US News
Supreme Court rejects city gun ban, upholds gun rights (2nd Roundup)
By Chris Cermak Jun 26, 2008, 16:56 GMT
On the Web
Similar articles
- Death sentences remain at three-decade low in US
- Russian arms dealer pleads not guilty in US court (Roundup)
- US: Russian arms dealer now a "federal inmate"
- US Supreme Court denies criminals the right to DNA appeal
- ANALYSIS: US gun rights far from resolved after Supreme Court ruling
Latest Headlines in US
- 1. Romney lags behind a surging Santorum in US polls
- 2. Whitney Houston to be buried Saturday in small family funeral
- 3. Obama, Democrats get Republican raspberries for Valentine's Day
- 4. Obama calls for quick passage of payroll tax holiday extension
- 5. Report: Director Oliver Stone's son converts to Islam
Older Talkback
page: 1
This will be a problem for the good people of Maryland & northern Virginia. As DC residents become less easy targets, DC criminals will spread teir favors more widely.
I don't think Virginians have much to worry about as they are quite capable of defending themselves. It's us Marylanders that have to worry due to the gun grabbing leftists that run this gulag.
I don't live in the USA.
'Thank God
I don't live in the USA.'
Agreed.
I have freedom, you don't.
Buy Guns over the counter in the UK.
The last time I SAW a gun in was a farmers 12 bore shotgun.
Apart from Military displays we rarely see guns here, except for the UK Constabularly (Police) at Airports,but rarely, anywhere else.
Our Canadian neighbors think everyone in the U.S. carries a gun and some feel it's a dangerous place to be!! It does seem that every time there is a report of an argument between someone, they all pull out their guns and fire away.
England has had an increasing violent crime rate since they essentially banned guns. Canada has had an increase, Australia has had an increase... The concept that 'When you outlaw guns, only outlaws have guns' seems lost on you people. Every state that has passed 'shall issue' laws, increasing the number of legally held guns has seen a decrease in crime and places where guns are not allowed are the places that the criminals who don't obey the law to begin with go and use their illegal guns to commit crimes without fear of retribution from a person with a legal gun.
Gun ownership reduces gun crime. It's a fact. Not everyone has or should have one, but the fact that the criminals don't know who does and who doesn't sure slows them down.
And with your inability to see the obvious, I'm glad you don't live in America either.
Stoney
A Red letter day!
I don't care about your crime statistics. I don't care about your gun-phobia. This was an end run to destroy gun ownership and it failed.
We are supposed to have rights and, no matter which one, there is a liberal trying to trim it off the Constitution. Fortunately, we have 5 lawyers who know what the Constitution is supposed to be for. The other four communists need to go.
'all governments end in tyranny' Thomas Jefferson
I don't think anyone other than law enforcement should be allowed to carry a concealed weapon. When was the last time you heard that an ordinary citizen used their gun to defend themselves, but you constantly hear about people getting into fights and using their guns to settle it.
funny thing, I'm American, and my one time my then Oxford educated (Doctor of physics) English boyfriend (lives here) nearly killed me with a loaded .38
Only time I have ever been threatened by a gun.
...carries risk and responsibility. Advanced citizenship is real work. Time to take your rights seriously. We get tired advocating for you.
'I live in England
I have freedom, you don't.'
That's why half the people in my co-op are 'Xpats' who have fled the UK nanny state and no-go zones for the freedom and economic opportunity, not to mention the cheaper booze, of the USA.
Having seen the UK regularly over the past 30ish years I can only say you are not as nearly as free over there as your parents were. It is just your mindset that has done it too.
Thus spake Lord Clarkson:
www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/jeremy_clarkson/article418 6068.ece
Snippet from the linked piece:''The machine needs to be fed. When you have 650 members of parliament elected to make laws, and an army of 500,000 civil servants whose job is to make sure that those laws work, and more legions in Brussels making more laws, there is never going to be any respite. The machine can never rest until absolutely everything is illegal.
Whenever I let my mind wander, I become quivery-lipped and frightened thinking about all the things I could do 10 years ago that I cannot do now. I may not smack my children, for instance, or talk on a mobile telephone while driving or put too much salt on my mashed potato or smoke at home if my cleaning lady objects or give my donkey a tender burial or encourage my dogs to kill rats. And if I put the wrong thing in the wrong-coloured dustbin, I’m likely to spend the next five years digging tunnels.''
