No words can express

[Saab2000]

the whole idea of owning a weapon is so strange, for what reason do you want to own a gun? I can't imagine any ...

I don't own a gun and have no real desire to own a gun but many people in the world would ask why we own very expensive bicycles, and often several of them. I know many gun owners and some love to shoot at the range, others enjoy the craftsmanship. Others like to hunt and some have them for defense of their home.

I don't own one but I sort of get why some people want them. They have a long history in the United States and that's how we got where we are today. They have always been a part of the culture of this land since the first Europeans came here.

[Chad]

the whole idea of owning a weapon is so strange, for what reason do you want to own a gun? I can't imagine any ...

For me, to hunt. Our middle schools and high schools have trap teams, they cannot take their gun to school with them but the team is school sponsored.

There haven't been any mass murders committed with 5 round shotguns, at least none that I'm aware of. Limiting the magazine capacity has always seemed reasonable to me.

Some feel the need to have one for protection. I carried an M16 for a year, because I needed to, I won't live that way by choice. I have no desire to live where being armed at all times is normal.

[StR]

ok my bad, I forgot the hunting thing.

maybe the only reason.

protect yourself from what? what place is this where you have to protect yourself with a gun? there is something very wrong.

"""""I have no desire to live where being armed at all times is normal."""""

right! try it with a different education, start now.

[Cookietruck]

some people need guns, not many need high capacity magazines though. i don't own any guns, i know how to shoot them though.

a few examples.
1. hunting
2. always some killing to be done around the farm
3. self defense, particularly in the country where it could possibly take LEO atleast 30 minutes to arrive to a destination...
4. there is the sportsmanship thing i can even understand, when i was 12yrs old and i would ask my grandpa if i could have the .22 and some bullets to go shoot at turtles in the tank...

[Scott G.]

the whole idea of owning a weapon is so strange, for what reason do you want to own a gun? I can't imagine any ...

The drafters of the US Constitution had a profound distrust of standing armies,
standing armies often being the tool of Tyrants. A "well regulated Militia"
meaning in modern English "A well trained Militia", would be a defense against
military dictatorship.

¡No Pasarán!

[StR]

The drafters of the US Constitution had a profound distrust of standing armies,
standing armies often being the tool of Tyrants. A "well regulated Militia"
meaning in modern English "A well trained Militia", would be a defense against
military dictatorship.

¡No Pasarán!

we are in 2016, not anymore in the Bronze Age, time to change.

[Saab2000]

we are in 2016, not anymore in the Bronze Age, time to change.

I agree to some extent with this. But it's extremely difficult to amend the US Constitution. Probably any constitution around the world as well. I think the US is at a bit of a tipping point and I hear all the time the question as to whether or not the US Constitution means what it says, to the letter, or whether it's a 'living' document, able to be interpreted to modern thinking. I fall into the latter camp but plenty of Americans fall into the former, meaning we have difficult decisions by the US Supreme Court.

This level of difficulty of amendment was quite intentional I believe.

[Scott G.]

we are in 2016, not anymore in the Bronze Age, time to change.

I was thinking more of 1936.

[guido]

The US Senate just voted down 4 amendments to prevent people on the terrorist watch list from being able to purchase guns and to close the gun show and internet sales loopholes on background checks. If you can't fly on a commercial airliner why should you be able to buy an AR-15?

Can we have a sensible government please? This stuff really matters and we really need to get everyone we know to get out to vote to change things...

[sk_tle]

The main issue is their are so many weapons in the wild already.

[guido]

The main issue is their are so many weapons in the wild already.

No arguments there at all (Though the background check enhancements would start to help this...).

But just starting with simple stuff, not asking to go all Australia on them or anything.

The US population agrees with these measures overwhelmingly.

That has to be possible.

[theflashunc]

The drafters of the US Constitution had a profound distrust of standing armies,
standing armies often being the tool of Tyrants. A "well regulated Militia"
meaning in modern English "A well trained Militia", would be a defense against
military dictatorship.

