Topic: Firearms Policy (Read 303 times)

But home invasions are illegal.. The government already stopped them..

-

^^^ No restrictions on private property, except if they are a direct threat, or if they are used to harm a man/woman or their property... 4th and 9th Amendments. And no restrictions on traveling with your private property... 1st Amendment.

Owning a gun is not the real problem in the post, owning is also possible in whole lot of countries in the world. It is the policies that binds it. Access to firearms in the US is so much easier than the rest of the world, that even a young teens can own one. Maybe culture is a factor for the difference in the law, but it is not an excuse to make guns available in freaking supermarkets.

Also, it is not about taking away the "GUNS" literally, it is about the restrictions and rules regarding owning a gun specifically

I agree with you the gun laws depend on a culture. If a culture came from a long line of hunters or soldiers, then guns are very important for the people of that country.  It would be hard to imagine taking the guns of the people away if they fought for their privilege to own them in the first place. I think that it is possible to limit the sell of guns for the future, but taking away guns (some of which might be antiques with a lot of value) seems nearly impossible in todays world. The only way would be for the government to pay a big premium for every gun taking away.

It all comes down to culture obviously. Because culture is what drives the mindset of people in a specific community or country along with long time existing traditions. These two are the main things that shape the children along with the environment that influences the children. But even so, good or bad governance made possible by great or awful leaders are also vital ingredients to what a country currently is and how people in a specific country acts towards laws, families, fellow countrymen and foreigners.

Buying a gun is easy though either in a legal or illegal way as long as you have money. And in US you will be denied for FFL if you misconduct gun and use it for unnecessary purposes, or atleast as per the laws.

Don't get so patriotic that you stop officers on the street just to tell them that.

"I'm not carrtying this wasp spray for self-defense, officer. I'm just really concerned. Concerned about wasps!

It’s not so simple as just ordering them online in the US..

We use all the bullets/ammo we want and don’t report buying them or using them in any manner..

It even more simple, you can simply order the guns in online and it will arrive at your doorstep, no need to visit the shops anymore.

But , even if you have a gun in a legal way means you can't simply shoot anyone without valid reasons, its for your self defence but you need to report the usage of bullets in case if you used it or else the license will be cancelled.

Wasp spray can take down a grown man and if your country has a ban on pepper spray/tasers you can use that for self defense.

The only problem comes about when people don't know how to take their elected officials to court, or at least recall them out of office. With a little legal manipulation, anybody can get this before a jury.

Remember:
1. The 4th Amendment allows you to have private property.
2. The 1st Amendment allows you to travel with it ^.
3. The 9th Amendment allows you to have any rights you want.
4. The 2nd Amendment allows you to take down Government with guns.


The end of gun rights: Democrats criminalize private gun sales by passing controversial bill

Yes, that’s why we are not afraid of guns..

If they didn’t have guns they would probably make more bombs.. Bombs are scarier..

If someone chooses guns to “kill innocent people”, then be glad they chose guns because it could easily be much worse..

They could easily have chosen bombs or poisons/poison gasses that could be far more devastating, and probably cheaper than buying guns anyway..

Oh yes BTW.. It is also legal in the USA to obtain and possess all/any of the required information/instructions on how to make bombs and poison gasses..
1st amendment baby!

It is also completely legal in the USA to make your own guns from scratch and never tell a soul about them.. Completely legal..
It’s also legal to 3D print guns, and legal to have and give/receive 3D printing code of guns.. (1st amendment)

(Not legal to make most bombs/poisons though, but the information to is completely legal as are most of the needed components)


And your worried about guns? LOL no..


Crazy people are going to be crazy..
It’s just lucky that most homicidal crazy people are also not very smart, or their damages would be much worse, and they’d also probably get away with it..

We haven’t seen a decently or orchestrated attack since like 9/11..
Even that Nashville bombing and Boston bombing were.. Not very successful..
The Oakland a city bombing was quite destructive.. The last one I can think of in the USA that was worth worrying about other than 9/11..


A few people get killed here and there in the USA, but look what happens in the Middle East with markets getting blown to smithereens all the time..


Yeah.. The only reason people here would be worried about guns is fear propaganda..

But the point is, it is "ILLEGAL". Yes you can acquire such weapon but in illegal way. Unlike in the latter where you can even purchase a gun in a supermarket? really though.


? where's the context behind those 500,000 getting shot if the guns are banned/ or shall we say a better weapon policy is implemented.
Because you are saying something on a baseless conclusion, and countries all over the world have already proven that having a strict weapon policy doesn't lead to such things as "500,000" getting shotted.


