The Supreme Court's Gun Ruling This Week - Not A Debate

[Timmo]

just look at the cities and states that have srtict gunlaws. There are higher rates of murder. so more restrict gunlaws does not and will not make you safer.

I don't know about higher murder rates in places with strict gun laws, there may be more murders overall, but I think that has more to do with population density than gun laws. That said, I do agree with those of you who've stated that gun restrictions only empower the criminal who couldn't care less about law in the first place. I fully support the right of lawful citizins to own firearms.

It seems to me that instead of trying to take away guns from law abiding citizens in high-crime areas, the powers-that-be should be focusing on what (in my opinion) causes higher crime rates.... overpopulation leading to high unemployment and low incomes. Something akin to the old saying "too many rats in the cage", or too many chickens in the coop, leading to violence and cannibalism in the hen house...

If certain urban areas could figure out a way to lower their population density, and then set density limits per square mile, I'd bet much lower crime rates would follow. But that won't happen because then the argument would shift to "the government is telling you where you can and can't live" instead of "the government is taking away your guns". A vicious cycle.... no matter what is done, it will be percieved as the government stepping on someones fundamental rights.

The court even debating the issue seems insane to me. I don't believe the court can override the Bill of Rights, maybe they think they can though.

It's the job of the Judiciary Branch to detemine what is constitutional and what isn't. The Court has a great influence on Congress. (edited because of ignorance on my part)

I hope that after the ruling last week, the country as a whole will just leave well enough alone. I am glad they finally defined the 2nd amendment as pertaining to individual rights, and not some militia mumbojumbo. The 5 to 4 count is a bit troubling to me, but hey, a win is a win.

Imagine what would be going on right now if the vote had gone the other way? Holy Moly...​

 

[Rosalind]

@Oblio and others who have mentioned the crime rates of cities (and Mass., where we have a lot more human beings than our neighboring states of Vt., NH, RI): Yes, I do believe this is one of the factors in our culture that contributes to the lack of nonviolent conflict resolution--too many people in too small a space, all crammed together. Population density is absolutely known to produce violent behavior as people fight over resources, and that's in every culture everywhere. However, I believe that some aspects of American culture are unique in their ability to make a violent conflict more likely than a nonviolent resolution. Those aspects would be the lack of a tradition of civility and diplomacy, and the lack of respect for rule of law.

These traditions in other cultures (such as Switzerland, where all adult males are required to keep military-issue guns in the house), coupled with a high standard of living (which occurs for various reasons), prevent what you see in American cities WRT violent crime, by and large. They don't do a 100% perfect job, but they do OK.

I forget who asked how far in the boonies I lived in PA, but let me tell you, it was pretty darn far! Yes, it was a few hours from everywhere you mentioned (cities etc.). There's a reason they call 'em the Endless Mountains. And there were exactly two police officers, who, if you called them to your house for whatever reason, if their family liked you, they'd tell you they'd look into it and then go smoke pot with their buddies. If their family did not like you for whatever reason, you got a $100 ticket for annoying them by having the nerve to call them out of the middle of a good fishing trip. Their cousin lived next door to me and didn't like me on account of, I swear to heaven, "She reads too many books and dresses like a hippie." There was a state prison not too far away, and the prison had at least one breakout per year, and the cons would hide out in the hunting cabins within a couple miles--occasionally blocks--from our house. Essentially, there was no police protection for anyone not a member of their extended family, and lots of loose murderers and rapists and such. Where I live now is a fairly wealthy suburb with more cops than you can shake a stick at, and they'll come help you get a kitten out of a tree if they're not busy, that's how friendly they are. Much safer.

 

[fullhouse]

Quote:
Actually they, the court, can't amend the Constitution. There are only 4 ways to do that.

Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state conventions. Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state legislatures. Proposal by Congress, ratification by state conventions. Proposal by Congress, ratification by state legislatures.

 

[Just-Like-Hatching]

I proudly support the NRA, I am a proud Soldier and have carried (legally) concealed weapons for years.

