Arm the teachers!

My question is and always has been, why the f*** does any civilian WANT to own an assault rifle (or other automatic weapon) in the first place?

steve

In the case of Americans, the legitimate reason (legitimate according to the 2nd Amendment at least) is to defend the country.  Therefore all military weapons are appropriate for all citizens.

The 2nd Amendment reads: "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."

The term ‘well regulated’ perhaps being the key term... I believe the Swiss have something similar... I don’t hear of regular public shoot out atrocities from  there... although apparently suicide from firearms is relatively high...

Yes, the gun lobby very much concentrate on the "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" part ignoring the "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State," part; arguing that the first clause is a statement in it's own right, rather than a limiting precondition applicable to the words that follow.

From a position of a strict literal interpretation of English, the text is in fact ambiguous, even though to everyone else the intent is obvious.

Ben Shapiro a conservative commentator in the USA says the main justification for owning military style assault rifles is protection against tyranny. He says governments can, and do, historically turn upon their own people, hence the need for AR 15s  by civilians to mount a militia against these tyrants.

Another point he makes is that in the vast majority of gun homicides the weapon used is a handgun. I think he said there about 6000 handgun homicides per annum vs about 300 with assault rifles.

He was an advocate of better mental health care, better background checks and the safe storage of guns in gun safes. However there should be no repeal of the second amendment .

He seemed to imply a “how sad, too bad, never mind”  attitude re school shootings.

I think the NRA should be less obstructionist re the above safety measures. Most owners of assault rifles I am sure are responsible people, and they and the NRA should back any government initiatives to make assault rifle ownership safer. Sadly I do not think the NRA will play ball here.

The genie is out of the bottle, there are 10 million assault rifles in private hands, and there will always be a tiny percentage of owners who will perform these atrocities.

The George W Bush regime had no difficulty passing intrusive surveillance measures against the population in the wake of 9/11. There was no public discussion about its implementatation. However it would be impossible to implement a repeal of the 2nd amendment because even though domestic gun murders are an order of magnitude higher than domestic terrorist attacks, gun ownership is ingrained in the American psyche. Gun murders are the unfortunate price of freedom, as far as many gun owners are concerned.

Rather than arming the teachers, I think the most pragmatic idea is to have airport type security at all schools, as well as more armed guards. Teachers should not have to be encumbered with the responsibility of gun training and the awesome imperative of fighting off a suicidal , heavily armed, armour clad kook  with a pistol.

Kiwi cat posted:

Ben Shapiro a conservative commentator in the USA says the main justification for owning military style assault rifles is protection against tyranny. He says governments can, and do, historically turn upon their own people, hence the need for AR 15s  by civilians to mount a militia against these tyrants.

Another point he makes is that in the vast majority of gun homicides the weapon used is a handgun. I think he said there about 6000 handgun homicides per annum vs about 300 with assault rifles.

He was an advocate of better mental health care, better background checks and the safe storage of guns in gun safes. However there should be no repeal of the second amendment .

He seemed to imply a “how sad, too bad, never mind”  attitude re school shootings.

I think the NRA should be less obstructionist re the above safety measures. Most owners of assault rifles I am sure are responsible people, and they and the NRA should back any government initiatives to make assault rifle ownership safer. Sadly I do not think the NRA will play ball here.

The genie is out of the bottle, there are 10 million assault rifles in private hands, and there will always be a tiny percentage of owners who will perform these atrocities.

The George W Bush regime had no difficulty passing intrusive surveillance measures against the population in the wake of 9/11. There was no public discussion about its implementatation. However it would be impossible to implement a repeal of the 2nd amendment because even though domestic gun murders are an order of magnitude higher than domestic terrorist attacks, gun ownership is ingrained in the American psyche. Gun murders are the unfortunate price of freedom, as far as many gun owners are concerned.

Rather than arming the teachers, I think the most pragmatic idea is to have airport type security at all schools, as well as more armed guards. Teachers should not have to be encumbered with the responsibility of gun training and the awesome imperative of fighting off a suicidal , heavily armed, armour clad kook  with a pistol.

