I will probably be banned for this, but...shooting thread!

[janvanvurpa]

Did the free blacks have the right to vote?

1869

Fifteenth Amendment approved. On February 26, Congress sent the Fifteenth Amendment to the Constitution to the states for approval. The amendment would guarantee black Americans the right to vote.

1890

African-Americans are disenfranchised. The Mississippi Plan, approved on November 1, used literacy and "understanding" tests to disenfranchise black American citizens. Similar statutes were adopted by South Carolina (1895), Louisiana (1898), North Carolina (1900), Alabama (1901), Virginia (1901), Georgia (1908), and Oklahoma (1910).


More;
Disfranchisement after Reconstruction era - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Rollo]

OK, what would anyone gain here by giving up these freedoms and a right?

A higher quality of life, liberty and happiness.

[EuroTroll]

A higher quality of life, liberty and happiness.

You forgot to add God's grace. : "Then said Jesus unto him, Put up again thy sword into his place: for all they that take the sword shall perish with the sword. (Matthew 26:52, King James Version)

I think the right to bear arms is unquestionably a liberty. Which is why I can understand why many Americans are so fond of it.

[race aficionado]

Just imagine and pause for a moment: just imagine if we actually had a real count, the total amount of deadly fire arms that are out there amongst the general public - here on the USA for example
The number would be STAGGERING. And add to that all the new ones that are now being sold in shops, gun shows and the Internet.

A couple of yeas ago I visited an uncle of my wife in Dallas. He told us he was a deer hunter and showed us his rifle collection. When he saw our enthusiasm he started trusting us he then took us to his special room where he proceeded to show us the rest of his gun collection: from Uzzies to Magnums to sawed off shotguns and many other automatic military specked killing machines. It was surreal.
So as we see, the playing field in this country in terms if gun ownership is again, staggering.
I remember a couple of years ago when the mayor of NYC and the police had this campaign of guns for toys in Christmas time. Yes, some guns were returned with no legal penalty and some toys were given but basically it's a joke when it comes to asking people to please return their arsenal and not face police action.

So yes, here on the US of A they are armed to their teeth - legally and illegally. Makes no difference, and don't mess with their right to own one because a shooting spree could start in any moment and you don't want to be caught empty handed.


Sent from my iPhone in my bullet proof bunker

[Lousada]

Violent crime rates are substantially lower here than in the UK and most of europe for that matter.

Sorry, I find that a little hard to believe. Could you please give me your source for that to prove me wrong??

[chuck34]

My house is alarmed, the police station is a couple of miles up the road, and I have a phone next to my bed. I don't have the mindset to want to kill someone, even a burglar and house robberies in this country are not usually committed using firearms. Being in a position where in the near future I may have a child and beyond small children in the house, I wouldn't want the worry of having a firearm anywhere near them even if I had to lock it in a gun cabinet where it would be of little use in an emergency anyway.

So your plan is to let the sicko rape your wife and small children while you wait for the cops to get there from "a couple of miles up the road"? Sounds like a good plan to me

Accidents do happen sure, and people in the UK get shot, but its so rare introducing guns here would do more harm than good. You could have fail-safe measures for many things in daily life. I could wear a helmet and weld a roll cage into my car incase I crash and am killed. I could build a fallout shelter in my back garden incase a nuclear war breaks out and I want a few more hours on earth. All extreme and going abit too far, but so is having a gun in my home just incase someone breaks into my house to murder me in the night. I think we have such different views on each side of the pond because we are so different. You think its daft that someone wouldn't have a gun for the possible, whereas we can't imagine live where you'd consider needing one.

No one is talking about introducing guns to the UK.

Your examples of "going too far in the name of safety", actually goes to my point as well. Why must all guns be banned in the name of safety when statistically the chance of an accident is practically insignificant?

[chuck34]

The age of the law is not my point.

The age of the law WAS your point, and the point of many others, otherwise why would you have said "old law". How many times has it been said in this thread and others just like it something along the lines of "that was written more than 200 years ago, it has no bearing now". Now you are claiming you didn't say anything about the age. Color me confused.

Having the freedom to give an opinion on something is very different to owning a device that can end somebodys life in a fraction of a second in my view at least.

You don't like owning a device that can end somebody's life in a fraction of a second? So you don't own any knives? How about a car? Cleaning chemicals?

I don't think owning a firearm has anything to do with freedom anyway, but would be interested in views that think it is of course

So a government coming in and telling you that you are no longer allowed to own something that 10seconds ago you could, has nothing to do with freedom? Hmmm, you have some interesting views on freedom.

[chuck34]

"Free" is relative. In 1790 "free" was not for women and black people, among others. Should we bring back slavery and abolish woman's right to vote just because that's the way things were in 1790?

So since women, black people, and by the way white men who didn't own property weren't allowed to vote in 1790, means that we should outlaw guns in 2012. That's a bit of a stretch, even for you Eki.

[chuck34]

I don't believe that. They wouldn't be doing crimes if they believed they'll fail. It's just another factor they'll have to take into account by having guns themselves and using the element of surprise.

So in societies where guns are illegal your claim is that criminals don't have guns and don't use the element of surpise when robbing someone? Seriously?

People trying to be heroes will result people becoming dead.

No people being stupid and robbing someone results in people becoming dead. It's telling that you try to make the criminal out to be the victim.

[Knock-on]

Sorry, I find that a little hard to believe. Could you please give me your source for that to prove me wrong??

There were 52,447 deliberate and 23,237 accidental non-fatal gunshot injuries in the United States during 2000.[4] The majority of gun-related deaths in the United States are suicides,[5] with 17,352 (55.6%) of the total 31,224 firearm-related deaths in 2007 due to suicide, while 12,632 (40.5%) were homicide deaths.[6]

Gun violence in the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

During 2007, nine young people lost their lives in shootings, including the killing of 11-year-old Rhys Jones in Liverpool.

According to Home Office figures, there were 59 firearms-related homicides in 2006-07 compared with 49 in the previous year. That is an increase of 18% in just one year. There were 507 serious injuries from firearms - more than one incident a day.

But at the same time, the trend in gun crime overall has been going down.

BBC News - Analysis: UK gun crime figures


Population of US is 311m and UK is 62m or 1/5th

I don't know if a UK homicide includes suicides but will give you the benefit of the doubt nd assume it doesn't therefore the gun rate in the US for deliberate homicide is over 4200% higher per capita population than that of the UK.