Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

dudeone

Michigan passes bill allowing concealed weapons in schools, day care centers, stadiums, churches

Recommended Posts

But they're not behind the shootings of innocent people in schools, theaters and office buildings.

Gangs are for the most part, shooting at other gang members. The guys shooting up the schools and theaters are just guys who are not playing with a full deck, and have easy access to weapons that are far more than anyone needs for hunting or "protection"....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember that we're talking about the U.S. here, where gang members and thugs are account for a large portion if not the majority of predatory crimes like home invasions, rapes, assaults, carjackings, etc.

They may not be responsible for suburban school shootings, but they're basically the reason you gave to watch yourself when it comes to avoiding being a victim and tense situations that you can encounter on a day to day basis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Remember that we're talking about the U.S. here, where gang members and thugs are account for a large portion if not the majority of predatory crimes like home invasions, rapes, assaults, carjackings, etc.

They may not be responsible for suburban school shootings, but they're basically the reason you gave to watch yourself when it comes to avoiding being a victim and tense situations that you can encounter on a day to day basis.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"right, now should we the right to own a gun"

"nah, I've got a better idea. Lets allow concealed guns in certain places"

I mean seriously how stupid is this. America has got to realise that banning guns is the best thing to do to stop this violence. Now I know that it takes a person with a problem (mentally) to do such a thing, but the fact that it is so easy to obtain a gun makes that particular individual much more dangerous.

They should first take away the right to own a gun, and then secondly invest more into mental health clinics!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

But they're not behind the shootings of innocent people in schools, theaters and office buildings.

Gangs are for the most part, shooting at other gang members. The guys shooting up the schools and theaters are just guys who are not playing with a full deck, and have easy access to weapons that are far more than anyone needs for hunting or "protection"....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

These shootings shouldn't make one afraid to go to school or work, the odds of being shot are worse than being struck by lightning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's really funny is, gang violence is not what gets ire here.. it's assault weapons, the very type of firearms that were banned federally and was let expire because it was shown it had done nothing to prevent gun deaths.

Show me the statistics to back this up, or is this just something else you pulled out of your arse??

And as shown in this case gun restrictions were in place and did their job, they prevented this guy from buying a gun. Further restrictions would have done the same. On the other hand, this kid took the gun from someone who legally owned firearms, which is exactly the type of thing criminals motivated to do this kind of thing do. It wouldn't have mattered if the assault rifle wasn't present.. he still had two other guns. :lol: There's been nothing shown here that follows the US constitution that would have prevented this occurrence from happening, as the mother was obviously not a criminal.

Proper firearm storage would have prevented this kid from access to ANY of those guns!!!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Our Strict Gun Laws Have Saved Thousands of Australian Lives

Posted on September 7, 2012

The two graphs below show how the rates of firearm homicide and firearm suicide have varied in Australia over the period 1915 to 2006. More recent figures (up to 2009) suggest that the rates remain near 0.1 per 100,000 of population for firearm homicide and 0.8 per 100,000 of population for firearm suicide. It is clear that the declines in death rates are associated with the list of stricter gun laws introduced, as shown on the right hand side of each graph.

Several Australian gun clubs are deceiving the public by claiming that the National Firearms Agreement of 1996 has not been successful. The Sporting Shooters Association (SSAA) and the International Coalition for Women in Shooting and Hunting are two examples. We believe that soon our politicians will realise that it is often unwise to trust gun club leaders on gun law matters.

The two graphs shown below use Australian Bureau of Statistics data, they show how the number of deaths by firearm homicide and firearm suicide have been greatly reduced since stricter gun laws were introduced after 32 people were murdered in six massacres by legal gun owners in 1987, and 41 people were murdered by non-criminal gun owners in two massacres in 1996.

The improved gun laws after 1996 are usually called the National Firearms Agreement (NFA) or sometimes referred to as the Howard gun laws.

From the graphs it can be seen that the reduction in yearly rates of firearm homicide and firearm suicide are approximately two thirds of what they used to be in the days before improvements were made to the laws (The long period of approx 30 years between 1956 and 1986). Thousands of lives have been saved: why do the gun clubs deny this? Are they ashamed of their stance that more Australians would die?

It took over a decade for the full worth of the post-1987 and post-1996 gun laws to be revealed, but the facts are known now and have been known for several years.

In our opinion, over a decade’s examination of gun incidents has also revealed that there were two weaknesses in the NFA, the superficiality of shooter training and insufficient rigour in several of the regulations relating to gun storage. These could be addressed now, and should be, without any major changes to the successful structure of the NFA.

1995-2006-1.png

Rate of Firearm Homicide (click for fullsize)

1995-2006-2.png

Rate Of Firearm Suicide

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem with the safe storage argument of firearms in the home according to the SCOTUS in District of Columbia v. Heller, 554 U.S. 570 (2008), that is a non-starter.

Hence you need the firearm at hand, loaded and ready for bear because otherwise it would not pass constitutional muster. So no trigger locks, gun safes, separate ammunition storage, etc that we have in Canada.

The handgun ban and the trigger-lock requirement (as applied to self-defense) violate the Second Amendment . The District’s total ban on handgun possession in the home amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of “arms” that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense. Under any of the standards of scrutiny the Court has applied to enumerated constitutional rights, this prohibition—in the place where the importance of the lawful defense of self, family, and property is most acute—would fail constitutional muster. Similarly, the requirement that any lawful firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense and is hence unconstitutional.

http://www.law.corne.../07-290.ZS.html

As long as firearms are sitting around loaded and unsecured, the problems continue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Change the Constitution!! .. or interpret it correctly for the 21st Century .. this is ONLY rocket science to the Yankees .. I guess it is replacing NASA? .. :lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Heller is the modern interpretation - it separates out the militia requirement and makes it clear that strict constructionism (aka frozen concepts) does not apply and it covers firearms in current use not historical firearms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yet, in the US, the odds are far greater than any other first world country.

As you say, people shouldn't be afraid to go to school or work. Yet here we are in a thread discussing people being able to carry concealed weapons at churches, schools and day cares....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing that case shows is that this can easily be overturned with at least 5 SCOTUS dissenting with Heller in a future case, and not applying stare decisis. By no means is a ruling set in stone indefinitely.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yup. Gangsters are most likely to be killing and wounding other gangsters as the article points out.

And if you read the article it refers specifically to drug smuggling and distribution, as well as people smuggling, prostitution, etc. - the usual criminal enterprises. The vast majority drug crime can be traced to gang activity and of course the usual RICO prosecutions.

If you have firearms in the home they are many times more likely to result in the death or injury of a family member, friend or guest than this bogeyman criminal, of course that is when said firearm it is not used as means of suicide.

And as statistics show if you are victim of a crime involving a firearm, it is most likely from a family member or someone you know, not a gang member. Unless of course you are also involved in gang activities as we saw recently with the Eaton Centre shootings in Toronto and the various gangland hits over the past decade in Metro Vancouver.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, that's a problem.. with murder.

As for the rest, that's called hysteria. Something bad happens, an overreaction occurs.. evidently something must drastically change as far as guns are concerned, so I stick with what's consistent with the US constitution rather than pretend obliterating it is anything in the realm of realistic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Down there its different, while most of the violence is indeed gang on gang or thug on thug, that subculture is both exponentially larger and far more prone to prey apon the average person.

The gang culture down there basically *is* the criminal culture, and not just a small component of it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.