Donate SIGN UP

Only In America. Is This A Price They're Willing To Continue To Pay For The Right To Carry Arms?

Avatar Image
sandyRoe | 14:34 Wed 26th Aug 2015 | News
103 Answers
Gravatar

Answers

1 to 20 of 103rss feed

1 2 3 4 Next Last

Best Answer

No best answer has yet been selected by sandyRoe. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.

For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
It's one of them.
Virginia Governor says tv crew shooter was disgruntled employee of station.

Police identified the shooter and their license plate and are reportedly chasing the suspect by car, according to local ABC affiliate WHSV News
-- answer removed --
Question Author
If there wasn't a constitutional right to carry arms it might be a bit harder to get their hands on a gun. And the death toll from various types of shootings would probably be greatly reduced.
I wouldn't know how to get hold of a gun in this country, Divebuddy.

That's the difference.
The NRA response inevitably will be "It wouldn't have happened if the journalists had been armed".
-- answer removed --
divebuddy - "Fair enough. But America is awash with guns, legal or otherwise. That isn't going to change any time soon. "

The right to bear arms debate emerges every time there is a tragedy like this.

There is no sign of this situation ever being resolved - President Obama has spoken out more strongly than his predecessors, but he is aware, as is anyone else, that the candidate that stands on repeals of the Second Amendment is the candidate that has lost before the election begins.

Until the 'frontier' mentality that seems to be woven into the American DNA loosens its grip, there will be no willingness for citizens to think about relinquishing their arms, or politicians to vote to compel them to do so.
-- answer removed --
divebuddy - "Quite why we (i.e. any non USAians) bother going on about it, beats me."

Because we are all human, and the tragedy of needless deaths is not confined by oceans or borders.

That, combined with utter frustration at the inability to solve this continuing problem gives food for thought to anyone.
///Quite why we (i.e. any non USAians) bother going on about it, beats me.///

Is that why you've contributed more posts to this thread than anybody - "bother going on about it" indeed. PMSL.
I don't know either, divebuddy, but I fear we may be about to find out.
-- answer removed --
The right to bear arms generally has little to do with these incidents. Guns dont kill people do. It's estimated there are in excess of 400m guns in the US, making them illegal would just mean some were put at risk as the criminal element (and a good few more) would simply not hand them in.

In addition to this you would still have to allow many guns outside of Towns. There are reasons for this, Bear, Snakes, Gators and simply the fact that no one is going to come to arrest someone trying to harm you because you are too remote.

I can imagine to outcry if a President removed this right and then crime stats rose and people were killed because of it and it's because of that no President will do anything.
youngmafbog - "Guns dont kill people do."

That's such a cliché, a comedy song has been made out of it!

If people didn't have the guns, they couldn't kill people with them.

It's a simplistic response to a simplistic view - and we both know that the issues are far more complex than that.
No, they would stab them with a knife or a car or any other implement to hand.

Cliche or not it is true. It's the nutter on the trigger that is the problem.
youngmafbog -"No, they would stab them with a knife or a car or any other implement to hand."

Nothing can ever be done to prevent the actions oc the ramdom psychotic - that is part and parcel of our crowded society.

"Cliche or not it is true. It's the nutter on the trigger that is the problem."

I think it's that the nutter has legal access to the trigger that is the problem - or at least the start of it.
Well I would agree it would be a good thing to vet people more, especially in America where there does seem to be a lot of nutters.

But it still would not stop the killings. Guns are not legal here, but we have shootings and murderers turn to machetes and bombs.

End result is the same - death to some poor sod.

Making guns illegal just penalizes those that have no malicious intent at all.
Question Author
The killer has shot himself according to 'latest news'. But he's still alive.
Once and for all, unless an event of cataclysmic proportions that makes the movement of the San Andreas Fault or Mount McKinley blowing its top, the Americans are not going to repeal the amendment that permits the bearing of hands - tell me in all sincerity how are they going to get 75% vote in both Houses.

However, there is one way that they could control gun usage and that is tax the proverbial out of the bullets and shot.......such a price that it deters the average punter, perhaps a rebate system for those who are permitted to bear arms., i.e the forces/licensed hunters and farmers, or for gun clubs where distribution is controlled - 'I counted them out and I counted them back.'

1 to 20 of 103rss feed

1 2 3 4 Next Last

Do you know the answer?

Only In America. Is This A Price They're Willing To Continue To Pay For The Right To Carry Arms?

Answer Question >>

Related Questions

Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.