Gun Laws in USA.

[The Sleeping Giant]

But a decreased likelihood is a good thing, isn't it?

if there was a decreased likelihood then yes. But how do we know that we ain't going to have 50 mass murders next year in Australia. The only way to really try and put a dent in it is by banning guns all together. then you just have to worry about the many illegal guns out there. It feels like you see it once a week on the news you see someone busted with illegal guns.

Then the system works.

[Jetters]

Change the second amendment to something along the lines of "Every U.S citizen has the right to live peacefully without the threat of other citizens bearing arms."
Or just get rid of the second amendment altogether and make whatever the third amendment is the second amendment.
Either action will go a long long way to changing their gun culture for the better.

The citizens were given the right to arms to ensure the government was in soughts scared of its citizens, Americans would not give this up, there would be outrage and a no confidence in the government. Although, I think it is ridiculous that Americans seem to believe what was written into their Constitution 100's of years ago will necessarily be applicable forever. IMO the Constitution should be seen as a living document.

You just have to look at snippets of interviews with gun loving rednecks to see how much deeper this issue is than just banning guns. It may be hard to fathom their relationship with guns when you consider how we think of guns in Aus, but solving the problem goes far beyond simple legislative change.

Maybe a recent example in Aus that might have application to the gun control laws in the US is how we have changed our attitude to cigarette smoking. We all know smoking is bad for us, so why not just ban it? Because its just not that simple, by making it illegal you create another list of problems, and problems you can no longer regulate. However, over time we have taken measures to make it quite socially unacceptable to smoke. Slowly our attitudes have changed, and whilst it's still legal to smoke, we are reducing the problem.

Could you imagine in Aus with our drinking culture what would happen if we banned alcohol! We all know it has negative effects on us and society, but we all do it and would be outraged if it was banned. Imagine what the residual problems would be!

Unless absolutely necessary, taking away peoples rights is not the answer.
In this case I think gun control IS absolutely necessary and fewer guns IS the answer, but it is not the first step.
Stop looking at this issue so narrowly, it must be looked at in its proper context.

[The Sleeping Giant]

Prohibition doesn't work as history shows. Tougher gun laws do.

[whufc]

Prohibition doesn't work as history shows. Tougher gun laws do.

Agree, I don't think there is any negatives to having stricter gun laws BUT that is not the sole solution either

[smac]

No one thinks it's the whole solution. But it's the cornerstone of any viable solution.

[therisingblues]

Change the second amendment to something along the lines of "Every U.S citizen has the right to live peacefully without the threat of other citizens bearing arms."
Or just get rid of the second amendment altogether and make whatever the third amendment is the second amendment.
Either action will go a long long way to changing their gun culture for the better.

The citizens were given the right to arms to ensure the government was in soughts scared of its citizens, Americans would not give this up, there would be outrage and a no confidence in the government. Although, I think it is ridiculous that Americans seem to believe what was written into their Constitution 100's of years ago will necessarily be applicable forever. IMO the Constitution should be seen as a living document.

You just have to look at snippets of interviews with gun loving rednecks to see how much deeper this issue is than just banning guns. It may be hard to fathom their relationship with guns when you consider how we think of guns in Aus, but solving the problem goes far beyond simple legislative change.

Maybe a recent example in Aus that might have application to the gun control laws in the US is how we have changed our attitude to cigarette smoking. We all know smoking is bad for us, so why not just ban it? Because its just not that simple, by making it illegal you create another list of problems, and problems you can no longer regulate. However, over time we have taken measures to make it quite socially unacceptable to smoke. Slowly our attitudes have changed, and whilst it's still legal to smoke, we are reducing the problem.

Could you imagine in Aus with our drinking culture what would happen if we banned alcohol! We all know it has negative effects on us and society, but we all do it and would be outraged if it was banned. Imagine what the residual problems would be!

Unless absolutely necessary, taking away peoples rights is not the answer.
In this case I think gun control IS absolutely necessary and fewer guns IS the answer, but it is not the first step.
Stop looking at this issue so narrowly, it must be looked at in its proper context.