¡No Pasarán!

And yet we have none of those things. Civil militias are long since been consigned to the dust bin of history, and those who can acquire such weapons are not terribly well trained thanks to lax gun ownership laws, and the military said gun owners believe they're defending against currently operates an a wing of flying robots who rain death from the skies across the globe.

I agree to some extent with this. But it's extremely difficult to amend the US Constitution. Probably any constitution around the world as well. I think the US is at a bit of a tipping point and I hear all the time the question as to whether or not the US Constitution means what it says, to the letter, or whether it's a 'living' document, able to be interpreted to modern thinking. I fall into the latter camp but plenty of Americans fall into the former, meaning we have difficult decisions by the US Supreme Court.

This level of difficulty of amendment was quite intentional I believe.

I don't disagree with your point at all, but I would point out that contrary to the popular belief and what you'll hear at Disney's Hall of the Presidents, these guys got a lot of stuff wrong. Heck, the Constitution itself is more or less their third crack at creating a national government. And even then, that document needed 10 Amendments straight out of the gate. Don't get me wrong, they had some really smart guys thinking about the role of governing and the governed, but these were also propertied, white men who crapped in buckets in the middle of the night and used horsehair as insulation in their walls. We've accepted that notion on significant portions of the government they created: Senators are now elected by popular vote, VPs aren't the loser from a presidential election, owning property is no longer a requirement to vote, that whole "you can own slaves thing." The list goes on and on.

And yet some fairly recent interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is acting if this is some immutable will beamed directly to us from 1776.

The whole thing is infuriating. Scotch helps.

[colker]

It wasn't a homophobic attack nor a a consequence of laxed gun ownership laws; it was a massacre conducted and oriented by a muslim fundamentalist terror organization.
And the europeans should get down their high horse on this thread and stop pretending being more civilized: America has way more freedom of speech just to begin with. Not to mention how easily their states roll over personal rights when declares an "exceptional state of affairs". Just check what went on in France after the latest massacre. Or even England where they shot a brazilian immigrant, a bystander by mistake and moved on. The european nations have all sorts of triggers to remove personal freedoms and give carte blanche to their police.
The Balkans had more brutality in the 90s than all the US history.

[StR]

And yet we have none of those things. Civil militias are long since been consigned to the dust bin of history, and those who can acquire such weapons are not terribly well trained thanks to lax gun ownership laws, and the military said gun owners believe they're defending against currently operates an a wing of flying robots who rain death from the skies across the globe.

I don't disagree with your point at all, but I would point out that contrary to the popular belief and what you'll hear at Disney's Hall of the Presidents, these guys got a lot of stuff wrong. Heck, the Constitution itself is more or less their third crack at creating a national government. And even then, that document needed 10 Amendments straight out of the gate. Don't get me wrong, they had some really smart guys thinking about the role of governing and the governed, but these were also propertied, white men who crapped in buckets in the middle of the night and used horsehair as insulation in their walls. We've accepted that notion on significant portions of the government they created: Senators are now elected by popular vote, VPs aren't the loser from a presidential election, owning property is no longer a requirement to vote, that whole "you can own slaves thing." The list goes on and on.

And yet some fairly recent interpretation of the 2nd Amendment is acting if this is some immutable will beamed directly to us from 1776.

The whole thing is infuriating. Scotch helps.

remains the impression that some politicians still use horsehair as insulation in their walls.;) the guy in the video for sure.
yes EU also had some horrible terror massacre. but it has not mass shootings on a daily basis.

not sure if this is comedy or real:
Ken Rutkowski - In one of the best Daily Show bits in a... | Facebook

[Daschund]

It wasn't a homophobic attack nor a a consequence of laxed gun ownership laws; it was a massacre conducted and oriented by a muslim fundamentalist terror organization.

Donald, didn't know you liked bikes.