That is the very reason, why people in your country is very comfortable holding and shooting the guns without any kind of fear. That is the very reason why your states has different incidents of mass shootings and such. Because they are too used to guns that it is like a normal thing to fire them anywhere, anytime


LoL, who says that people in other countries can't have guns? lmao

We can have guns to use for sports and not for killing innocent lives though

Everyone else is just jealous they can’t have guns..
“If I can’t have it, you shouldn’t either”


Crime rate?
Firearms adding to crime rates can be BTFO by statistics no problem, but even IF guns increased crime or deaths in any way..

Gun rights are worth more than 100,000 lives a year..
Even if 100,000 people died a year because “Goons R bad” then I’d still rather have the guns..
We have spent way more lives protecting our freedoms than that, and will do it again..

You worried about 50 people getting shot?
Try taking the guns and watch 500,000 people get shot..
Is it worth a war to you?

Pro tip.. Don’t be a ghetto gangster or other such criminal and your chances of ever getting shot are astronomically slim..


Most of us have been shooting guns longer and from a younger age then driving cars..
We teach our kids from a very early age to shoot with BB guns and such, and have them shooting high powered rifles and shotguns when their like 10..

AR-15?
LOW powered rifle and extremely easy for young people to shoot.. Soft gun..
They are so low powered that they are considered too small to even shoot deer with..

Try shooting something like a 300 Win mag bolt gun (deer gun).. See what kind of damage something like THAT can do, and then get back to me about how scary you think a tiny .223”/5.57mm is..

Full metal jacket rounds?
Designed NOT to kill, LOL.. Seriously.. Look it up..
The rounds we hunt animals with, the ones actually designed to kill, are against the Geneva convention to use in war..
Did you know?

“Military rounds” - much much more likely to survive than hunting rounds..

If you want to compare even a relatively “not scary” 30-30 hunting round to a AR-15 “military round”.. The 30-30 does probably on the order of 10X more damage easily..

You’d probably survive getting shot in the gut with an AR-15, just makes a little hole.. (that’s the point, in military combat it’s better to keep them busy trying to save people)
A “hunting gun” with hunting ammunition? You’d have a hole in your back you could stick your fist in.. Ya ain’t gonna live..

Those countries are old fashioned and never wants their people to take control over anything but surely it is possible to buy a pistol or auto guns in the black market for cheaper price and they can even use it too, so all they need is money to get the power.

In the foundational documents of the USA...

The 4th Amendment says people can have their private property. It doesn't suggest any limits on what their private property might be. Guns are private property.

The 1st Amendment has been court adjudicated to include the right to travel. And this travel is allowed across the States. And it includes traveling with private property... guns included.

The 2nd Amendment essentially says guns almost point blank. Do you know what the main reason for 2nd Amendment guns is? To put down rebellion by the Federal Government, and maybe the State governments, as well.

The 9th Amendment says that any rights that are not listed to be ours through the wording of the Constitution, are ours for the asserting and taking.

The USA is a nation adhering to the ownership and use, when appropriate, of guns and other arms.

Given the current trade war situation between china and the united states over firearms control there are arguments for chinese technology companies to separate business from china or move out of china. In this case, Singapore can be their ideal place due to the improved financial and legal system the western countries are able to rely on singapore there are offices of many western organizations including the united states. So chinese companies are now heading to singapore he noted that the controversy surrounding gun rights was completely unfounded the second amendment to the us constitution guarantees the right of citizens to bear arms.

China is a different story, they will throw people in jail for whatever reason they feel like so obviously firearms are out of the question. China wouldn't want their citizens to be armed of course, that'd give them too much leverage. So gun control is easy.

India has some firearms, they're just illegal. In India, you can just bribe your way past any law because the police are so corrupt. I can't imagine their enforcement of firearms being strict.

This is besides the point, back on the US -- The US has something like 300 million guns out there floating around. You can't just confiscate all of them, it doesn't work like that. You'll end up having criminals retain their guns while law abiding citizens give up theirs.

^^^

Yes, singapore is ineed a small country, but the point of this post is about the firearms policy existing in USA.

India is a lot larger than USA, also China is larger than USA, but both of this countries has strict implementation of their firearms policy.

Going back to singapore, because they are small, they have strong firearms policy. TRUE, but if we will see it and make their country larger, they will still have firearms control similar to china or india, but maybe the banning of self defense weapon like pepper spray will be legalized.

Singapore is very little country in terms of land so its literally possible to keep all the spots under surveillance by the police itself so it is crime free and if you were in Singapore you can know the actual ground reality, literally you can see the police everywhere and also it is one of the country which is having strict punishment for crimes so people don't dare to do any crimes.

