. But ... I think we can breathe a sigh of relief that what we anticipated didn't happen."

John Lott, a visiting professor at the University of Maryland who has done extensive research on the role of firearms in American society, said the results in Michigan since the law changed don't surprise him.

Academic studies of concealed weapons laws that generally allow citizens to obtain permits have shown different results, Lott said. About two-thirds of the studies suggest the laws reduce crime; the rest show no net effect, he said.

But no peer-reviewed study has ever shown that crime increases when jurisdictions enact changes like those put in place by the Legislature and then-Gov. John Engler in 2000, Lott said.

In Michigan and elsewhere (liberal permitting is the rule in about 40 states), those who seek CCW permits, get training and pay licensing fees tend to be "the kind of people who don't break laws," Lott said.

Nationally, the rate of CCW permits being revoked is very low, he said. State Police reports in Michigan indicate that 2,178 permits have been revoked or suspended since 2001, slightly more than 1% of those issued.

Another State Police report found that 175 Michigan permit holders were convicted of a crime, most of them nonviolent, requiring revocation or suspension of their permits between July 1, 2005, and June 30, 2006.

But even if more armed citizens have not wreaked havoc, some critics of Michigan's law chafe at how it was passed: against stiff opposition in a lame duck legislative session and attached to an appropriation that nullified efforts at repeal by referendum.

Kenneth Levin, a West Bloomfield physician, was one of those critics. In a letter to the Free Press in July 2001, he referred to the "inevitable first victim of road or workplace rage as a result of this law."

Last month, Levin said he suspected "it probably hasn't turned out as bad as I thought. I don't think I was wrong, but my worst fears weren't realized."

But the manner in which the law was enacted was nevertheless "sneaky" and "undemocratic," Levin said.

Other opponents remain convinced that it has contributed to an ongoing epidemic of firearms-related death and destruction.

Shikha Hamilton of Grosse Pointe, president of the Michigan chapter of the anti-gun group Million Moms March, said she believes overall gun violence (including suicide and accidental shootings) is up in Michigan since 2001. Many incidents involving CCW permit holders have not been widely reported, she said.

The most publicized recent case came early in 2007, when a 40-year-old Macomb County woman fired from her vehicle toward the driver of a truck she claimed had cut her off on I-94. Bernadette Headd was convicted of assault and sentenced to two years in prison.

Hamilton said that even if gun violence has ebbed, it remains pervasive, tragic and unnecessary. At the least, a more liberal concealed weapons law means there are more guns in homes and cars and on the street, she said, and more potential for disaster.

Advocates for the law argue that there is nothing equivocal about the experience of the CCW permit holders who have warded off threats and, in a few instances, saved themselves from harm.

In September, a 36-year-old Troy man killed an armed 18-year-old assailant who, with three other suspects, attempted to steal his car outside Detroit Police headquarters.

Michelle Reurink, 40, a consultant in Lansing, got her CCW permit last year, not so much because she felt an imminent threat to her well-being, she said, but because she's a strong believer in the Constitution's Second Amendment -- the right to bear arms.

"The primary reason I got it is because I feel like I have the right to have it," she said.

Still, she doesn't often carry her gun during her daily routine, though she takes it when she and her husband go on their boat, she said.

Having the license and a handgun makes her feel more secure in her home (where no one needs a CCW license to have a gun), she said. She also feels more secure because of the required training, including self-defense lessons, she took as part of the license application.

Mark Cortis of Royal Oak, who conducts concealed weapons license training and sits on the Oakland County gun board, said he believes the benefits of an armed citizenry are evident in small ways almost every day, as permit holders deter trouble and live more confidently.

"The police just can't protect you," Cortis said. "If you have to call 911, it's probably already too late."

Contact DAWSON BELL at 313-222-6604 or dbell@freepress.com <mailto:dbell@freepress.com>.
 
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

"Would Banning Firearms Reduce Murder and Suicide?"

Interesting Study, well worth the read. 

Stay Safe





 
Thanks, only read a short bit, but sec 670 is telling. The US is a excellent place to study the effects of gun control and issuance of permits for self defence firearms. Within the states is a wide variety of laws and social conditions complete with excellent statistical databases to draw from. At their very worse lawful firearms have a minimal effect on homicide rates, under the right conditions they can reduce the rate of crime and homicide.

The authors are correct to realize that there are more factors at play than just gun ownership within each country. Also Homicide rates in North America are a faulty indicator, the level of responder medical care and intervention has expanded greatly from the 70's, where they would in most places, stick you into the ambulance/police car and hope you are still breathing by the time you get to the hospital. Better to review the level of violent assaults throughout the period, keeping in mind that a large portion of assaults are never reported.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top