The only thing the Republicans are good at is offering their prayers for the victims of mass shootings. Otherwise, anything else is viewed as an infringement on their sacred Second Amendment which allows them to bear military grade assault rifles to be used when a tyrant government armed with bombers and tanks will turn on it own people. Good luck with the AR-15s.

Good points. Either -

Civilians should be allowed access to all weapons to fight against tyrannical govts. Including nukes.

Or -

Repeal the second amendment

Or at least get it interpreted - specially around the well regulated militia part. In the case of the USA, the military is all  volunteer - so that is the well regulated militia right there. No need to allow access to any weapons to civiliansThey can join the militia if they want to.

Hunting can be carried out with bows and arrows.

No other country is as paranoid about being governed, and feels it needs to arm its citizens. So what's the US's problem?

steve

Paper Plane posted:

No other country is as paranoid about being governed, and feels it needs to arm its citizens. So what's the US's problem?

Perhaps selective quoting / misrepresenting but...

“[Xi Jinping’s] now president for life. President for life. And he’s great.  And look, he was able to do that. I think it’s great. Maybe we’ll give that a shot some day,”

Eloise posted:

Paper Plane posted:

No other country is as paranoid about being governed, and feels it needs to arm its citizens. So what's the US's problem?

Perhaps selective quoting / misrepresenting but...

“[Xi Jinping’s] now president for life. President for life. And he’s great.  And look, he was able to do that. I think it’s great. Maybe we’ll give that a shot some day,”

I have no problem with someone being president for life, provided that they're still not allowed to serve more than 10 years in office!

Paper Plane posted:

No other country is as paranoid about being governed, and feels it needs to arm its citizens. So what's the US's problem?

Reading this thread... those almost exact same words popped into my head as well. Why do seemingly many have so mistrust of their authorities do they feel the need to possibly bear arms against them...

Over hear in Blighty (excluding NI which has its own considerations) we tend to have a healthy scepticism of authority... and a head of state outside of the political system... and yes we have marches, the occasional riot every few years, civil disobedience etc , but these are all I suggest part the democratic and society regulation processes... perhaps as a nation of ‘tribes’ we are ultimately more generally integrated and at ease with our selves rather than being possibly a nation of individuals.. and therefore the need to possibly bear arms against our state and neighbours  (for most) just doesn’t factor in.

Paper Plane posted:

No other country is as paranoid about being governed, and feels it needs to arm its citizens. So what's the US's problem?

steve

Its president?

or more specifically, fear of the power that individual can wield?

I was musing about guns & gun related deaths & does gun ownership have an affect on gun related death. Using www info I looked at two countries I know a fair bit about & that have a reputation for problems with guns; plus I've incl UK as a benchmark:

USA (the country at the base of this thread). I worked for a US/International company for many years & have travelled to USA at least 4 times a year during that period including some long term stays. Buying & owning a gun in USA is as we have all seen on the news is quite easy.

South Africa, I travelled there for work very frequently, more so than to USA. I've also spent a lot - & I mean a lot - of time on private business & leisure. Ownership of a firearm is conditional on numbers of factors, purpose of need, background checking, premises where kept & licensing of the weapon itself. That said the bad guys all seem to have them & they are invariably outside the law & licensing.

United States has 10.5 firearm-related deaths per 100,000 population per year & has 101.05 guns per 100 population (yes that is 101.05 guns per 100 people)        South Africa is 8.3 deaths per 100,000 ppa & 12.7 guns per 100 population.      UK has 0.23 deaths per 100,000 ppa & 2.8 guns per 100 (I can only imagine the majority of these are shotguns (sport))

So it seems USA's 101 guns per 100 population each cause 0.104 firearm related deaths per 100,000 population & that this is a lot less than the 12.7 guns per 100 in South Africa that account for 0.653 deaths.    UK as a bench mark & that measure is 0.082 deaths.

So does gun ownership have an affect on gun related deaths. Based on these numbers NO.  Does regulation/legislation have an effect: In SA the answer is no, whereas in UK yes. What's my point, nothing other than you might be interested, its just another imponderable in the what to do puzzle. But I see one of the main problems in USA is an obsession with school shootings, virtually unknown elsewhere & that has to be psychopathic & not solely criminal.