The FAST Approaching Gun Ban

[martin48]

Here are some more thoughts - though, I sadly think many will not read them.

OK - a constitutional clause that permits the keeping of arms, but why allow almost anyone to purchase machine guns? How many unarmed teenagers do you wish to kill at one time? If the "right" is assist in preventing tyranny by an elected government, why stop at machine guns, surely citizens need to ability to match the power of the government -weapons of mass destruction.



In answer to the question, do European nations have a similar U.S. 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms including an individual and collective right ? The summary answer is NO. However, the English Bill of Rights of 1689, which predates our Bill of Rights by 100 years, codified an ancient self-protection right with the words, “ … subjects who are Protestants may have arms for their defense suitable to their conditions and as allowed by law.” This gave birth to the English common law right to keep and bear arms for self-defense, but the vague wording is a far cry from the absolute wording of our 2nd Amendment: “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.”
In Britain, the possession of most types of arms are strictly controlled for the common good. Criminals, children, and the mentally ill are not allowed to be armed. The UK Firearms Act of 1968 sets rigid requirements for a firearms certificate. A concept of compulsory security for rifles and shotguns is in effect and extends to shotguns. Centre-fire self-loading and pump action rifles are banned as well as automatic weapons. Gun rights and strict rules have culturally evolved to a point where today England has one of the lowest gun ownership levels and gun homicide rates in the world. Further, this has not resulted in high non-gun homicides or violent crime culture as purist anti-gun control believers like to say.
This low gun access approach works for England but probably would never work for the U.S. Our nation is totally saturated in a gun culture – including quasi machine guns that can shoot 30-50-100 bullets in seconds. We are a country where an individual can go into a gun show and walk out with a semi-automatic weapon and no background check … where insane people have easy access to military style weapons! Lanza used three of four semi-automatic weapons belonging to his mother, all easily accessible. This potential from ever more efficiently designed arms to murder many people rapidly makes the case for re-defining U.S. gun law all the more urgent.
Switzerland also has no constitutional guarantee of an individual’s right to bear arms. The national legislature could ban gun ownership anytime. But today Switzerland is a heavily armed nation. This reflects a centuries old Swiss culture to have arms to resist possible invaders or despotic tyrants, like Hitler in WWII. The country’s high gun ownership level comes with a very low gun homicide rate vs. the U.S. All males at 18 join the military and can take their military assault weapon home with them when they leave. Thus, up to 500,000 military assault weapons are estimated to be in Swiss households today. These weapons must be locked up and ammunition is kept in central arsenals. The government supplies bullets for shooting festivals. Canton police may issue special permits for civilians to own assault rifles – typically as licensed collectors—and such weapons may not be fired in full automatic mode. The country hosts some of the largest rifle shooting events in the world. While gun ownership laws have tightened upon handguns and non-military weapons, it is still reasonably easy to get a hand gun. But, it is illegal to carry guns in public.
As stated earlier, social attitudes and discipline concerning guns play a major role in Europe. The Swiss and Norwegian easier gun access cultures illustrate that the ability to possess arms is not necessarily a direct causal link to a greater gun homicide or crime rate. This is true in an opposite way for England where a much more difficult access to guns does not ipso facto translate into much higher levels of non-gun homicides or crime rates as some pro-gun enthusiasts suggest.
Spain enforces strict controls over firearms. The constitution clearly states: “The State shall have exclusive competence over … the regime for the production, trading, holding, and use of weapons.” In Finland, citizens must have a valid reason for a gun license such as hunting, recreation, or gun exhibitions. An amendment to the 1997 Scotland Firearms Act banned private possession of all modern pistols, even for competitive sporting purposes. Small bore rifles are not limited. Many types of rifles, shotguns, and black powder pistols and long arms may be privately owned. Luxembourg has a complete ban on guns. In the Netherlands, assault rifles, silencers, and short-barreled shotguns as well as any kind of high capacity magazine are banned for civilian possession unless authorized by the Minister of Justice.
Our neighbor, Canada, has no constitutional right to bear arms. Gun ownership is strictly regulated and certain gun models are prohibited by the Firearms Act. Canada’s crime rate is lower than that of the U.S.
Conclusion
Unlike America, the European individual right to bear and keep arms is NOT entrenched in constitutional law. The U.S. gun culture inherited from England and Switzerland of protecting ourselves against tyrannical government was expanded on by Thomas Jefferson with his remarks:
“The laws that forbid the carrying of arms … disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes … Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed may be attached with greater confidence than the armed man.” (Thomas Jefferson, Common Place Book , 1774-1776 (quoting from “On Crimes and Punishment” by criminologist Cesare Beccaria 1764).
It should not be surprising that the right to bear arms has remained closely and jealously guarded in America. Our constitution has left the 50 states free to regulate the private possession of weapons in whatever way deemed appropriate to them. Today 43 states have some kind of right to bear arms provisions which are far more relevant to proposed state and local gun controls than the 2nd Amendment. However, in the McDonald v. City of Chicago case, the U.S. Supreme Court holds that the 2nd Amendment applies to the states, potentially weakening state and local gun control laws.
The fundamental purposes of the 2nd Amendment have come to represent: (a) the individual right to protect oneself against other individuals and (b) the collective right to protect oneself against a tyrannical government. Both U.S. 2nd Amendment protections are seen to be rather anachronistic by European standards for a number of reasons. BUT, these rights are steadfast, virtual “emotional” realities for many Americans. In Europe, having guns – except for hunting and shooting festivals and except for well-controlled Swiss assault weapons as a retired civilian-militia protection against invaders – is simply NOT built into the psyche of Europeans who in general have little interest in nor see the necessity of owning guns as a defense against criminals or their governments.
The challenge for America is where to draw the line between the rightful, normal gun means to defend oneself as opposed to the use of modern multi-murderous weaponry and magazines. U.S. anti-gun regulation paranoia abounds in the thought than any restriction is the first step to the total banning of guns, ultimately making citizens more unsafe against criminals who will never give up guns. This is further supported by NRA’s false claim that there is no statistical evidence the 1994-2004 semi-automatic assault gun ban had a measureable effect in reducing violent wide-scale shootings.
Complete gun control in America is never going to happen given the 2nd Amendment and fact there are too many guns already out there. We have created a climate of gun protection and resort to gun violence by criminals and non-criminals (e.g., crimes of passion) that is deeply cultural and self-perpetuating… that is leap years worse and ingrained than in Europe and Canada by any statistical measure.