========
If it is of any consolation to our British Cousins, the same kind of idiocracy is taking over on our side of the pond. The sad news is, there is nowhere left to run. It is already necessary to turn and fight.
Never seen such a bunch of crazy arguments to defend guns .The two worst as usual SP7 and nohatness.THe first doesn't give a shit about the statistics ,because human live is nt real to him.And then of course there is noharness,saying in not so many words that guns are outlawed in europe to feed the necessity for a thriving burocracy .That was his mos stupid comment ever .AS if there are no better reasons .You could save at least a hunderd american lives a day,from which many children.Even toddlers kill each others in the USA .THere is not one civilized country in the world allowing things meant to kill only in the hands of it's population.You are in the company of Soudan,Ethiopia,Colombia,Brazil and a few others .As for the argument that a gun will defend you,please clarify how your gun will stop the bullet from another gun from hitting you .Perhaps magic ?
When my children are playing in the back yard and a rabid fox or much to friendly black bear comes wandering in, you bet I want my gun handy. It seems like a lot of the posts here can't see any other use for guns than committing criminal offenses. There are proper uses and more responsible citizens using them than criminals. It's just that responsible gun use doesn't make the headlines. Just because some criminally minded miscreants of society use them for their violent crimes is no reason for me to give up my right to own my rifle.
A few figures which may help put the gun owning idiocy in perspective -
In america (year 2000 figures - but still very relevant)
The average cost for treating each unintentional shooting is $22,400. The average cost for treating each gun-related injury is $18,400. Because most victims of gun violence in America are uninsured, the public ends up footing the bill for their treatment.
According to the Annual Bill To The Nation costs of gun violence in the US have been estimated at between $100 billion and $126 billion.
During the ENTIRE Korean War, 33,651 American were killed. That is less than the number killed by guns EACH YEAR in america !
The ENTIRE Vietnam War cost 58,000 american lives. Keep buying those guns - you'll soon get thbe yearly kill rate up to the Vietnam figure
'Remember folks, guns don't kill people...
bullets do.'
Oh, my! Look who popped up when I put the bureaucrats in their place, the Belgian Control Freak. Way to go, Tonny. I appreciate your helping me make my case.
I'm not against gun ownership but don't think hand guns should be allowed to the general public.
'...would you PLEASE step into the gas chamber!?'
- Ayn Rand
All law abiding citizens should have right to bear arms. There should be a basic training/registration/licensure maintenance process.
Carrying weapon in public should be an option, but strictly regulated.
Harsh penalties for violations.
Hey - great idea - allow guns, but not ammunition. Maybe the right to bear arms didn't specifically include ammunition in fine print, so that could be a way to get around this declaration - make ammunition illegal - right on!!!!
..that's what got you libnazis here: trying to play footsie with the Constitution.
Politicians cannot be relied on to make reasonable, just laws. Wash. D.C is the perfect example:
Did they enact reasonable legislation?
No.
They just banned all guns. Has it helped crime there or Chicago?
No, and they do not care.
They made an empty jesture at the expense of gun owners, endangering the public's safety at the expense of transient political gain.
This is why the founders wrote this document.
And, it worked!
just how many average citizens go around carrying a loaded, concealed handgun?? And more specifically, if they were confronted, they would have a he** of a time getting it out of their briefcase, etc., or where ever it's hidden!!! Let's all just sling our rifles/shotguns over our shoulders and head to town!
As long as they use good judgement, I do not care.
I live in the USA. A few years ago on a TV talk show, two men were invited on to speak - one of them a gun owner - one of them an anti-gun advocate. The gun owner related a story of how, prior to gun ownership, his house was broken into by burglars. His youngest son 'surprised' the burglars and they shot him dead. Following that incident, the gun owner said he bought a gun and took an approved firearm course to learn how to use it properly. Further, he said that if anyone ever broke into his home again, he'd kill anyone he felt might threaten his family.
The anti-gun advocate chided him, asking, 'So you think that two wrongs make a right?' I swear, I wanted to reach through my TV screen, grab that guy by the throat, and ask him:
'Since when did self-defense become a WRONG thing to do?'
It would be nice if we lived in a fairy-tale world where the police responded to life-threatening situations in time to make a difference. Unfortunately, we don't. So, while I don't own a firearm myself nor belong to the NRA, I believe that everyone has a right to own a firearm for protection of self or loved ones.
BUT ... I have one proviso.
