Supreme Court says Americans have right to guns

[Enoch]

Well, first an amendment is suggested or proposed

it needs a 2/3 vote in both house of congress or to be proposed in a special national convention to be approved for the ratification process

 

then it need to make its way through congress carrying a 3/4 majority to be ratified, or it can be approved in special state conventions if 3/4 of the states approve

 

Once an amendment is proposed it has 7 yrs. to be ratified before it just goes away.

 

The special state conventions will never happen because we could technically abolish the constitution in them if we were inclined

Not quite. The sequence is a 2/3rds vote by both houses of Congress, then the ratification by 3/4ths of the states, either via their legislatures or by conventions. (Most past amendments have gone the legislature route-- the only one that I recall using state conventions is the 21st, which ended Prohibition.)

 

http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A5.html

[Laozi]

Gun manufactures ship their guns out of the country knowing full well they're selling to people who plan to make those guns available on the black market in the US. By fining them you force them to take a active hand in the distribution of their products. Also making it illegal to export guns wouldn't be a bad idea.

 

Its simple and heavy handed, Taks, and I understand your argument, but guns are pretty unique in what they're used for, pretending that all products are the same until they get to the hands of the consumer just doesn't really fly here.

 

I'd answer Tale's post too, but he's a tard

This is the US. Gun manufacturers don't ship guns out of the country for the guns to get shipped back in. The Black Market for guns in the US comes from guns sold to licensed dealers that are then improperly sold or from guns that are stolen.

 

Issues with licensed dealers improperly selling guns is a problem of licensing and enforcement. Not the sale from manufacturers.

 

 

not all illegal guns are obtained in the same way, duh

 

But even if every gun in the US that was used in a crime was acquired the way you say it is, then if the manufactures were fined don't you think that they'd have a bigger interest in keeping track of who has their guns and keeping their guns away from dealers who make a habit of selling them improperly?

Edited June 27, 2008 by Laozi

[Laozi]

Well, first an amendment is suggested or proposed

it needs a 2/3 vote in both house of congress or to be proposed in a special national convention to be approved for the ratification process

 

then it need to make its way through congress carrying a 3/4 majority to be ratified, or it can be approved in special state conventions if 3/4 of the states approve

 

Once an amendment is proposed it has 7 yrs. to be ratified before it just goes away.

 

The special state conventions will never happen because we could technically abolish the constitution in them if we were inclined

Not quite. The sequence is a 2/3rds vote by both houses of Congress, then the ratification by 3/4ths of the states, either via their legislatures or by conventions. (Most past amendments have gone the legislature route-- the only one that I recall using state conventions is the 21st, which ended Prohibition.)

 

http://www.usconstitution.net/xconst_A5.html

 

 

 

right, I should have said 3/4 vote in the state legislature, good catch

[Tale]

But even if every gun in the US that was used in a crime was acquired the way you say it is, then if the manufactures were fined don't you think that they'd have a bigger interest in keeping track of who has their guns and keeping their guns away from dealers who make a habit of selling them improperly?

A seemingly common problem is lax enforcement. Even if finding the manufacturers could have an effect, the lax enforcement would limit it. So, until enforcement is up, trying to find more things to enforce would be seemingly pointless.

Edited June 27, 2008 by Tale

[Meshugger]

On a more serious note: Countries like Canada and Finland have the same amount of weapons per citizen as the US, but they are not even close on comparing with gun-related crime, in such cases of assault, attempted murder and so on. Maybe it is the dense population in bigger cities, or maybe it is a byproduct of the culture of strong individualism that makes it easier to form 'us and them' mentality on the individual and the group he or she associate themselves to. Do those factors function as a breeding-ground for people with a high contempt for the general society? I do not know. But the whole "GUNS! whooo-ra"-mentality isn't exactly helping either.

[Moatilliatta]

But the whole "GUNS! whooo-ra"-mentality isn't exactly helping either.

Does something like this actually exist in America or is it just something invented by Euro commies^TM (or your regional equivalent)?

 

Edit: I guess that I should stress that I'm not trying to be confrontational or anything, I'm just interested.

Edited June 27, 2008 by Moatilliatta

[taks]

On a more serious note: Countries like Canada and Finland have the same amount of weapons per citizen as the US, but they are not even close on comparing with gun-related crime, in such cases of assault, attempted murder and so on.

interesting. i did not know this. of course, this isn't something you're going to hear in standard channels since it makes the whole correlation thing with guns and crime look bad. ooops.

 

Maybe it is the dense population in bigger cities, or maybe it is a byproduct of the culture of strong individualism that makes it easier to form 'us and them' mentality on the individual and the group he or she associate themselves to. Do those factors function as a breeding-ground for people with a high contempt for the general society? I do not know.

i think this may be some of it. however, i do think the drug thing has a huge impact on the violent crime rate. our laws are so strict and that stupid failure known as the "war on drugs" (what was nancy thinking?) really did turn into a war. drugs gave rise to the huge gang population in the US, which is the source of much of our violent crime. these folks are killing each other, mostly, which doesn't show up in statistics very well, either.

