by Simon 616 Replies latest members politics
Because they're Americans, Besty.
They're not going to give up their rights to carry guns in Texas. No sir.
Then they'll say it's those mentally ill people. But use our model of a decent and humane national health system, so that mental illness is treated responsibly?
No way.
James - If you mean somebody in the UK can't scream racist abuse at others and then hide behind "free speech" then yes I am pleased to say we don't have that right.
Should I apologise for asking for a simple clarification:-
Why does the USA have 15x per capita gun ownership and yet 74x per capita gun homicide compared to the UK?
I already admitted that life is better in the UK. You guys are indeed much more civilized than us barbaric, ravenous, gun-toting 'Mericuns. You have it all figured out.
James - If you mean somebody in the UK can't scream racist abuse at others and then hide behind "free speech" then yes I am pleased to say we don't have that right.
Thank you, Cofty. Americans very seldom try to revise the English system of government.
Yes, I live in Texas.
Yes, I am armed and loaded.
We kind of think that is the right way to do things, out here in the forntier.
I already admitted that life is better in the UK. You guys are indeed much more civilized than us barbaric, ravenous, gun-toting 'Mericuns. You have it all figured out.
I've spent time in London and I agree. I would live there if I could. I wish I was as smart as the fictional character, Dr. Who and I could come up with a non-violent solution to any situation, but I'm not. I doubt if anyone else here is either.
" We here Americuns dont neede any foriennors tellen us about what to do with guns, we already know wat to do wit them "
Deputy Dog said: Do you or anyone in their right mind think Representative Gabrielle Giffords was part of a tyranical government? That's why he's in prison.
Of course I don't. But since you stated that: "...The second amendment was not designed to protect our right to hunt or for target shooting. It was intended for the people (individuals) to use to dispose of tyrants."
If the "individual" has the right to "dispose of tyrants", then who gets to decide who's tyranical in the government?
I already admitted that life is better in the UK. You guys are indeed much more civilized than us barbaric, ravenous, gun-toting 'Mericuns. You have it all figured out.
can anyone else add insight to why the USA has 15x per capita gun ownership and yet 74x per capita gun homicide compared to the UK?
Or is that it....
EP said: Better access to long term, sustainable mental health care
While that is true, wouldn't that involve a government run healthcare system? Something many Americans are deathly against? I'm guessing that many mentally disturbed people cannot afford private insurance to cover the costs.
better enforcement of existing laws, immediate and harsh sentencing of people that break gun laws, for starters.
Unfortunately, these nutters that pull these mass murders either end up killing themselves, or if they are captured alive, they are inevitably given a 100+ year sentence, which does nothing but burden the tax payers. It does nothing to help prevent these tragedies.
jameswood said: I wish that the anti-gun people posting on this thread would simply tell the truth about the way they feel: The constitutional "right to bear arms" is an inconvenience for them, and they wish that it should be abolished.
I don't think people are viewing it as "inconvenient" james, but far more of a "concern". I'm not American, but I am horrified at what I see as a huge problem south of the border when it comes to guns. These mass murders are becoming an almost regular occurrence and the whackos are obtaining very sophisticated weapons and thousands of rounds of ammunition through legitimate means. Obviously the laws and the way your Second Amendment is being used now is not working very well, and something needs to change.
In the days after 9-11, when it became known how easy it was for the terrorists to enter the USA, board a plane a take control, then it was obvious that much stricter security needed to be implement in order to avoid a repeat of what happened. The change in immigration and homeland security does not mean that another 9-11 will never happen (although hopefully it won't), but at least something was done about what was a very lax security issue that cost thousands of people their lives that day.
The same can be said for gun control. If much tighter security was implemented on gun control in the States, it may not eliminate the problem entirely, but it should at least cut down on a number of these cases.
Those kids are adorable!
I'm hoping you were joking. If not, do you find these kids adorable too?
