The FAST Approaching Gun Ban

[trish]

Some of the states (i.e., Pennsylvania and Vermont) explicitly mentions the right to bear arms for self defense too.

That's an interpretative stretch without having the text in front of you. Perhaps they meant defense against indians, wildcats and bears. Perhaps defense against their own government never even crossed their minds. Once upon a time the violent tragedies of the day were maulings and Indian massacres. Now they are elementary school kids mowed down by semi-automatic gun fire. Once again, it doesn't matter what the founders were thinking. What matters is what they wrote into the text of the law, whether it is still law and if it is, how the courts interpret it now.

[Prospero]

Sorry 300 !!!!! I just checked and in 2011 nearly 32,000 people died in gun related incidents in the US (crime, suicides and accidents)

[Prospero]

And I'd also add that if a rule (even one written by your sacred founding fathers) is now foolish and unfitting for the times, then why should it not be changed? They were not written by god.

[trish]

I didn't. You are not rebutting any argument I've made. Don't stick me in with "you guys" ...

Good, so why do you need the second amendment to cover semi-automatic weapons, large magazines etc. etc.? Are you saying there is no need for the 2nd Amendment? The only reason to keep it is tradition?

[trish]

Sorry 300 !!!!! I just checked and in 2011 nearly 32,000 people died in gun related incidents in the US (crime, suicides and accidents)

Thank you, Prospero.

[Prospero]

The gun supporting people here have still not answered the question about why they WANT to own these weapons.

[Dave32111]

My point would be that it's a right guaranteed by the constitution - you need to do more than ask why I need one to just be able to ban it.

And please - let's talk about homicides, use FBI statistics. Try this one:

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr...e-data-table-8

323 homicides by rifles in 2011. "Assault Rifles" (whatever that term means to you) are a subset of that category. Violent crime is still decreasing every year, but you want to ban a tiny portion of guns? Why?

And finally, because you asked so nicely, I don't need to want one, I own one. I target shoot with it - because it's fun. Why do you go fishing? Because you enjoy it. When I'm not shooting it, it stays in a safe, where no one has access to it.

[trish]

My point would be that it's a right guaranteed by the constitution - you need to do more than ask why I need one to just be able to ban it.

So you can't think of a reason not to ban it other than it's a currently guaranteed by the Constitution.

Why restrict the discussion to homicides? Or even deaths? Or rifles? How about gun related accidents, both fatal and non-fatal? How about rifle related accidents, fatal or non-fatal? How about those involving children? Life is tough. No need to add guns to the mix.

[giovanni_hotel]

Unfortunately, the 2nd Amendment isn't going anywhere. But we should have enough public support to get rid of high capacity mags and assault rifles.

There's roughly 300+ million guns in the U.S. owned by private citizens, how do we put that toothpaste back in the tube??

[trish]

Unfortunately, the 2nd Amendment isn't going anywhere. But we should have enough public support to get rid of high capacity mags and assault rifles.

There's roughly 300+ million guns in the U.S. owned by private citizens, how do we put that toothpaste back in the tube??

Unfortunate, but true. It's a good reason not to break out new tubes and start squeezing them, which is exactly the solution proposed by the gun manufacturers (though their NRA lobbyist, Lapierre).

Besides the ban on high capacity mags and assault rifles I would like to see law that make gun owners and manufacturers libel for injuries caused by their weapons (stolen or not). Currently manufacturers and owners are protected from libel suits! A firearm can blowup in your hand and you cannot sue the manufacturer. A kid can steal a gun from an owner and kill someone, but the owner (as I understand the law) need not worry about liability.

Just as every driver needs to carry auto-insurance, every gun owner should be required to carry insurance on each of his guns to cover any injuries it might cause.