Key.Aero Network
Register Free

Page 1 of 46 1234511 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 30 of 1374

Thread: U.S.A Second Amendment re-think

  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Bomber Country. Lincolnshire
    Posts
    7,875

    U.S.A Second Amendment re-think

    In view of what has happened to these, and indeed other School children, and many other incidents that have taken place, involving the use of Shotguns and Section 1 Firearms.do you think that any individual should be allowed to own seemingly as many weapons as they like?.in the U.S.A.
    Personaly, I think the 2nd should be fine tuned, to allow anyone to own the minimum of weapons they REALY need, And all weapons be kept in a secure place within the owners property, or at a gun club, where they are secure.
    Should they adopt the same rules and regs as we have here in the U.K.
    The other week, I was watching a U.S.A. program where a family business purchased and sold, also traded weapons, and one chap brought to them a pristine GATLING gun he wanted to sell, need I say more?.
    What are members views on gun ownership in the States?.

    Jim.

    Lincoln .7
    There is no such thing as a problem, just a solution!!

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Black Six
    Posts
    17,625
    Not really our place to suggest to the Americans what they should do.

    I can't see any panacea.

    Moggy
    "What you must remember" Flip said "is that nine-tenths of Cattermole's charm lies beneath the surface." Many agreed.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Bomber Country. Lincolnshire
    Posts
    7,875
    'Reply' not 'Quote' please

    Moggy, The only panacea, would be to ban all weapons, but we both know that would be impossible, however, I agree we should not tell the Americans what they can, and what they can't do, but in light of what has happened, don't you think the Americans are thinking along the same lines as I am?. The folks who have lost their child, I bet they are, even if they themselves are gun owners.

    I wonder how many over there are wondering just how many will be shot in the next incident, and you can bet your bottom Dollar, there will unfortunately be one.
    Food for thought on what we Brits think.

    Jim.

    Lincoln .7
    Last edited by Moggy C; 15th December 2012 at 11:06. Reason: pointless quote

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Black Six
    Posts
    17,625
    I just feel very sorry for the Americans and the situation they are in.

    Moggy
    "What you must remember" Flip said "is that nine-tenths of Cattermole's charm lies beneath the surface." Many agreed.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,801
    I’m not sure guns in a ‘secure place’ within the owner’s property would solve many problems; the recent killer’s first victim was apparently his mother at his home.

    The problem is the guns. Look at this story from China, twenty-two children injured in a school by a man with a knife; if he’d had a semi-automatic weapon most of them would be dead. Children have been killed with knives in Chinese schools but far less than would be the case had guns been involved (and I don’t know what gun-controls exist in China).

    http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-asia-china-20723910

    Pre- Dunblane the UK had pretty strict gun-control, post-Dunblane the UK had very strict (draconian perhaps) gun-control. This isn’t really an American problem; pro rata we in the UK have probably had as much of a problem. The difference is in the relationship that the average person in the UK has with guns; hand a gun to the average person in the UK and their overriding emotion will probably be fear (except young males maybe and, disturbingly, children). Americans, well many of them, seem to have a different relationship with guns; gun ownership makes them feel safe.

    I don’t know the full details but the shooter in the recent tragedy apparently lived alone with his, divorced, (teacher) mother. He was a ‘quiet, shy, smart, academic’ man but apparently he (they) felt safer, or at least comfortable, with a (semi-automatic?) point-223 rifle in their home? This was Connecticut, apparently not a state with high gun-ownership (or crime / gun crime)?

    [Edit: The weapons used in the shootings now appear to be two handguns.]

    The cultural change to remove the guns from America, and America’s psyche, is huge and probably not democratic because most Americans want their guns. Anyway, as has been said, it isn’t our decision to make.
    Last edited by Creaking Door; 15th December 2012 at 15:39.
    WA$.

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Posts
    2,935
    As in so many areas, one can push through legislation , and a proportion of people will protest, but abide by those new rules.

    However, the unstable and dangerous individuals who actually pose the threat, are not the sort of people who will obey the law anyway.

    If firearms were to be outlawed for the general public, what proportion would actually be handed in? 50% would be optomistic

    This ghastly phenomenon will stop when the authorities can identify and contain the angry, the marginalised, and psychotic elements in society, ie never.

    Until then, it is like the risk of being hit by lightning- you take your chances.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,083
    Quote Originally Posted by Propstrike View Post
    This ghastly phenomenon will stop when the authorities can identify and contain the angry, the marginalised, and psychotic elements in society, ie never.

    Until then, it is like the risk of being hit by lightning- you take your chances.
    Exactly. All a gun ban would accomplish would be to punish responsible gun owners. I do think that getting a firearms licence, no matter where you live, should be a difficult and thorough process though.

