The fundamental stupidity of US gun laws

Post Reply New Topic

Perhaps the problem is the delusional paranoid nutcases out in society rather than guns. Lanza did not own those guns nor was he legally allowed to buy them. An assessment would of done nothing.

you do realize that many if not most of the state constitutions around europe includes a wording almost identical to the us in regards to free speech?

That teacher was probably in the IDF. She would know how to scope out possible trouble makers in the area. In Israel every able bodied man or woman serves in their armed force except for Druse persons and in some cases Orthodox Jews.

The first thing anyone learns about Midinath Yisroel (The State of Israel) is this: Do Not F*ck With the Jews on their turf. Very simple. Very plain.

ruveyn

I agree, regulation won't solve everything and stop all the problems, but it'll help. I really can't think of any realistic way to completely solve the issues, crazy people will be crazy and they'll find ways to kill people, but we don't need to make it easier for them.

And yet that doesn't stop then from censoring and censuring people over ridiculous thought crimes like "hate speech" and blasphemy. Bit of a difference there.

The issue that is not going reported in this thread is that "Gun Control" was the very problem in this issue. Since President Clinton made into law requiring no guns (Even police officers) within 1000 feet of the school. Schools are sitting ducks. "Guns" were not the problem, the guns were registered to his mother. He might have went into, excuse my language; Bat s**t mode and killed all of those kids on a psychotic drug trip.

Dox47 is right. He called you there.


Best Regards,

Jake

The Israelis had to learn the hard way not to be disarmed.

“There’s no question that weapons in the hands of the public have prevented acts of terror or stopped them.”
~Israeli Police Inspector General Shlomo Aharonisky

Delusional paranoid nutcases exist all around the world. Many are no more curable than AS. Are you trying to shift the blame to mother nature?

How 'weapons in the hands of the public' can stop rockets fired by the Hamas? Fail.

But they can and have stopped Palestinian terrorists from crossing over the boundary in order to plant bombs.

The notion that since guns cannot stop every attack they are of no use is totally bogus.

Guns cannot prevent everything, but they can prevent some things. In fact there is no perfect defense against all manner of attack. One does the best one can in defending self and home.

ruveyn

I hate a lot of things my country does, such as our army, our energy policy, our nuclear weapons (it is backward that we refuse to invest in new nuclear power stations but will happily invest in new weapons), our lack of marriage equality, and lately our treatment of the disabled and the poor. We have a poor attitude towards the countryside, being too willing to build on greenfield sites or use a natural habitat for farmland, which means we have the lowest climax community cover in Europe (I think it was Europe, might have been the Western world or countries above a certain area). In less pressing matters, I think we are no longer creating top class footballers or musicians and we do not invest enough in British films. Our roads are not designed with cyclists in mind, and our water system is inefficient, with more water lost to leakages than used in any specific context.

And yeah, call me backwards, but I don't think allowing people to incite racial hatred is something to be particularly proud of. The continuing existence of Westboro Baptist Church (or at least their protest) is a stain. Over here, if a group was saying things like that then they would be shut down.

THAT is the real stain; the answer to offensive speech is more speech, not censorship. Free countries do not have thought police.

even the us has censorship laws by that defintion,

you arent free to incite violence without consequence, westboro could arguably be said to do just that.
hate speech is also illegal under certain conditions at a workplace in the us.

no country has 100% free speech.

not that i disagree with the notion that free discussion is essential to any country worth it's salt, it is however worth noting that in almost all countries where hate speech is properly defined it is defined as beyond discussion, often with threats and dehumanization as required factors.

Our incitement statutes are very narrow, and SCOTUS agrees that WBC does not cross them. Also, saying the wrong thing at work might subject you to civil penalties, but it won't land you in jail. The same cannot be said of much of the rest of the world.

in effect it can in plenty of countries,

not even the cartoonist "catastrophy" could land a person in jail, were you to stand outside the local church preaching about how gays should be "removed from society as the dogs they are" however, then you are inciting to violence in a discriminatory manner and it can land you in jail.


what i am saying here is that there are laws in the us, meaning that 100% free speech doesnt exist there either, so then we can discuss where, when, why and what is illegal but we are still discussing degrees and in many cases rather small ones at that.

Gun control measures won't work in the US because they'll have to take them from our cold, dead hands.