August 12, 2020, 04:37:44 am

New
Site design:

A lot of new content added.

Check the home page.


New!
Thanatopsis "Requiem" Available now.


Studio Videos

Live in studio performances

someone pinch me - i agree with the NRA!

Started by gkg, May 18, 2006, 10:04:39 pm

Previous topic - Next topic

gkg

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060518/ap_on_re_us/nra_campaign

shock and dismay - i agree with the NRA!

it seriously bothered me at the time and am bothered by it still.  while i think the NRA can take a flying leap on issue of automatic weapons, the constitution most clearly gives us the right to arm and protect ourselves.

guns are a complex issue and i\'m not really inviting debate on the whole subject, but rather on the matter of the people caught in Katrina being forcibly disarmed.  it may have curbed crime, that can\'t be proven or disproven, but it has \'blown a hole in the Constitution\' as the NRA states.
Peace.

image = <i>"Blue Velvet"</i> (front of 2-sided piece) (c) georgia k griffin - all rights reserved

oldfolkie

I\'ve resisted replying, but since I\'m a well-known sufferer from foot-in-mouth disease...

The "right to bear arms" thing is something I will never understand. I guess you have to be USAmerican to get it. Especially handguns. I see no reason for anyone to carry a handgun, ever.

Like you, I\'m not interested in debate. I\'m just expressing my fundamental non-comprehension. Must just be the Canadian in me.  ::)
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity. ~  R.A. Heinlein

gkg

May 23, 2006, 04:15:19 pm #2 Last Edit: May 23, 2006, 04:17:13 pm by gkg
hmmm... i wouldn\'t say i\'m not interested in debate, i just don\'t want to start a huge debate on the whole issue, and i\'m really not a fan of handguns or the notion that every person should be armed.  however, there is a sense that a society that may not bear arms is held captive by those empowered to carry them - thus supporting a military state.  that\'s one part of what i have a problem with.

let me put this another way - if you\'ve ever lived in the middle of nowhere and not had a way to defend yourself from either a large rabid or injured animal, or from a human gone bad - i can tell you it\'s a sinking feeling of helplessness.

i do not think we all need to carry handguns, in fact i\'m generally anti handgun (although i used to be a damn good shot with a 38) - i\'m really saying that we have a right to keep about things like hunting rifles (no, we don\'t need semi-automatic rifles to shoot deer with either, so that\'s not what i\'m talking about either).  something that we can be used to put food on the table and get off that shot to save our child from an injured/starving mountain lion or drug crazed rapist/murderer.

i used to live with handguns  for a reason.  we had carry permits due to the money and alcohol on the premises (we owned and lived in a package store off a major highway out in the middle of nowhere).  there are sometimes reasons for such things - but as a general rule, i\'m with you - "guns don\'t kill people, people do, people with guns".
Peace.

image = <i>"Blue Velvet"</i> (front of 2-sided piece) (c) georgia k griffin - all rights reserved

oldfolkie

I see I need to clarify, I meant "not get into a big debate about it" too. I\'m going to pass the buck to yesterday being a holiday Monday  ::)

I can\'t really argue with your position gkg. I just don\'t see it like you do, is all.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity. ~  R.A. Heinlein

gkg

LOL!!  no reason you should.   ::)

the short of it is i want more gun control, i want all assault weapons off the streets, and yet i am fearful of a government that disarms its people.
Peace.

image = <i>"Blue Velvet"</i> (front of 2-sided piece) (c) georgia k griffin - all rights reserved

oldfolkie

Hmm. :-/  Sounds kind of like the problem originated with arming the people in the first place. But it\'s always hard to take away something so entrenched. Perhaps if people bore in mind that there are quite a few other civilized countries out there (including us *waves*) who seem to get along just fine without constitutional weaponry. And haven\'t become military dictatorships...yet. Just a thought.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity. ~  R.A. Heinlein

gkg

they were never \'officially armed\' - but i think we\'re just going to have to sit on the fence and wave at each other on this one... Canada started the same way we did, with people having arms for hunting and self-defense... but they gained independence very differently so perceptions might differ; remember thought that your Bill of Rights guarantees Canadians a right to bear arms, as do Australia\'s & England\'s Bill of Rights.

anyway - i have much respect for you and your view, and i\'m closer to your view than you may realize, it\'s just that one final hurdle i can\'t cross.
Peace.

image = <i>"Blue Velvet"</i> (front of 2-sided piece) (c) georgia k griffin - all rights reserved

oldfolkie

May 26, 2006, 01:46:17 am #7 Last Edit: May 26, 2006, 01:48:20 am by oldfolkie
gkg, you\'re absolutely right that we all started out from a basis in Common Law which (although not codified) included a right to keep and bear arms tradition. It\'s the "not codified" bit that led to divergence from the original tradition in places outside the USA. As I  understand it your Constitution & Second Amendment do in fact entrench this tradition as a right. But I\'m not entirely up on the details so I could be mistaken in my interpretation.

If you check, you\'ll find that in all Common Law countries except the United States, Parliamentary supremacy has permitted statutory law to be developed that extinguishes the historical common law right to keep and bear arms. Instead, the UK, Canada, Australia, New Zealand all developed from that tradition towards a presumption that every person has the right to liberty and security of person.

I know it\'s picky, and I also know that we\'re pretty close in thinking on the subject (not that we would think less of each other if we weren\'t, we can agree to differ!), I just wanted to clarify in case you weren\'t aware of the changes in other Common Law countries. (I cribbed massively from Wikipedia, but it gives the gist.)

Anyway, it\'s an interesting subject. I\'m actually glad you brought it up because it made me refresh my knowledge of our laws. We\'ve got our own little fiasco over gun controls going on at the moment (a much needed and widely supported but fiscally bungled long gun registry) so it\'s timely up here too.
Never underestimate the power of human stupidity. ~  R.A. Heinlein

gkg

thanks oldfolkie, i did know that over the last century most others who had started with the same English Common Law basis had moved away from much of it, including the right to bear arms - it was written into our constitution over 200 years ago when much of our country was wild and unsettled by white faces... and there have been factions trying to get that part recognized as not being intended to literally cover ALL forms of arms.

it is an interesting subject and i suppose partly my childhood of people needing to protect themselves from both guerilla fighters and the government (depending what side of the issues you were on) is a large part of why i am uneasy when our government disarms people by force.

yeah, your registry is almost as bogged down as ours is full of holes.   ;)

nice \'discussing\' with you, my northern neighbor!   :-*
Peace.

image = <i>"Blue Velvet"</i> (front of 2-sided piece) (c) georgia k griffin - all rights reserved