    It's not guns, but people that carry out these acts. If they can't get hold of a gun, they will find another way.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    South East Essex
    Posts
    2,719
    As far as the US is concerned, they will never give up their right to carry arms.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,801
    Quote Originally Posted by j_jza80 View Post
    It's not guns, but people that carry out these acts. If they can't get hold of a gun, they will find another way.
    But you must concede that a ‘nutter’ armed with a semi-automatic weapon and a plentiful supply of ammunition is, in all probability, going to kill more people that if he was armed with ‘the next best thing’. Look at the recent example from China.

    People are the problem, people with guns; you cannot ban people but you can ban guns.
    WA$.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Posts
    1,083
    The "next best thing" could easily be a home made explosive, which could potentially be worse than an automatic weapon if exploited to its potential.

    Most of these attacks seem to be carried out with semi auto handguns, I would suspect that the vast majority of automatic weapons in private hands are with responsible owners.

    Banning these weapons won't work in the US IMO. Their borders are too large to be policed effectively, and the world is full of ex Soviet automatic weapons that are available easily and cheaply. While the Police carry handguns, there will always be a demand for large numbers of black market weapons in the US, if the regular supply chains are restricted.

    As I said above, I'm all for tighter gun controls, but I believe a total ban would achieve nothing but make the movement of firearms untraceable and punish a huge number of responsible gun owners.

    Stepping up security in schools would be more effective, but what kind of message does that send to children?
    Last edited by Moggy C; 16th December 2012 at 11:53. Reason: Pointless quote removed

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Posts
    3,020
    Would it be possible to enforce Britsh type gun laws in the US. Is it possible that revised gun laws devised in Washington, could be imposed on the different states by central govt. Genuinely like to know. Thanks.
    "Behold! The Wings of Horus"

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Walsall
    Posts
    7,401
    It appears the guns were owned by and registered to the mother of Adam Lanza. It begs the question of why she felt the need to own two semi automatic pistols and an M4 carbine. The 'right' to own your own weapons is enshrined in US Law. It is a pity that the rights of the victims of those murdered with legally owned firearms are so easily overrode. The personal responsibility for these deaths lies with Adam Lanza but should there be a wider social or moral responsibility?

    President Obama has spoken of the need for 'meaningful action' but what form can that take? I suspect none, at least while there are people living in the US who espouse the slogan 'you can take my gun when you pry it from my cold dead fingers.'

    As for the Second Amendment it states “A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” Mrs. Lanza, a suburban housewife and mother, did not belong to any militia and her ownership of those weapons was neither necessary or contributory to the 'security of a free State.' Mrs. Lanza's ownership of those firearms achieved nothing more than the unnecessary deaths of herself, her son, six innocent adults and twenty primary school children.

    Twenty eight funerals to be held in the week before Christmas, the gun lobby has so much of which to be proud.

    Regards,

    kev35
    The Forums only '"blithering anorak" as endorsed by ZRX61

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,801
    Quote Originally Posted by j_jza80 View Post
    The "next best thing" could easily be a home made explosive...
    I agree that a total ban on guns in the US is impracticable, there are simply too many unregistered guns in circulation, but it may have prevented the recent tragedy.

    My contention is that these sort of killing-sprees are too ‘easy’ if there are legally-held semi-automatic weapons and plentiful ammunition on the premises. Yes, if somebody really is determined to carry-out such an attack and guns are not readily available they could make explosives or they could obtain illegal weapons but these things take time and pre-planning.

    My thinking is that the recent tragedy happened when the shooter lost his temper in an argument with his mother and because guns were easily accessible it turned into a shooting spree...

    ...had he had to manufacture his own explosives or acquire illegal weapons he’d have had time to calm down!

    Essentially, I think these people are cowards, they go heavily armed to target the defenceless; if they had to go into the underworld to acquire an illegal weapon I think they’d be too scared to do it.
    WA$.

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Walsall
    Posts
    7,401
    And the Second Amendment itself was written when America was a nascent State. Surely it can be argued now that the United States Army, the National Guard and the Federal, State and County Police Forces fulfill the role of “A well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State.....”