[EightySixer]

Thread drift no doubt, but I feel the need.
I was in Marshalls Department Store the other day, looking at some new cookware before I shot over to the grocery. Walking out, I noticed a well dressed woman, button up blouse and slacks in line looking at headphones. I am certain she noticed me also, perhaps I thought, she is trained and/or government. I don't think anyone else even noticed, as the plum/pink color of the Ruger pistol at her waist blended in with her shirt. As I walked by I noted to myself how composed she appeared, how aware she was even while focusing on the headphones. I am certain she noted me in her peripheral long before I walked past her. I could't help but think to myself, good for her. As absurd as it may sound to some people, carrying a pistol in a department store, I am sure many of the victims in Orlando, Paris, the beach in Tunsisia would have though it absurd just as I do at one point.
Though, everything going on is changing my perspective I must admit. I am thirty three, non homeowner, well spoken, composed and polite. Nothing really of value nor character that puts me in the cross-hairs but at the same time I shiver more at the thought of being helpless than I do being that woman in Marshalls. What do they say, "That will never happen to me," until that one time it does.

Not so much the terrorism, as frightening as it is that is what it is designed to do, instill fear, on the grand scale it is but a very minor percentage. What worries me is looking at the shooting chart of the United States in 2016 that was linked a few pages back. That is not terrorism, that is drug related, hate related and more than anything else personal emotional distress. I have read 60% of gun deaths in the US are suicides. Though that leaves a healthy percentage of assaults which are fueled by hate, money, property and or addiction.

I don't think it is solely the Muslim/Islamic culture that is nurturing this violence, when I look around for a moment I see eerily subtle similarities here in my life.

There was a guy, who posted a picture in this triathlon forum of his tiny handgun he takes on runs with him. The first comment on his post was another man, "I am sorry for your fear" it read. I am torn, I can relate on an honest emotional level to both of them and their perspectives. I don't think either of them is wrong, but I also don't think either of those attitudes are going to stop what is happening globally, with regard to the inhumanity. And for my thoughts expressed just now, I have not been able to come up with a good solution. I hope someone else soon will.

Great thread.

[sk_tle]

Though that leaves a healthy percentage of assaults which are fueled by hate, money, property and or addiction.

And a whole lot of domestic violence.

I read somewhere that one third of the women murdered overall are killed by their partner/husband and two thirds of the women killed by a firearm were killed by their partner/husband. The risk for a woman to be murdered is increased 5 times when there is a gun in the household.

Bottom line: guns can save a few lives, especially when operated by professionnals (i.e. police) though they aren't exempt of mistakes/abuses, but take a whole lot more.

[bcm119]

Carrying a gun makes very little sense because the chance of being killed in a mass shooting is almost negligible. If the goal is to reduce your chances of dying, it makes much more sense to mitigate the larger risks first, like staying fit and healthy and avoiding activities like driving a car or riding in traffic. Lugging a few pounds of pistol around on your hip every day for that one in a million chance you'll be in a mass shooting with a clear shot of the shooter is the definition of poor risk assessment and management.

[Dallas Tex]

Carrying a gun makes very little sense because the chance of being killed in a mass shooting is almost negligible. If the goal is to reduce your chances of dying, it makes much more sense to mitigate the larger risks first, like staying fit and healthy and avoiding activities like driving a car or riding in traffic. Lugging a few pounds of pistol around on your hip every day for that one in a million chance you'll be in a mass shooting with a clear shot of the shooter is the definition of poor risk assessment and management.

Do you have life insurance to protect your family if you die? Do you lock the door of your house at night? Do you listen to the flight attendants safety speech on airplane flights? All low probability events that most people want to be prepared for if they occur.

[guido]

Actually the statistics don't back you on this at all. Having a firearm in the house makes you less safe. More risk of beak-in/theft, more risk of domestic violence, more risk of children gaining access to the weapon, more risk of suicide.

It might make you feel better, but it is placebo. Take the sugar pill (brush your teeth afterwards...) Much safer.

Do you have life insurance to protect your family if you die? Do you lock the door of your house at night? Do you listen to the flight attendants safety speech on airplane flights? All low probability events that most people want to be prepared for if they occur.