Singapore is just a small country and they can discipline their people in an easy way. that's why there's no need for them to legalize guns since the crime rate is not high. comparing it to the USA is not right because in the US you will meet different kinds of people there with different environment depends on what state you are residing but with that lots of places, you will also meet some different gangs and crimes which will leave the country no choice but to legalized the use of firearms for protection but at the same time, they're being abused by the same gangs that ruled the streets.

"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."

1. The right to own a gun is not protected so you can defend yourself against a militia. It is protected because a well regulated militia, which is necessary for the security of the free state, can not exist without it.

2. Please indicate which part of the Second Amendment excludes automatic or semi-automatic firearms.

3. Do you suspect the Founding Fathers were familiar with the concept of technological innovation, and might have assumed firearm technology would advance?

4. Please indicate which part of the Second Amendment limits Americans to owning single-shot handguns, and where a rigorous vetting process is mandated.

Part of the heritage to have mass shooting every now and then, making schools not even safe.

And yeah, typical you, a person who clings so much to old era's that can't accept logical changes that is beneficial and advantageous.

Well, that shows that you didn't read the Amendments. None of the Amendments have any design to limit the people. They all have design to limit the government.

as far as the UK goes, much of what is said directly in the 9th Amendment of the US Constitution, is applied in all kinds of other ways in the latest revision of the Magna Carta, which the UK is still under.

but when you READ THE AMEMDMENTS.. you actually start to see certain words
like regulated
like the lack of 'semi-auto'
like the lack of' fully auto'
like the lack of 'for use of leisure and sport'
like the lack of 'for use without reason'
it clearly says its about the use of defence.

so wake up to what the amendments really mean for the limited utility of 'arms'
and stop dreaming of what you think it should mean about their utility

oh and it never says anything about the right to bear loaded guns. no mention about allowed to have bullets.
so yea buy a gun to stick above your fire place. but dont ever think that it says your allowed to have a fully auto rifle draped over your shoulder as you enter a crowded public place

The USA is different. Firearm freedom is written right into the Amendments: the 1st, the 2nd, the 4th, and the 9th... if not others. Firearm freedom is built right into the foundational laws of the nation. It's part of the heritage of the people of the USA.

Ohh I forgot to put the link for their law, but here it is https://www.loc.gov/law/help/firearms-control/singapore.php, I'll edit my original post too and put the link there

Anyway, I don't think that houses will be searched for this kinds of weapon as there are still other laws in motion. Carrying these pepper sprays and such in public places is what is illegal. But illegal doesn't mean that they have to search every individual in the city for this.

Really? That's crazy, how is owning a pepper spray illegal. I can understand that banning firearms is good for the country and will reduce the crime rate. But controlling firearms in a city country like Singapore than a massive country like USA. Even if you would ban guns completely overnight, how could you enforce such a law? There is no way you could go to every person and check their house.

I'm not American, so can only comment from the perspective of an uninformed outsider...

I would imagine that the history of the nation plays a huge part in US attitudes to guns. We can go back to the War of Independence, when a bunch of colonists had to raise militias to defend themselves against an organised army - if ordinary civilians couldn't own guns, then the modern US would not exist. And then we can go through to the era of Manifest Destiny, and the taming of a continent... living on the frontier and expanding into wilderness makes guns a necessity, both for protection and hunting food.

We could ask whether gun ownership is appropriate in modern civilised metropolises, but that is a different question. The present is always built upon the past, and can never be understood without context.

Personally, I favour the right to bear arms and am very much opposed to gun control.  The first and most important reason why people have the right to bear arms is to overthrow a tyrannical government. Then it is important for self defense as well, and defense of others.  Mexico has extremely strict gun laws and yet gun violence there is extreme.  So it is a little facile to say ban guns and you solve all the gun violence, and anyway I would rather deal with the problems associated with too much freedom than the problems associated with too little.

if the 'right' to own a gun is for defence against a organised militia
then having a gun for fun/sport is not an excuse to have a gun

if the 'right' to own a gun mentions 'well regulated'
then having a unregistered gun with no checks or vetting should not be a thing

if the 'right' to own a gun does not describe a fully auto rifle. then having a fully auto is not a right
nor a semi auto

back when the 'right' was wrote. guns fired single shots. that took multiple seconds to reload.

so what americans should realise as there 'right' is single shot handguns to be used only in defence. and only after going through a rigorous vetting process

 Because Singapore is a strict country than USA.

While I always noticed that USA has the most loosen restrictions when it comes to owning firearms. I just happened to find out that in singapore, even carrying of pepper spray for self-defense is illegal.

How come that Singapore can ban all these weapons and not be a den of criminals, And USA can't.

EDIT: here is the links for the law https://www.loc.gov/law/help/firearms-control/singapore.php and https://singaporelegaladvice.com/law-articles/laws-prohibited-replica-self-defence-weapons/ if you're curious