Interesting example, cigarettes.
Thirty years ago every Austrslian over the age of 16 had the legal right to smoke cigarettes. Yet that was never in our constitution. Probably no country ever had such an absurd clause in their constitution.
By changing the second amendment you aren't taking away anyone's rights. They'll still have the right to bear arms until such a law exists that denies them that right. But you can't do anything legal against them while that amendment exists.
Imagine trying to ban smoking in restaurants if our constitution gauranteed us the right to do just that?

[smac]

And the Yanks who get all uptight at the suggestion of changing the 2nd amendment need to look up the definition of amendment.

[kickinit]

But a decreased likelihood is a good thing, isn't it?

if there was a decreased likelihood then yes. But how do we know that we ain't going to have 50 mass murders next year in Australia. The only way to really try and put a dent in it is by banning guns all together. then you just have to worry about the many illegal guns out there. It feels like you see it once a week on the news you see someone busted with illegal guns.

Then the system works.

so you can guarantee australia won't have another mass murder?

[The Sleeping Giant]

But a decreased likelihood is a good thing, isn't it?

if there was a decreased likelihood then yes. But how do we know that we ain't going to have 50 mass murders next year in Australia. The only way to really try and put a dent in it is by banning guns all together. then you just have to worry about the many illegal guns out there. It feels like you see it once a week on the news you see someone busted with illegal guns.

Then the system works.

so you can guarantee australia won't have another mass murder?

Been pretty good so far, since Bryant and Knight.

[Jetters]

Prohibition doesn't work as history shows. Tougher gun laws do.

They do in many countries, statistics do not show that it works in the US however. Although, it is hard to decipher the credibility of statistics as they are always manufactured to suit the point of the argument being made.

[Jetters]

Change the second amendment to something along the lines of "Every U.S citizen has the right to live peacefully without the threat of other citizens bearing arms."
Or just get rid of the second amendment altogether and make whatever the third amendment is the second amendment.
Either action will go a long long way to changing their gun culture for the better.

The citizens were given the right to arms to ensure the government was in soughts scared of its citizens, Americans would not give this up, there would be outrage and a no confidence in the government. Although, I think it is ridiculous that Americans seem to believe what was written into their Constitution 100's of years ago will necessarily be applicable forever. IMO the Constitution should be seen as a living document.

You just have to look at snippets of interviews with gun loving rednecks to see how much deeper this issue is than just banning guns. It may be hard to fathom their relationship with guns when you consider how we think of guns in Aus, but solving the problem goes far beyond simple legislative change.

Maybe a recent example in Aus that might have application to the gun control laws in the US is how we have changed our attitude to cigarette smoking. We all know smoking is bad for us, so why not just ban it? Because its just not that simple, by making it illegal you create another list of problems, and problems you can no longer regulate. However, over time we have taken measures to make it quite socially unacceptable to smoke. Slowly our attitudes have changed, and whilst it's still legal to smoke, we are reducing the problem.

Could you imagine in Aus with our drinking culture what would happen if we banned alcohol! We all know it has negative effects on us and society, but we all do it and would be outraged if it was banned. Imagine what the residual problems would be!

Unless absolutely necessary, taking away peoples rights is not the answer.
In this case I think gun control IS absolutely necessary and fewer guns IS the answer, but it is not the first step.
Stop looking at this issue so narrowly, it must be looked at in its proper context.

Interesting example, cigarettes.
Thirty years ago every Austrslian over the age of 16 had the legal right to smoke cigarettes. Yet that was never in our constitution. Probably no country ever had such an absurd clause in their constitution.
By changing the second amendment you aren't taking away anyone's rights. They'll still have the right to bear arms until such a law exists that denies them that right. But you can't do anything legal against them while that amendment exists.
Imagine trying to ban smoking in restaurants if our constitution gauranteed us the right to do just that?

I don't see the relevance of cigarettes not being in the Constitution. My analogy was directed at social issues rather than legal.

By changing the second amendment you are opening the door to take away rights, you don't think people will be awake to this? Carn.

No, you can introduce gun laws whilst the 2nd amendment exists. US States have a variety of gun control laws under the same US Const. There is room for interpretation.

[The Sleeping Giant]

Prohibition doesn't work as history shows. Tougher gun laws do.