Before buying a firearm, I think that every potential buyer should be required to show a verifiable certificate to the gun seller, PROVING they have taken and passed an approved firearm safety course. Sadly, too many people get their ideas about gun ownership from watching TV and movies - and think that merely owning a gun gives them security. A gun in the possession of a stupid person is worse than having no gun at all. And, I think if you asked a law enforcement officer (like my uncle), you'd find that police don't fear private gun ownership. They fear IRRESPONSIBLE gun ownership.
The Supreme Court, in their 5-4 ruling, alluded to the fact that it may take many years of lawsuits to fine-tune 2nd Amendment rights in the US. That, I can understand. Every state has different rules about how a gun can 'legally' be used in self-defense. Many states, like mine, have what's called and 'equal and opposite force' rule. In short, if a burglar broke into a home, a homeowner shot and killed him, and later the police discover that the burglar was not carrying a deadly weapon, the homeowner could go to jail.
(Devil's advocate mode, hehe)
A few years ago, a friend of mine (a local-area police officer) told me how to handle such a situation. As a disclaimer, let me say that I'm not suggesting people follow his advice (grin). I'm only mentioning what he said.
First, go to a local store and buy a pocket knife that comes in a plastic wrapper or box (making certain your fingerprints don't get on the knife). Buy it with cash so there's no bank record of the purchase. Put it in a safe place and just remember where you put it. If someone breaks into your home, shoot to kill, making certain they are facing you when you shoot. Then, retrieve the pocket knife, again making certain you don't get your fingerprints on it. Using tissue paper, place the knife in the burglar's right hand and close his hand around it ... then flailing the hand to the floor. Take the tissue paper and the plastic wrapper (or box) the knife came in ... and any sales receipt ... tear them up into small pieces ... and flush them down your toilet. Then and ONLY then, call the police.
Why the right hand? In knife fighting, changing hands is not uncommon ... and the right hand would be the logical place it would be anyway. If the burglar was left-handed, it won't matter.
When the police arrive, tell them the burglar confronted you with the knife and you fired in self defense. Because a knife is considered a deadly weapon, your use of a firearm will be consider justifiable under the equal and opposite force rule. Case closed.
If you think you need protection in your home, you are going to have to wear your gun, loaded, in a holster at all times; otherwise it's not going to do you any good in the closet or nightstand! And I seriously doubt anyone is going to do this.
Answerman wrote 'I wanted to reach through my TV screen, grab that guy by the throat, and ask him...'
Here in a nutshell is the in-built american love of violence to solve problems. By all means ask someone to explain themselves, but why 'grab him by the throat ?'
In similar circumstances but with a gun available ' bang - I've won the argument !'
You could do with a few anger management courses before being let anywhere near a gun
That's it in a nutshell! Too many hotheads running around with their handguns looking for a shootout, and they don't care who gets in the way.
Handguns and assualt rifles shouldn't be legal for the general public under any circumstances. Some declarations proposed in the early years of this country shouldn't necessarily apply today.
William partially quoted me, 'I wanted to reach through my TV screen, grab that guy by the throat, and ask him...' - and reserved his comments to that partial quote. But, he deftly avoided answering the question that followed, completing the quote, 'Since when did self-defense become a WRONG thing to do?' I'd love to hear your answer to that question - and no, I won't reach through my monitor screen to grab you by the throat if you choose not to answer it (grin).
Be honest, William. If a man broke into your home in the middle of the night ... and if you had the choice of reaching for a gun or reaching for a telephone ... which would you reach for? If you chose the telephone, you'd better remember to speak softly. And if the man broke into your bedroom while you were making the call, you'd better hope that he's a Good Samaratin who'd respond to pleas like, 'Oh, God, please don't hurt me or my family.' Problem is, there aren't too many break-ins done by Good Samaratins.
Just a P.S. As I said in my first post, I don't own a firearm ... nor do I belong to the NRA. I admit that, from time to time, I've thought about buying one and taking training. But, I've opted for a different security solution. I employ a security service that's incredibly cheap and intensely loyal. Perhaps you've heard of them - The Doberman Brothers (grin).
In responce to Gordys statement, when was the last time you ever heard of an 'ordinary' citizen using a gun to defend themselves. Get a copy of the nra's american shooter or hunter and look at the section titled The armed citizen, I guess you could add the words 'ordinary armed citizen' to fit your terminology as needed. No one is 'ordinary' when confronted by an intruder. It is a situation that requires the utmost 'unordinary' actions' a person will ever resort to to survive the situation.
page: 1
Your Talkback on this Story