Boston Marathon

[sweetts18]

No. a gun is NOT dangerous, not anymore than a blender, microwave oven, automobile, or chainsaw. Each of these has the power to maim, kill, or destroy if misused or used maliciously, but alone, without human influence, they will sit for a hundred years and never harm a soul.

[Gillian]

No. a gun is NOT dangerous, not anymore than a blender, microwave oven, automobile, or chainsaw.

-
Hmmm. A fully automatic assault rifle is no more dangerous than a microwave oven?. Explain that to me again.

Thank fuck I don't live in the States ...

[buttslinger]

No. a gun.... a blender, microwave oven, automobile, or chainsaw....

Promise me you won't let any kids play at your house!

[trish]

It's tragic how many accidental blender deaths just go unreported in the U.S. everyday. Not only ignored by the media, but even Congress has ignored the problem; they didn't even bother to instruct the CDC not to conduct studies on blender deaths and injuries.

[sweetts18]

Ok... I want you guys to tell me of one incident where a firearm (of any description, but I love how we've somehow gone back to this supposed "fully automatic assault rifle" that we Americans must surely all have... so let's make it one of those!) got up, walked out of the gun cabinet, loaded itself, and then drove somewhere looking for a target without somebody holding it.

[Prospero]

Sweets18... you really are a dunderhead. A gun is designed to kill. That is it's purpose - be in a hunting rifle, a hand gun or a fully automated assault rifle. I wonder why the man who killed all those children in Sandy chose a gun over a microwave. How many people have died deliberately or accidentally as a result of using a microwave in the US in the past 12 months. What a stupid arguing point.

The gun fetish that obsesses so many people in America is a sign of a collective insanity which is perplexing in the light of America's otherwise astonishing record across the board of human achievement.

[Stavros]

Oh, and: "Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington

Sweetts18 -you claim the mantle of history on your 2nd amendment, but you ignore the same history on gun ownership, then and since. The right to bear arms at the time was limited to free men who, in order to bear those arms had to swear an oath of allegiance to the Revoution and enter their name and personal details into a national register before being issued with a Musket or whatever the weapon was in those days. By definition a slave was not entitled to bear arms, as slaves were not considered human beings but 'human property' (of the slave-owners).

The right to bear arms became part of the fall-out of the Civil War when freedmen -most of whom had fought on the Union side- were allowed to retain their weapons leading to a backlash in the Southern States where local laws took those guns away.

At its inception in the 19th century, the NRA's primary concern was to improve the marksmanship of its members, and it supported Roosevelt's Gun Control legislation in the 1930s which was initiated to respond to violent crime in the cities.

Interestingly, again, not only did the NRA support gun control in the 1960s, in California the gun control laws that had allowed citizens to walk around with weapons on their hips or in their hands, were tightened when the Black Panther Party used their right to carry weapons to 'monitor' what they claimed was police harassment of the Black community -it was when they walked into the Capitol building fully armed -as they were legally entitled to do- that severe gun laws were passed -and yes, Ronald Reagan was Governor at the time. Gun control laws were tightened in the 1960s because of the Panthers, because of the urban riots -the 2nd Amendment had nothing to do with it.

You can follow the history to the present day, how the NRA has only become extreme on gun control since the 1970s/80s and may be part of the broader attack on Civil Rights that has characterised much conservative politics in the USA, trace how many gun control laws were passed out of fear of Black people having the same rights as 'the rest' to bear arms, and all of it is a world away from the precise wording of the 2nd Amendment.

In other words, the gun debate in the USA is a debate about relations among Americans, not about the organisation of Americans against an external enemy. For that, you have an army, a navy, an air force, the National Security Agency, the Department of Homeland Security, the FBI, the CIA, the National Guard(s) and local policing....

This is one of the most entertaining and interesting articles on the subject:
http://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/...f-guns/308608/

[trish]

Ok... I want you guys to tell me of one incident where a firearm (of any description, but I love how we've somehow gone back to this supposed "fully automatic assault rifle" that we Americans must surely all have... so let's make it one of those!) got up, walked out of the gun cabinet, loaded itself, and then drove somewhere looking for a target without somebody holding it.

Heroin almost never jumps off the counter into a hypodermic needle and into a person’s vein. Cars almost never start themselves up and drive down the street looking for a crowd of pedestrians to mow down.

People do accidentally overdose on drugs. People falling asleep or otherwise distracted do mow down crowds of pedestrians while driving. Rifles racked in the back window of a pickup rarely discharge and fire into a nearby house or passing vehicle, but accidents do happen daily. (http://accidentalgunshots.tumblr.com/). Women rarely keep their ammunition in the oven (http://fox59.com/2013/02/21/oven-sho...#axzz2T53rcrRA). Men rarely accidentally kill their sons with firearms (http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/c...1ead38ce7.html), but it happens almost every week; whereas accidental deaths by blender are practically non-existent.

Yet we regulate the use of drugs, cars and guns (...and even blenders have to be UL certified ). Why?

Because “person+gun” and “person+heroin” and “person+car” are an inherently dangerous combos and the electric motor in a blender can interfere with your neighbor’s radio reception and wifi.

Sweetts seems to complain that inanimate objects don’t commit crimes or cause accidents so it’s unfair to make laws against them. There are two flaws to this complaint. One: Gun regulations are restrictions placed upon people who would use, buy and sell guns. They are not laws against the guns themselves. Two: Guns are inanimate objects...it’s impossible to treat them fairly or unfairly .

[Prospero]

Give blenders the vote.

[hippifried]

A gun is an inanimate object... its people you need to worry about.

Is there a point to this? All tools are controlled by people. Regulations on sale &/or use are to protect others from misuse by those that have the tool. Gun regulations are to help keep potentially lethal tools out of the hands of those who shouldn't have them. It's a real simple concept that isn't prohibited by the Constitution or any SCOTUS rulings.

What if I told you that I am FOR the healthcare reform?

????????? What does that have to do with this?

That isn't for me or for you to decide. pay attention. ...When the MAJORITY of people are convinced that they need to take up arms... the MAJORITY will do just that. What I'm talking about, and what this amendment is about is what the majority has the means to do when its agreed that there is an issue... and its intent is to be the LAST resort... its there for the chance that all due process fails.

Oh... So "the MAJORITY" is going to take up arms against the democracy they live in... ??? Huh? Why? "the MAJORITY" doesn't know what it wants? You really should rethink this extremely lame argument. The Second Amendment is about keeping the "well regulated militia" armed. It's as much a restriction on States as the Federal Government. We're really not supposed to have a standing army. That's why it has to be refunded every 2 years. That would be in Article I section 8, just in case you missed it Mr Constitutionalist.