They do in many countries, statistics do not show that it works in the US however. Although, it is hard to decipher the credibility of statistics as they are always manufactured to suit the point of the argument being made.

You are talking about Islamic countries?

[Footy Chick]

Guns fix everything according the dad on Extreme Parents on Gem at the minute.

The daughter wrote a post on FB complaining about the chores she had to do at home.

SO the father shot her laptop. 10 times.

[Jetters]

Prohibition doesn't work as history shows. Tougher gun laws do.

They do in many countries, statistics do not show that it works in the US however. Although, it is hard to decipher the credibility of statistics as they are always manufactured to suit the point of the argument being made.

You are talking about Islamic countries?

No, when you compare statistics within the US when individual states have brought in various gun control laws. More laws have not equated to less gun violence.

[The Sleeping Giant]

Source?

[therisingblues]

The citizens were given the right to arms to ensure the government was in soughts scared of its citizens, Americans would not give this up, there would be outrage and a no confidence in the government. Although, I think it is ridiculous that Americans seem to believe what was written into their Constitution 100's of years ago will necessarily be applicable forever. IMO the Constitution should be seen as a living document.

You just have to look at snippets of interviews with gun loving rednecks to see how much deeper this issue is than just banning guns. It may be hard to fathom their relationship with guns when you consider how we think of guns in Aus, but solving the problem goes far beyond simple legislative change.

Maybe a recent example in Aus that might have application to the gun control laws in the US is how we have changed our attitude to cigarette smoking. We all know smoking is bad for us, so why not just ban it? Because its just not that simple, by making it illegal you create another list of problems, and problems you can no longer regulate. However, over time we have taken measures to make it quite socially unacceptable to smoke. Slowly our attitudes have changed, and whilst it's still legal to smoke, we are reducing the problem.

Could you imagine in Aus with our drinking culture what would happen if we banned alcohol! We all know it has negative effects on us and society, but we all do it and would be outraged if it was banned. Imagine what the residual problems would be!

Unless absolutely necessary, taking away peoples rights is not the answer.
In this case I think gun control IS absolutely necessary and fewer guns IS the answer, but it is not the first step.
Stop looking at this issue so narrowly, it must be looked at in its proper context.

Interesting example, cigarettes.
Thirty years ago every Austrslian over the age of 16 had the legal right to smoke cigarettes. Yet that was never in our constitution. Probably no country ever had such an absurd clause in their constitution.
By changing the second amendment you aren't taking away anyone's rights. They'll still have the right to bear arms until such a law exists that denies them that right. But you can't do anything legal against them while that amendment exists.
Imagine trying to ban smoking in restaurants if our constitution gauranteed us the right to do just that?

I don't see the relevance of cigarettes not being in the Constitution. My analogy was directed at social issues rather than legal.

By changing the second amendment you are opening the door to take away rights, you don't think people will be awake to this? Carn.

No, you can introduce gun laws whilst the 2nd amendment exists. US States have a variety of gun control laws under the same US Const. There is room for interpretation.

The relevance is that it is a strong influence on how people think, legalities often are.
People in plenty of countries have the right to bear arms without it being gauranteed in their constitutions. It is a needless indulgence and their constitution is like the bible is to Christians. While that amendment exists that right is basically God given. It's often the first thing they mention whenever there's a challenge to their right to bear arms.
Remove it and you are not taking away rights. And you're not doing it exclusively to take away rights. I see it as changing a mind set.
Lastly, that constitution has in the past stood as a barrier to gun control, regardless of the various laws.

[Sky Pilot]

Guns fix everything according the dad on Extreme Parents on Gem at the minute.

The daughter wrote a post on FB complaining about the chores she had to do at home.

SO the father shot her laptop. 10 times.

Some laptops are harder to kill off than others.

[valleys07]

so you can guarantee australia won't have another mass murder?

No guarantee, but im pretty confident australia's next serial killer wont be able to just pick up a gun from mums cupboard and shoot up a mass of innocent civilians.

[Sky Pilot]

so you can guarantee australia won't have another mass murder?

No guarantee, but im pretty confident australia's next serial killer wont be able to just pick up a gun from mums cupboard and shoot up a mass of innocent civilians.

Perhaps just nick them of f a Navy patrol boat