    Regards,

    kev35
    The Forums only '"blithering anorak" as endorsed by ZRX61

  15. #15
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,801
    Quote Originally Posted by kev35 View Post
    It begs the question of why she felt the need to own two semi automatic pistols and an M4 carbine.
    Exactly! Statistically, if you own a gun in the US, the person most likely to be shot with it is yourself or a member of your family.
    WA$.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Bomber Country. Lincolnshire
    Posts
    7,875
    Quote Originally Posted by kev35 View Post
    It appears the guns were owned by and registered to the mother of Adam Lanza. It begs the question of why she felt the need to own two semi automatic pistols and an M4 carbine.
    And this Kev, is exactly the point I was making, to allow an owner the minimum number of weapons they REALY need. I know you are well aware I was the Firearms Officer for South Holland whilst in Lincs Police. I had myself, as I used to go around schools, to demonstrate gun safety, several lethal weapons, these included an over and under 12 gauge, a side by side, same gauge, a Ruger Section 1 Firearm, and a WW2 303, all of which were in fine working order. They were kept in a very heavy steel cabinet, the door of which had 2 deadlocks fitted, the ammo was also in the cabinet, which had 3 more compartments inside, the doors of which also had deadlocks on them.
    The keys to the cabinet were all kept in a safe with a combination lock, the combination of which non of my family knew.Both gun safe and key safe were bolted into the concrete floor in a room of the house. Also, all windows and doors were alarmed, and night time P.I.Rs were fitted.All this, when I was a Police Officer.
    Do weapons in the USA have to be kept as I kept mine?.
    Yes, Gun ownership became nigh on impossible after Dunblane, and rightly so, also the rules that any applicant made when applying for a shotgun, or a Sect1 firearm, were really tightened up.
    If when I interviewed an applicant, and he didn't comply with his application 100% it was refused, reasons like wanting a Sect 1 firearm, however, not having sufficient land to discharge the caliber he was applying for safely.
    I could give many more reasons, for revocations also, however suffice it to say, yes it did help get weapons under some control, but as has been said on here, if someone wants to obtain a weapon illegally, then they will.
    When the renewal of weapons was due, in those days, 3 years, it was surprising just how many gun owners had not used their weapon, this was because you could check the amount of ammo they had applied for, and you would then check how much the owner had used in those 3 yrs, and in many cases, it proved one thing, that many didn't even NEED to have a gun in the first place, so why apply for one?.

    Jim.
    Lincoln .7
    Last edited by Moggy C; 16th December 2012 at 11:54.
    There is no such thing as a problem, just a solution!!

  17. #17
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Tonbridge, Kent, UK/Formerly Auckland, NZ
    Posts
    1,044
    Quote Originally Posted by ~Alan~ View Post
    As far as the US is concerned, they will never give up their right to carry arms.
    I'm afraid this is correct.

    In a way that we Brits might find difficult to understand, the right to bear arms is tied up in the USA's pioneering history.

    I'm not saying it's right, necessarily, but few politicians will touch gun-control issues.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    South Gloucestershire
    Posts
    2,338
    People with guns,I am not even going to get into that I think the forum know my view.American must decide by taking a good hard look at themselves and their own society.

    The thing I would like to express is my absolute horror at what has happened and my feelings of sadness for those who have lost loved ones. I would also extend that to the young children who will be probably be scarred for life in witnessing this absolutely evil act!
    I have kleptomania,But when it gets bad
    I take something for it.

  19. #19
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Devon, UK
    Posts
    280
    As has been said, any gun law will only infringe on the law abiding citizen.
    After Dunblane, the most law abiding folk, my brother included, lost £1000’s+ as their legally held weapons were taken from them. My brother was an award winning marksman for the military. All this was taken from him without recompense.

    Unfortunately, weapons are still available on the black market throughout the world and still kill more people annually than any horrific massacres reported on the media.

    You will never stop the bloodshed until there is nothing left in this world that can be used as an implement of death. ‘ Guns, knives, cars, sledge hammers, axes, machetes, bottles etc etc.

    Gun laws in the UK robbed my brother of a sport and a magical weapon. It did not stop any idiot from obtaining a weapon and creating havoc.

    My thoughts are that any knee jerk reaction will only serve the politics of this world not the man in the street.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Jan 2000
    Location
    Black Six
    Posts
    17,625
    Quote Originally Posted by Wokka Bob View Post
    After Dunblane, the most law abiding folk, my brother included, lost £1000’s+ as their legally held weapons were taken from them. My brother was an award winning marksman for the military. All this was taken from him without recompense.
    I do not believe that was the case.

    Certainly the armaments company for which I worked cleared out the entire European inventory of hard-to-sell, or defective hand guns and were dutifully recompensed for every one.

    Moggy
    "What you must remember" Flip said "is that nine-tenths of Cattermole's charm lies beneath the surface." Many agreed.

  21. #21
    Join Date
    May 2005
    Location
    Aerospace Valley
    Posts
    3,981
    Whenever something like this happens the Govt take actions against the people who didn't do it. That's like passing laws to restrict sober people from driving to lessen the amount of drunk driving....

