Assault Weapons Ban

[OULobo]

BTW: LE mags= Law Enforcement magazines=Capable of holding more than 10 rounds.

Just to add to this, LE mags actually have a stamp on them that says, "For law enforcement use only." They are high cap mags that were illegal for civs to have. There were pre-ban high cap mags that were legal to own and buy. They have to have been made prior to the AWB goinging into effect. Basically it is "grandfathering" in the old mags. There were reletivly few of these available and the price was hellish.

 

[Gaidheal]

Basically it is "grandfathering" in the old mags. There were reletivly few of these available and the price was hellish.

I'll bet it was. I also will bet that there was a quiet market in... *ahem* 'aging' post-ban high capacity magazines.

John

P.S. Yeah.. I am still up.. still reading about the 'Deep Magic' that is x86 machine code and assembler. In case people did not know, I am a programmer.

 

[Gaidheal]

Well, I think this one has wound down to a natural and amicable end..

.. by way of tieing up loose ends:

I read the links and they were informative if only by way of providing an alternative opinion. It has to be said though, that even if 60% of US gun killings were actually suicides, it'd still have a much higher rate of firearm caused killings than almost every nation, per capita.

The figures for reference, as I recall, break down into:

UK ~50

Germany ~70

France ~130

USA ~11,000

These are 'rough and ready' but in the right ball-park area with the figure for the USA being AT LEAST what I have stated. Obviously this is annual deaths, not monthly or something. 60% of 11k still leaves 4,400 killings. If we assume the other figures have NO suicides counted in that still puts the USA way 'ahead' in this regard. What this means is a whole other debate, but that it is true is indisputable. Moore's conclusions about what it means and why it is there can be challenged but it is hard to argue there is no problem at all.

John

 

[Bushigokoro9]

I guess I'll join in on the always-friendly never heated debate.

Amendment II

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.


I still do not understand all the confusion??????? It is a matter of principle.

"The right of the people"

I do not read where it states the right of PARTICULAR people or it is the priviledge of government-approved people.

"to keep and bear arms"

Again I do not read where it states the right to keep and bear CERTAIN arms or APPROVED arms.

When the Bill of Rights were drafted the technology of arms that the civilians (colonies) had where not less effective than that of the government, British Crown or his majesty's armed services or however you would like to call it.

The Bill of Rights is to protect individuals from the Government. The Bill of Rights is a safeguard created to protect individuals from the crimes that were experienced in Europe under various governments. There is a very logical order to the Bill of Rights. There is a reason why particular rights are classified first, second etc…

The last point "shall not be infringed"

I do not know how anyone could read this any other way. If so I would love to have it explained to me.

Now, the more freedom a society has the greater potential of crime and / violence a society COULD have. This is also going into other areas of study that I will not go into at this time.

Best Regards,
Bushigokoro

 

[Tgace]

Also add in accidental discharge deaths and LEGAL use of force. Of course a nation with a high per-capita gun ownership is going to have a higher use, legally, illegally, suicide, accidents etc. The same can probably be said of car accidents.

 

[Gaidheal]

Heh! Even if it is legal, that is still very high. That is the point... and per capita ownership isn't higher than a lot of nations with much lower figures. Cars is another area where a similar problem shows up - more people killed as a result of drink driving, every year in the 90s, than were killed in the entire Vietnam War, for example. I am not saying "America's crap!" though obviously in some regards it is, but rather saying "Be realistic and honest about what issues there are". For those who can't read well - any nation is "crap" in some regard, not least my own (Scotland).

John