Frank Thomas
The Netherlands
December 30, 2012

[broncofan]

Interesting cross-cultural comparison. Some good points. Sadly some people would read this and take Switzerland as an example to say: if they don't have a high murder rate, it shows that guns alone don't cause a high murder rate. Yet, the more salient interpretation might be that many factors contribute to a murder rate, but guns increase that rate within any given society (to a varying degree).

A couple of additional thoughts:

-The most generous view of the protection against tyranny argument goes like this I think (I don't know why I'm in such a generous mood). Maybe if you have certain weapons you cannot match the artillery of your country's military, but you make it so their persecution of you is not cost-free. They know that they will be subject to guerilla warfare, or if they round people up for internment camps that they are liable to lose their storm-troopers in the process. It's all very apocalyptic I know and does reflect a deep-seated mistrust of government. But that is the line of thinking. To be honest if our government were rounding people up for labor camps I'd probably prefer to become a guerilla fighter than hand myself over willingly but I'd rather not live my life as though that's a likely possibility.

-The other thing is that a correlate of gun ownership in our country seems to be a mistrust of other people and a mistrust of government. You could almost set up a regression equation mapping it. The fact that the right is anachronistic might also reflect an unhealthy nostalgia some gun-owners have. In other cultures, gun ownership might be more ceremonial or based on entry into the military, but for us it's a way of expressing dissatisfaction and alienation.

-I am also glad that he interpreted the UK murder rates the way we have been. I know UK does not have the same culture or history as we do but the statistics do indicate that lower rate of gun homicide does not translate into a similar increase in deaths by other means. It goes against logic to think that it would.

[notdrunk]

Belief is an action?

SYG seems to depend on whether the shooter "feels" threatened. A man who brings a gun gun to a heated argument is making no other point than, "Disagree with me at your own peril." SYG says you can shoot him, right?

Nope, that is not how SYG work.

[trish]

SYG works?! It's killed more people than it saved.