 

But the whole "GUNS! whooo-ra"-mentality isn't exactly helping either.

i think that's a myth. i know very few people that actually own a gun, let alone have this mentality (though one of my friends does indeed). keep in mind, in colorado springs, nearly everyone is considered "conservative," at least by euro standards, i.e., i don't have a whole lot of friends that would otherwise be against the 2nd amendment ruling, which means i do have a whole lot of friends that should have the "GUNS! whooo-ra"-mentality but don't.

 

taks

[Gorgon]

I dunno, if you mean people who are overly emotional about the cult of the constitution and their guns, you need not look far. The US has a gun death rate of a third world nation, but they want to have them, just like by and large they want the death penalty. Their funeral I guess. It would be undemocratic to go against a majority of the electorate, even if a majority of the electorate are some simple backwards Neanderthals.

 

Just like segregation you would need a watershed moment in history for this to change. It's nowhere on the horizon.

[Gorgon]

Actually it occurs to me that us pinko commie euros might be to blame, we constantly poke our fingers in their faces pointing out their shortcommings and they respond by being opposite. You think the yanks don't care ? - just look at the whole debacle with France.

[Walsingham]

Actually it occurs to me that us pinko commie euros might be to blame, we constantly poke our fingers in their faces pointing out their shortcommings and they respond by being opposite. You think the yanks don't care ? - just look at the whole debacle with France.

 

You've got a point. The more we say that guns are American, the more likely they are to want guns. I know I probably would.

[Moatilliatta]

Actually it occurs to me that us pinko commie euros might be to blame, we constantly poke our fingers in their faces pointing out their shortcommings and they respond by being opposite. You think the yanks don't care ? - just look at the whole debacle with France.

 

You've got a point. The more we say that guns are American, the more likely they are to want guns. I know I probably would.

On top of that it probably strengthen our own wish not to have guns or gun violence and as such we could be said to be leeches leeching off America.

[Walsingham]

Actually it occurs to me that us pinko commie euros might be to blame, we constantly poke our fingers in their faces pointing out their shortcommings and they respond by being opposite. You think the yanks don't care ? - just look at the whole debacle with France.

 

You've got a point. The more we say that guns are American, the more likely they are to want guns. I know I probably would.

On top of that it probably strengthen our own wish not to have guns or gun violence and as such we could be said to be leeches leeching off America.

 

Oh I see what you mean. You mean by pillorying them we shore up our own anti-gun stance? Seems a bit crude, though. Not to mention it sucking for the yanks.

[Gfted1]

Whats the saying, "you cant unring a bell". There are literally millions of weapons in the hands of US citizenry and the vast majority are law abiding. Its a small minority of people that are accountable for the majority of gun crime in the US and you can rest assured they bought the weapon in an alley. Short of kicking in everyones door I cant see any possible way to remove guns from our culture. Not that I want too either. I dont think the majority should be held hostage by the minority. The whole throwing out the baby with the bathwater thing.

[Walsingham]

Whats the saying, "you cant unring a bell". There are literally millions of weapons in the hands of US citizenry and the vast majority are law abiding. Its a small minority of people that are accountable for the majority of gun crime in the US and you can rest assured they bought the weapon in an alley. Short of kicking in everyones door I cant see any possible way to remove guns from our culture. Not that I want too either. I dont think the majority should be held hostage by the minority. The whole throwing out the baby with the bathwater thing.

 

Well, I'd certainly agree that removing guns is almost certainly impossible. At least in today's context with organised crime able to funnel in new guns with impunity.

[Laozi]

Gun ownership might have more to do with being on the wrong end of European Imperalism

[Moatilliatta]

Not to mention it sucking for the yanks.

Well I did mention that it would make us leeches and it usually sucks to have a leach leaching off of you. I don't really believe that we as euros are the cause of any american policies. They would probably be more likely to laugh at us than be contrarian.

 

Does anyone know if the modern percieved problem of arms proliferation is a modern problem that started relatively recent or if it is an inheritance of the past?

[mkreku]

btw, mkreku, i never said "i know more because i have a background in statistics." quite the contrary. you have simply constructed a strawman, though i will admit you did it unknowingly due to a failure to get the original point.

Sure, everyone misunderstands you because you're so much more advanced than anyone else. No matter how many university points everyone else has in the exact same subject. Keep living in your little bubble. Makes it a lot easier to 'discuss' things if you can just dismiss people as knowing less than you based on a few university credits.

 

The US has a lot more guns out in the wild than most civilized, non-warmongering countries. Yet the US also has one of the highest death-rates by gun related deaths than any other civilized non warmongering country. The only people not clever enough to realize the connection are the Americans themselves.. so I guess Darwin's theory is in full effect in the US. Good for you! Shoot more, you deserve it!

