egafd.com

It seems America has given the world another mass shooting massacre, this time families going to watch the new Batman movie. An estimated 14 people, including kids, are dead, with upto 50 people critically injured.

In our last debate on gun laws, Robches took exception to my criticism of gun laws and told me he'd like to see students on campus carrying guns to stop other people with guns killing them. Well, Colorado gun laws allow concealed and open carrying on handguns (and some assault rifles) without a licence. Surely someone at the cinema was a rootin' tootin' shootin' gun-totin' Calamity Sam who could have put up a fight?

Not that this latest culling of innocents will change the mind of some gun-loving idiots over the water......nor any here.

Another terrible atrocity.

At a slight tangent, an American film reviewer who last week gave the film a less than glowing appraisal has received so many death threats, he's gone into hiding.

The twisted irony of course being that Hollywood is an industry that often glorifies this type of behaviour and the masses pay money to be 'entertained' by it.

As regards "the right to bear arms" as enshrined in the U.S. constitution, it may have been a good idea in the days of the frontier settlers, when you needed to carry shooters in order to fight off marauding Apaches and cattle rustlers. In fact that was its original purpose as laid down by the Founding Fathers when a large proprtion of the people still lived in stockades in the hostile wilderness.

But in this day and age it's completely nonsensical and is at least 100 years out of date. The tragedy though is that the gun lobby in the States is so powerful politically, so any meaningful overhaul is probably unlikely.

Having said that though, I think the kind of ill-conceived, knee-jerk blanket bans of the type we saw over here after the Hungerford and Dunblane shootings are equally nonsensical. All they did was penalise legitimate owners, gun clubs etc. Gangsters and sundry deranged nutters have still been able to get their hands on firearms with relative ease, and gun crime is still a massive problem that's actually got worse since the bans.





I think there's a lot of truth in the saying "outlaw guns and only the outlaws will have guns".

- Eric

andy at handiwork wrote:

> At a slight tangent, an American film reviewer who last week
> gave the film a less than glowing appraisal has received so
> many death threats, he's gone into hiding.


Yes I heard about that as well. Bonkers isn't it?!

- Eric

Sam:

It would seem the only person armed at the cinema was, sadly, the killer. You don't learn about the murderers stopped in their tracks by armed citizens because it does not make headline news all over the world, but it happens in the USA every day, reported only in local media. Why an event like this in the USA becomes headline news over here only seems to demonstrate that our news netwroks are rather in thrall to the USA. I doubt a similar event in Mexico would make the evening news.

Flat_Eric wrote:


>
> As regards "the right to bear arms" as enshrined in the U.S.
> constitution, it may have been a good idea in the days of the
> frontier settlers, when you needed to carry shooters in order
> to fight off marauding Apaches and cattle rustlers. In fact
> that was its original purpose as laid down by the Founding
> Fathers when a large proprtion of the people still lived in
> stockades in the hostile wilderness.
>

Not really, the Constitution was written by men who had just defeated the most powerful country in the world in a war for their independence. Its text reads "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." The writers of the Constitution were not concerned about rustlers, they were concerned that the free people who had won the war against Britain would continue to be able to defend their freedom.

The militia, incidentally, is defined as all adult males, and the Supreme Court has held that the Second Amendment is a right of all citizens, and is not limited merely to those actively engaged in military duties.

Too true. All you get from these people is that it's to protect them, and the country as a whole, from dictatorship and a police state. Like you said, quite true a hundred years ago but civilians aren't going to outgun their own armed forces today. I suppose they should all have their own fighter jets and surface to air missiles these days.

It's just an excuse for people who like guns to have their very own guns. And they like guns much more than we do because their culture is built around guns. I cycle that, I think, needs to be broken - though, as you imply, any politician who tries will be dead in the water........quite literally, depending on where the assassination takes place *I've always wanted a !rollseyes! smilie for occasions like this.

Not sure I agree on the 'legitimate owners' bit, though, Eric. I mean, of course some legitimate gun owners have been put out by the new laws introduced but we have to realise that we are all human beings that can, and do, crack at certain points in our lives. Most of us calm down and get a grip but it only takes a split second to grab a gun and do something horrific. If we were all machines programmed to never get angry, or go completely berserk, I'd be with you. At least if you or I happen to have some sort of breakdown we'd be hard pressed to cause too much havoc before somebody stops us.

I know your argument: Everyone at the cinema should have took their kiddies to see Batman while packing some serious weaponry. It's their own fault for being unarmed. Silly fuckers!

What you don't realise is that if 5 or 6 panic-stricken mums & dads HAD been packing then more than 14 would be dead right now from friendly fire and the like.

Anyway, Colorado is a state where you're free to carry around handguns - both concealed and on show. The relaxed gun laws didn't help these people because most normal folk don't go around carrying guns to the cinema or supermarket. Maybe, just maybe, this nutter woudn't have gotten hold of all the shit he was carrying so easily.

Robches wrote:

> Not really, the Constitution was written by men who had just
> defeated the most powerful country in the world in a war for
> their independence. Its text reads "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." The
> writers of the Constitution were not concerned about rustlers,
> they were concerned that the free people who had won the war
> against Britain would continue to be able to defend their
> freedom.


Either way ... still no longer relevant in the 21st century.

Not unless you're expecting expect China or North Korea (or some other foreign power) to invade Colorado or Texas or North Dakota etc.

"Red Dawn" perhaps, Robches?

- Eric

[IMG]http://i755.photobucket.com/albums/xx19 ... 120704.gif[/IMG]

Sam Slater wrote:

> I know your argument: Everyone at the cinema should have took
> their kiddies to see Batman while packing some serious
> weaponry. It's their own fault for being unarmed. Silly
> fuckers!
>

That wasn't what I said and is in fact a stupid and offensive comment. You have let yourself down. I am more than willing to have a decent discussion with anyone, but not if they are going to behave like you do.