The right to bear arms

I get that I'm not living in a nation as deeply entrenched in gun culture. When Port Arthur happened, we were aghast but there was still some dissent and they rallied the support of the NRA to go to loggerheads with our government. Fortunately, the outright ban on semi-automatic weapons went through. Since last Friday, state Premiers have come under tremendous pressure here if they are even seen to be supporting gun groups cut through the redtape of gun ownership and the sort of weaponry allowed. Australia has reacted in great sympathy to this tragedy and revisited its own horror. It would be political suicide for any politician right now to help out these groups. I guess that is the difference between the nations but it is also a reminder to remain ever vigil about our government and the favours they are trying to curry without thinking about the consequences.

This is from The Guardian newspaper in the UK and if the 88% of the gun owning population decide not to give up their weapons, the US Government is going to have a hard time forcing them to. That's a lot of firepower there.

The key facts are:

• The US has the highest gun ownership rate in the world - an average of 88 per 100 people. That puts it first in the world for gun ownership - and even the number two country, Yemen, has significantly fewer - 54.8 per 100 people

• But the US does not have the worst firearm murder rate - that prize belongs to Honduras, El Salvador and Jamaica. In fact, the US is number 28, with a rate of 2.97 per 100,000 people

• Puerto Rico tops the world's table for firearms murders as a percentage of all homicides - 94.8%. It's followed by Sierra Leone in Africa and Saint Kitts and Nevis in the Caribbean

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Emil Miller

You've just destroyed your own argument.

---

Destroyed with irony, which is very rare in Texas.

Juarez had 5K murders in one year. I don't see how PR is worse than Juarez. Where did you get that info from, Emil?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by qimissung

Thanks for clarifying, Varenne. I think the idea of arming teachers is just an idea-at the moment anyway. :D

---

I suppose the mere fact that arming teachers is Texas's first publically available idea speaks volumes. And believe me, THAT is exactly how they think in the main.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/...loped-country/

That's excluding Mexico.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Volya

Or they could've fired at the killer, thus delaying him and possibly scaring him off, if not outright killing him?

---

They would not have known he was a killer until he fired first. The teachers would be the first targets whether they carried guns or not. Then the rapid shooting of the children could commence. It is the rapid targeting that should justify banning these types of weapons.

We will see what happens in Texas whether arming teachers reduces the number of deaths or increases it through accidental killings. However, I don't think Texas should be singled out. Texans are no worse than anyone else here.

There is also no point in scaring off someone who is intent on committing suicide.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by YesNo

They would not have known he was a killer until he fired first. The teachers would be the first targets whether they carried guns or not. Then the rapid shooting of the children could commence.

---

Exactly.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by LaMaga

Juarez had 5K murders in one year. I don't see how PR is worse than Juarez. Where did you get that info from, Emil?

---

Well, it's from the Guardian, a left-wing British newspaper.

Today they printed a substantial article and interviewed a US gun dealer called Mr. Durkheimer; this is part of the article:

But Durkheimer, who counts elephant hunting in Africa among his pastimes, has not seen anything like the past weekend.

"There are two kinds of Americans. People who want to take care of themselves and those who want to be taken care of. The ones who want to take care of themselves are the ones who come into my shop," he said.

The buyers regard the Newtown killings as a tragedy, but view any connection to their right to own weapons as a political ploy aimed at depriving them of their guns.

"It's terrible what happened. It's just plain evil," said Richard Merritt on the steps of the gun shop after browsing assault rifles with a thought to buying himself one for Christmas to supplement the handguns and hunting rifle he owns.

"But there's people trying to use that to say I'm responsible because I own a gun. Where's the connection? The only people making one are doing it for political ends because there's not one of these massacres would ever have been stopped by a law that takes my gun away. But now they're talking about doing that again, I think this may be the time to buy."

You can see that there's likely to be tough times ahead for those who try to disarm the American public.

We could arm our children.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Lokasenna

Agreed. Most people in the UK would not see it as a right to own guns. Following the Dunblane massacre, legislation was passed that essentially made the ownership of handguns illegal - a move that had a great deal of popular support at the time and since. Nor has there been any serious attempt since to decriminalise them.

If anyone, particularly in America, has never heard of the Dunblane massacre, and its following reforms, then I urge you to at least have a look at the wiki: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dunblane_school_massacre - if nothing else, it shows that these terrible events can bring about change.

---

Our guns are for keeping the Queen of England out of our face. You blokes might have broke free centuries ago if you'd had them. I bet the Irish were happy they kept theirs when the English came a knockin'.

And if we are trying to use these events as the reason for change in law, surely we must look at the Bath School massacre, the deadliest school massacre in the US. The killer did not use guns, he used bombs. Bombs are very easy to make at home (all it takes is a google search to find out how), do you suggest we ban the sale of all products that can be used to make them?

What is sad is just how predictable all the arguments against any form of gun control are... as if the individuals lack any ability to think for themselves, but only repeat the NRA handbook: "Guns don't kill people..." "More people are killed by cars..." Yes, a bomb was used in the deadliest school massacre in the US. How many total deaths from bombs in US schools have their been vs total deaths from guns? How many kids have been killed each year from guns? I personally know of 4 of my own former students killed by guns. And once again... the products used in the creation of a bomb... and the automobile... do they perhaps have a practical purpose beyond killing? How about guns?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by mortalterror

Our guns are for keeping the Queen of England out of our face.

---

Lol. 88 per 100 people? It's heartening to know that you're still afraid - very afraid

It seems that the most these teachers, even if armed, could have done was become a target for the killer...

Or they could've fired at the killer, thus delaying him and possibly scaring him off, if not outright killing him?

Oh please. I remember Charlton Heston speaking on behalf of the NRA immediately after the Columbine killings suggesting that teachers should carry handguns. I cannot even begin to fathom the number of deaths that would result from such. In any given year in any American urban school district students have succeeded in stealing the teacher's cell-phones, i-pods, i-pads, laptops, watches, keys, and any number of other expensive toys from under the teacher's noses. Can you even begin to imagine the number of guns that would end up stolen... in student hands?

It's heartening to know that you're still afraid

And that's the problem. Calming the fear of those paranoid individuals by allowing them to purchase automatic weapons more easily than they can get a license to drive is more important than the thousands of lives of innocent men, women... and children lost every year.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by stlukesguild

It seems that the most these teachers, even if armed, could have done was become a target for the killer...

Or they could've fired at the killer, thus delaying him and possibly scaring him off, if not outright killing him?

Oh please. I remember Charlton Heston speaking on behalf of the NRA immediately after the Columbine killings suggesting that teachers should carry handguns. I cannot even begin to fathom the number of deaths that would result from such. In any given year in any American urban school district students have succeeded in stealing the teacher's cell-phones, i-pods, i-pads, laptops, watches, keys, and any number of other expensive toys from under the teacher's noses. Can you even begin to imagine the number of guns that would end up stolen... in student hands?

---

Or found by a snoopy or curious kid when the teacher walks out for "just a second" and forgets to lock her desk. When I was working at a local social service agency, a little kid once got hold of her social worker's mace and started cheerfully spraying it around. Luckily, nobody was hurt.