[Calax]

btw, mkreku, i never said "i know more because i have a background in statistics." quite the contrary. you have simply constructed a strawman, though i will admit you did it unknowingly due to a failure to get the original point.

Sure, everyone misunderstands you because you're so much more advanced than anyone else. No matter how many university points everyone else has in the exact same subject. Keep living in your little bubble. Makes it a lot easier to 'discuss' things if you can just dismiss people as knowing less than you based on a few university credits.

 

The US has a lot more guns out in the wild than most civilized, non-warmongering countries. Yet the US also has one of the highest death-rates by gun related deaths than any other civilized non warmongering country. The only people not clever enough to realize the connection are the Americans themselves.. so I guess Darwin's theory is in full effect in the US. Good for you! Shoot more, you deserve it!

you make it sound like america isn't a warmonger.

[Walsingham]

Gun ownership might have more to do with being on the wrong end of European Imperalism

 

How was America on the wrong end of European imperialism? Shortly after defending the colonies from the French and their native American allies we tried to impose a one penny tax on TEA and they freaked out. Several shockingly incompetent British command staffs later no more colonies.

 

If that's the wrong end of colonialism then which end is The Congo?

[Xard]

It's not like brittons couldn't have taken colonies back - it's just they had more pressing matters at hand and more valuable areas

 

And the itty bitty tax was only made due to severe lack of cash British Empire ended in after finaly wtfpwning French after seemingly never-ending war.

Edited June 28, 2008 by Xard

[Gorgon]

The British could never have afforded to field a long term occupation army once it became clear that the colonies would be perpetually contested.

[Humodour]

But the whole "GUNS! whooo-ra"-mentality isn't exactly helping either.

Does something like this actually exist in America or is it just something invented by Euro commies^TM (or your regional equivalent)?

 

Edit: I guess that I should stress that I'm not trying to be confrontational or anything, I'm just interested.

 

I think most people in Australia see Americans as a bunch of gun-runners, too. But Australians don't exactly have a good view of America in general, so... slightly biased.

 

Edit: Although American tourists are great to get drunk with! European tourists can be a bit snooty.

Edited June 28, 2008 by Krezack

[Laozi]

The British could never have afforded to field a long term occupation army once it became clear that the colonies would be perpetually contested.

 

 

Right, thus creating the idea in American's heads guns = freedom. Without a gun how are you to keep the King of England out of your face?

 

My father in a lifelong member of the NRA and we've talked about how gun company's interest put gun ownership right in danger, while at the same time controlling the debate in Congress. My father, like most members of the NRA, supports some time restrictions on "assault weapons" and things of that nature, but are fearful of giving up any type of freedom because such a thing would set a precedence to take greater freedom away.

[Xard]

Gorgon: Yeah, there was nothing to gain from conquering colonies. But they could've done it.

 

But the whole "GUNS! whooo-ra"-mentality isn't exactly helping either.

Does something like this actually exist in America or is it just something invented by Euro commies^TM (or your regional equivalent)?

 

Edit: I guess that I should stress that I'm not trying to be confrontational or anything, I'm just interested.

 

I think most people in Australia see Americans as a bunch of gun-runners, too. But Australians don't exactly have a good view of America in general, so... slightly biased.

 

Edit: Although American tourists are great to get drunk with! European tourists can be a bit snooty.

 

Uggh, I don't think anywhere around the globe there's particularly good look on americans.

 

I blame american tourists for japanese wariness with rude, obnoxious gaijin (who tend to be americans but the ire is sometimes against all westerners).

 

Luckily we finns get along with them just fine. Similar mentalities, heh

[Guard Dog]

The British could never have afforded to field a long term occupation army once it became clear that the colonies would be perpetually contested.

 

 

Right, thus creating the idea in American's heads guns = freedom. Without a gun how are you to keep the King of England out of your face?

 

My father in a lifelong member of the NRA and we've talked about how gun company's interest put gun ownership right in danger, while at the same time controlling the debate in Congress. My father, like most members of the NRA, supports some time restrictions on "assault weapons" and things of that nature, but are fearful of giving up any type of freedom because such a thing would set a precedence to take greater freedom away.

 

I don't like the idea of punishing a company for the bad acts of individuals who happen to end up with their products. If I were to rob a bank and in the process shoot a guard with a Ruger pistol, fining Sturm-Ruger would make as much sense as fining Chevrolet if I used one of their cars as a get away, or Nike if I was wearing their shoes as I ran out.

 

I do think you hit on something big in ths post though, and Enoch alluded to it earlier. Now that the spectre of total bans and confiscation of firearms (always the stated goal of the gun-control fanatics) has been removed I think you will see less opposition to reasonable restrictions such as banning hi-cap magazines, waiting periods, and assault weapon bans.