[martin48]

I think this is true. It's the mistrust of government by a sizable fraction of the US that amazes me. Sure, I don't like the Tories and UKIP are a load of loonies; but in the States there seems to be a deep-seated hatred of government. Not healthy

-The other thing is that a correlate of gun ownership in our country seems to be a mistrust of other people and a mistrust of government. You could almost set up a regression equation mapping it. The fact that the right is anachronistic might also reflect an unhealthy nostalgia some gun-owners have. In other cultures, gun ownership might be more ceremonial or based on entry into the military, but for us it's a way of expressing dissatisfaction and alienation.

[buttslinger]

The People have spoken. People vote with their wallets, and with millions of dollars of gun sales, Congress is on recess. I don't have more guns than books, but I don't have a small Law Library on my shelves, either.
The last approval rating of Congress is something like 19%
I think when they poll the approval rate of Hitler it always comes in at like 15%
Common sense, the Police, even the people want tighter restrictions on the obvious loopholes in gun sales, but the Republicans are too busy talking about Obamacare and Benghazi. I haven't seen an article about gun reform in the newspaper for weeks. It's an ice cold topic.
Don't expect Hillary to propose giving little boys Princess Outfits and Tiaras for Christmas, either. A Woman running for President is going to do everything She can to show that her Opinions are not Estrogen-laden.
Embrace the Chaos. Strap on a pair of Colt Peacemakers, Pard. Cause in the USA, Guns are here to STAY.

[trish]

I haven't seen an article about gun reform in the newspaper for weeks. It's an ice cold topic.

This one's from today's paper of record. http://nyti.ms/1jaVEBT

A Woman running for President is going to do everything She can to show that her Opinions are not Estrogen-laden.

Not much of a problem for a post menopausal candidate. "...anybody can have a gun, anywhere, anytime."____Hillary Rodham Clinton (April 30 2014....13 days ago... http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireS...paign-23600038) I'm hoping to vote for Elizabeth Warren. Speaking of estrogen vs testosterone you should take a look at the attack ads John Oliver designed... http://www.mediaite.com/tv/you-need-...political-ads/

[AlexisDVyne]

I think this is true. It's the mistrust of government by a sizable fraction of the US that amazes me. Sure, I don't like the Tories and UKIP are a load of loonies; but in the States there seems to be a deep-seated hatred of government. Not healthy

Mistrust of the government.. hmm..

Well.. consider the USA goverment is made up 99.99% people that are well to do and never had to actually work for a living.. Born silver spoon in mouth.. went to yale, havard.. yadayada..

These aren't regular people.. they have no concept of being poor.. they don't have any clue to be under the pressure of the next paycheck being their last and loosing their car, their home, their family..

They are cleptocrats.. in league with the Banksters and Corpirates that try to run the world.. #1 USA export.. weapons..

The only way to get them out and put real people in is by revolution..

Why do you think these people spend 3 million on advertising their campaign for a position that pays $125k a year?? It's because they're gonna fuck you for 10 million while they're in office..

The global financial picture is changing fast.. next year China will be at par with the USA for GDP.. the year after they will leave the USA in the dust as they become the biggest and richest nation in the world for the next 40 years..

The USA has a way out.. the easy way to maintain control is destabilize the whole world, anarchy, global unrest.. WW3..

Option #2 Revolution..

I'm just worried about the 50 million USA refugees that will flood Canada..

I hope americans wake up some time soon and realized they're being royally fucked over bareback.. and that the rest of the world is also getting fucked over and being forced to feltch the cum out of the asshole of the USA..

[trish]

The only way to get them out and put real people in is by revolution..

Can you guarantee revolution won't bring real tyranny instead of the pretend tyranny gun nuts are always fantasizing and whining about? Instead try increasing the size of the electorate; i.e. campaign with reasoned argument and vote. If you can succeed in getting a majority of eligible citizens to vote (rather than suppressing the vote), then I'll believe that maybe that revolution isn't just a fleck of gunpowder in your eye.

[buttslinger]

just a fleck of gunpowder in your eye.

OK, Trish, You were right when you said that gun ownership has to REVERSE to significantly reduce gun violence and death. When do you expect sweeping gun reform to be a reality and not a dream? Over.