I grew up in a place where we never locked the doors, carried a rifle in the truck and never worried about getting robbed. But everybody had a weapon. Joined the military and lived in several different states. I was worried more in places that had very restrictive gun laws than in places with less restrictive ones. Seems like the crooks weren't sure who had guns in the less restrictive states and and surely weren't worried about much in the places were few people had the right to weapons.

I raised four daughters and all of them can change the tire when they have a flat and use a gun if the necessity arises.

When I deploy for sometimes a year or more at a time, I don't worry about the wife. She is quiet handy with a gun and not afraid to use it to defend herself or the kids.

So as you can see, I am not worried about law abiding citizens having a gun. Just those that don't care what the law is either way.

 

[Timmo]

Quote:
Actually they, the court, can't amend the Constitution. There are only 4 ways to do that.

Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state conventions. Proposal by convention of states, ratification by state legislatures. Proposal by Congress, ratification by state conventions. Proposal by Congress, ratification by state legislatures.

Yes yes..sorry about that, I had legislative and judicial mixed up. The courts job is to uphold the constitution and determine what is constitutional and what isn't, correct? In that way they do have an influence over how congress may or may not ammend the constitution.

Sorry about that, I edited my post.

 

[tnkinhunting]

I have a Ruger on my nightstand - and another in the drawer. Both are loaded. I believe we have the right to bear arms - 5-4 is too close for comfort. Think long and hard before you vote for president and get their view on gun control. The next president will probably appoint two judges maybe more if they go in for a second term.....not everyone has CIA protection.

 

[Davaroo]

Quote:
This is quite smple, really. It means every citizen shall be a part of the nations defense, citizen-soldiers, at home and in military service... the whole "enemies, both foreign and domestic" bit. EVERY citizen; that means YOU who are reading this.
Not watchdog government, not hired strongarms with badges - YOU.

You are essentially required by virtue of your citizens duty** to both own firearms and to be prepared to use them. The men who framed those words were both prepared and followed through by risking their lives to create those words. They lived under the jackboot of an occupation force, if you'll recall. To even meet in a tavern under the guise of insurrection could mean death. Truly, "All Gave Some, Some Gave All."

Nothing less is expected of you.

This means even against scofflaws who would infringe on your right to "life, liberty and the pursuit' of happiness. There are all manner of enemies, abroad and at home.

We can debate the words until we're blue in the face, but the intent was immutable:

This nation rises or falls by what each of us DOES, not what we argue about.

** Sadly, DUTY is a concept that seems to be fast slipping from our consciousness. Most feel there is only duty to oneself, these days. Part of the reason we have an excess of crime, I'm certain.

 

[ilovemychickies]

Ok, here's my view on this whole gun ban thing. Someone may have already said what I'm about to say, but I don't really have enough time to read 9 pages.

I think that people should be alowed to own/carry guns. If they make a new law that says that guns are illegal, the murder rate is going to skyrocket. The people that rob banks, commit murder, break into houses, etc, with guns, aren't going to care if they break the law about the carrying guns. They aren't going to say, "Oh man! There's a new law that says we can't carry guns. Guess we can't rob anymore banks or commit anymore murder!" What I'm trying to say is, if they're already to the point where they are doing crime, what's going to stop them from breaking another law? They won't care. We need to be able to defend ourselves if the time comes where we need to! It's common sense people, common sense.

Ok, I'll get off my soapbox now.

*Edited to re-word a sentence that made no sense.

*

 

[PurpleChicken]

Quote:
I must admit I never thought of it in quite those terms but that is a very strong
arguement. Not only do we have a RIGHT we have an OBLIGATION to arm ourselves.

I've got to think about that one for a while. It does seem to be in line with what the
founding fathers would have wanted.

 

[tomstephens]

I'm all for the individual right to carry any firearm. I think the purpose of the second amendment was, I believe, just as much a way to make sure the people can always protect themselves from intruding nations and criminals as it was to protect the people from the government.

When the nation was founded people came from an environment where their freedoms were taken. Usually not by invading armies and criminals but by the existing government. I think the founding fathers wanted to make sure that couldn't happen again. They wanted to make sure there was always a way to fight back.

So I have doubts about all but the most basic firearm regulation.


Oh and Elderoo, I think you're dead on.