    & the worse school attack wasn't gunfire...
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster
    Last edited by ZRX61; 16th December 2012 at 23:03.
    If anybody ever tells you anything about an aeroplane which is so bloody complicated you can't understand it, take it from me: It's all balls. RJM.

  22. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,801
    But if you banned alcohol would drink-driving deaths go up or down?

    Interesting link to the Bath School Disaster; I’ve never heard of that incident before.
    WA$.

  23. #23
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,801
    Quote Originally Posted by Wokka Bob View Post
    It did not stop any idiot from obtaining a weapon and creating havoc...
    Except you cannot possibly say that can you; the three deadliest shooting-sprees in the UK were carried-out with legally-held weapons but you cannot say that banning semi-automatic weapons, pump-action shotguns and all handguns, plus a general tightening of firearms licences, hasn’t prevented similar incidences since then.

    And if restricting access to firearms doesn’t make the world a safer place why have any restrictions at all? Would you be happy if there was an AK-47 shooting club in Finsbury Park for example?

    And what about explosives? There have been bomb attacks in the UK for decades so does that mean that restricting access to explosives isn’t achieving anything? Should we be able to buy dynamite or plastic-explosives in B&Q?

    You are absolutely right when you say that firearms restrictions are a political issue but if we’re going to have a meaningful discussion about restricting access to firearms I don’t think we can approach it from a ‘more guns do not mean more deaths’ angle because it clearly isn’t true.
    Last edited by Creaking Door; 22nd December 2012 at 16:36.
    WA$.

  24. #24
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Location
    Wiltshire, England
    Posts
    390
    The NRA used this awful event by saying it proved there was a need for LESS regulation. I guess they are reasoning...

    If everyone had a gun then this sort of thing would not happen. The crazy guy (always seems to be a guy) starts shooting little kids and an adult comes along and blows his head off. Therefore no unstoppable massacre.

    Makes emminent sense to me in a society where the two most addictive drugs (nicotine and alcohol) are legal and hallucinogenic drugs (which are totally non-addictive and have no physically harmful effects) are so illegal you get five years for picking a specific mushroom.

  25. #25
    Join Date
    Sep 2010
    Location
    virginia beach,VA.
    Posts
    770
    If they would simply make it illegal to murder someone this would not have happened........oh, sorry........it has been against the law to murder someone for a long time. And the penalties are pretty stiff. I wonder why it still happens then, even in the UK?

  26. #26
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,801
    Ah, so you’re saying if murder was legal there wouldn’t be an increase in the murder rate?
    WA$.

  27. #27
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    East Kent
    Posts
    8,401
    An interesting but inevitable thread, I suppose. And every time an incident like this occurs the same arguments are peddled. I am not sure how relevant the arguments from a British perspective are. Our two cultures are different so the contributions from our members across the pond are instructive.

    One thing is for sure, though and is equally applicable anywhere - argument and debate hot in the wake of a tragedy will never produce a rational solution. If the US is to debate its gun law it should not be now.
    Charlie

    Keep smiling - it's never as bad as you think!!

  28. #28
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    6,801
    You’re right, the debate should take place on an ‘average’ day...

    ...when only about eighty-five people in the US will be killed by guns.
    WA$.

  29. #29
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    High Wycombe, U.K.
    Posts
    835
    It's somewhat ironic that you can be sure that the vast majority of these people, who are busy telling the U.S. what they should do, will be up in arms when the E.U.'s legal arm tries to tell the U.K. how to behave.
    One of the saddest items, to come out of this is that one of the victims was the son of an English father and American mother, who, only a few days ago, decided to make their home in a "safe" American town, and sold the house which they'd been hanging on to, just in case they changed their minds about the move.
    Give a bit more consideration to the central, suffering, characters, in this, and a bit less to telling another country how to behave; it is, after all, none of our business, and our "ruling classes" are no shining example to hold up for inspection.

  30. #30
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Bomber Country. Lincolnshire
    Posts
    7,875
    C.D.

    Warren, I agree.
    I would like to hear from a Forum member from the U.S.A. to explain just what obtaining any lethal weapons involves.
    I am aware that Many States there, have there own laws regarding this, but still have to conform to certain parameters.
    Is there a limit for example as to just how many weapons one person can own?.

    Jim.
    Lincoln .7
    There is no such thing as a problem, just a solution!!

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 2 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 2 guests)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

- Part of the    Network -

KEY AERO AVIATION NEWS

MAGAZINES

AVIATION FORUM

SHOP

 

WEBSITES