Gun control and the second amendment....

[ChickensRDinos]

I live in a country where it's very very hard to get a gun, and it makes me feel safe.
But I'm not going to explain myself, simply because I've experienced that people who are pro gun are not interested in discussions about it.
I visited the USA in 2009, and had some americans ask me for my honest opinion, so they could tell me that if I don't own a gun, I can't protect my family like I'm supposed to. Kinda rude.

That is one of my pet peeves. People ask you for your honest opinion and then just upset. If you don't want to know then don't ask. lol. I am sorry you have had that experience with Americans.

 

[DaphneNL]

Have to tell you I also met some amazing people on my trip. But in those few weeks I learned there are many many differences between Dutch and American people.
I will keep following this thread, I hope to see some more opinions about this subject.

 

[Q9]

Have to tell you I also met some amazing people on my trip. But in those few weeks I learned there are many many differences between Dutch and American people.
I will keep following this thread, I hope to see some more opinions about this subject.

I may be mistaken (correct me if I am), but hasn't the Netherlands partially legalized drugs? That seems like it would be a significant source of crime reduction; I know in the U.S., many violent crimes are drug-related, especially in the larger cities and near the border. The cartels and gangs couldn't care less about collateral damage.

 

[MamaRoo]

Amendment II
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.

Interesting that it says "keep" and not "own". Perhaps the original intent was not to have houses full of weapons, but to allow the people to create a local militia in times of war and be issued a weapon for the short term defense of property against enemies.

 

[DaphneNL]

I may be mistaken (correct me if I am), but hasn't the Netherlands partially legalized drugs? That seems like it would be a significant source of crime reduction; I know in the U.S., many violent crimes are drug-related, especially in the larger cities and near the border. The cartels and gangs couldn't care less about collateral damage.

I really think partial legalisation of drugs in the Netherland reduces crime.I also think that criminals will always calculate their changes if they commit a crime. Example: If some idiot wants to break into my house, he/she will know the chance I own a gun is minimal. That reduces the chance the idiot will feel the need to take a gun with him/her when breaking into my house drasticly. Because when he/she gets caught breaking in with a gun, the sentence is much heavier.

 

[ChickensRDinos]

While it may lessen violence around organized crime, I think the bigger issue with these mass shootings is the US's almost complete lack of a mental health care system.

 

[Baymule]

DaphneNL, those sure are some beautiful birds in your avatar.

 

[rebelcowboysnb]

Amendment II
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.

I realize this will probably be closed pretty quickly, but can I ask, who regulates the militia?

It is debated that that means armed. It really does not matter. The militia was always the whole of the people who chooses to be. It was always a community level group that worked together to guard the people of that community. They could be called up by the state but that really meant that they were asked to become regular army without enlisting for a set time. So they are the army but can go home if they want.

Anyway the main point is the words "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed" There was no question at that time that it meant the fed could not disarm or regulate the arms of the people. The state on the other hand could if they wanted to. That is why most states have something worded like that in the state Constitution to. But at the federal level, the second gave the people the right to own an carry any arms they chose to. The reason being that the states needed to be able to let there people carry arms equal to any military.

The Constitution now applies to the states. So to you does that mean that the states also should no longer be able to regulate any arms without amending the Constitution...

 

[Q9]

Interesting that it says "keep" and not "own". Perhaps the original intent was not to have houses full of weapons, but to allow the people to create a local militia in times of war and be issued a weapon for the short term defense of property against enemies.

Keep can be interchanged with owned, given the context. It's obviously an individual right; George Washington, Patrick Henry, James Madison, Thomas Jefferson and many, many others explicitly praise individual firearms ownership, and every single other right in the Bill of Rights refers to individuals. It seems odd to think that the Second Amendment is not referring to an individual right as well.

Of course, the right would still exist even if the 2A was repealed - it merely describes a right, it does not create one. While we can go on and on about practicality, this entire debate boils down to philosophy.

 

[yinepu]

I know there has been a lot of talk about banning guns.. many people are for it.. many are against it


For some reason (and i COULD be wrong... but I dont think so) I seriously doubt that standing there shaking my finger at a coyote or feral dog.. or mountain lion and telling him he's a bad baby for trying to attack my livestock would do much good

and if a person ever broke into my home I doubt that me standing there scolding them would make much of an impression on them either!
We live out in the country.. by the time I called 911.. and the police managed to get here ..assuming they could even find us..(even the UPS guy gets lost). I'm sure the damage would have already been done and I would be laying stone cold dead on the floor... so yeah.. I'll take my chance on defending myself, my family and my property with a gun.. cause i doubt the finger wagging would be very effective against the four legged or the two legged predators.


If others choose not to have a gun.. well that's their business... but don't try to take them away from me