another school shooting in U.S. of A. :(

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

The freedoms we enjoy as part of our Bill of Rights . . . . . It says "The people".
Interpret that yourself.

---

Yes- the people - but not all people - given what has been happening with the abuse and irresponsible application of that freedom. (when we talk of freedom to keep and bear arms)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

The freedoms we enjoy as part of our Bill of Rights does not contain anything about "some people" or "certain people" or "need special permission" or "only members of a certain group". It says "The people".
Interpret that yourself.

---

OK I will.


We the People of the United States, in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.

Is it a "a more perfect Union" when this sort of thing happens on a more regular basis than anywhere else in the world? How does giving people access to instruments of death "insure domestic Tranquility" or "promote the general Welfare" of it's citizenry? Is 20 dead children really a shining example of "the Blessings of Liberty"?

If you fought for independence on the "self-evident" reason that people have "certain unalienable Rights" of "Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness" why then do so many people have the instruments to destroy all three?

The United States craps all over the preamble to its constitution and has failed in the very reason for declaring its independence.

You might talk about defending the citizenry from the "tyranny of government" but it seems to me that the biggest enemy of the United States is "We the People".

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

You might talk about defending the citizenry from the "tyranny of government" but it seems to me that the biggest enemy of the United States is "We the People".

---

Rollo is on a Roll

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by race aficionado

Rollo is on a Roll

---

Thankfully, he doesn't get to vote.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by starter

thankfully, he doesn't get to vote.

---

amen to that

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

This is true. However and this is just a few of the conditions from Swiss gun legislation:
- all automatic weapons banned.
- all semi-automatic weapons banned.
- all people must get a Weapons Purchasing Permit (and pass a criminal background and psychological test).
- to carry a gun on the street requires a Weapons Carrying Permit (they are normally only given to security and the police).
- all private weapons must be stored in a locked box.
- until 2007, government issued ammunition was kept in sealed boxes which was a criminal offence to open. Now ammunition is not kept at civilian premises.
SR 514.541 Verordnung ber Waffen, Waffenzubehr und Munition
SR 514.54 Bundesgesetz vom 20. Juni 1997 ber Waffen, Waffenzubehr und Munition (Waffengesetz, WG) (there is a PDF on this page which is quite extensive)

If America tried to enact similar legislation, all automatic and semi-automatic weapons would have to be seized immediately, as would virtually all ammunition, locked boxes would be required in people's houses that had guns and most people would be disallowed from carrying a gun outside.

It would however be closer to the actual wording of the second amendment:
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.

Switzerland probably has the most highly regulated rules for gun ownership in the Western World. This point is almost always ignored by pro-gun people in the United States.

---

And yet you totally miss the relevant part of the second amendment, that part AFTER the comma: The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nigelred5

And yet you totally miss the relevant part of the second amendment, that part AFTER the comma: The right of the people to keep and bear arms SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

---

If Rollo had his way, he would rewrite the constitution on a minute by minute basis to suit the mood of the day.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Rollo

This is true. However and this is just a few of the conditions from Swiss gun legislation:
- all automatic weapons banned.
- all semi-automatic weapons banned.
- all people must get a Weapons Purchasing Permit (and pass a criminal background and psychological test).
- to carry a gun on the street requires a Weapons Carrying Permit (they are normally only given to security and the police).
- all private weapons must be stored in a locked box.
- until 2007, government issued ammunition was kept in sealed boxes which was a criminal offence to open. Now ammunition is not kept at civilian premises.
SR 514.541 Verordnung ber Waffen, Waffenzubehr und Munition
SR 514.54 Bundesgesetz vom 20. Juni 1997 ber Waffen, Waffenzubehr und Munition (Waffengesetz, WG) (there is a PDF on this page which is quite extensive)

If America tried to enact similar legislation, all automatic and semi-automatic weapons would have to be seized immediately, as would virtually all ammunition, locked boxes would be required in people's houses that had guns and most people would be disallowed from carrying a gun outside.

It would however be closer to the actual wording of the second amendment:
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.

Switzerland probably has the most highly regulated rules for gun ownership in the Western World. This point is almost always ignored by pro-gun people in the United States.

---

And, what's more, the whole Swiss attitude towards gun ownership is totally different to that in the USA.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

If Rollo had his way, he would rewrite the constitution on a minute by minute basis to suit the mood of the day.

---

Nonsense. There is nothing wrong with the occasional amendment. Your founding fathers did not have a monopoly on being uniquely wise, you know.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Starter

Thankfully, he doesn't get to vote.

---

Why 'thankfully'? I would have thought he seems to be the sort of sensible citizen any country should welcome, and enfranchise accordingly.