The 2nd Amendment

[rjohnstone]

How about domestic opinion?

http://www.galluppoll.com/content/default.aspx?ci=1645

For those who don't want to click, this gallup poll found that as of Jan. 2007, 49% of Americans supported more strict gun sale laws, while only 14% thought they should be less strict.

The problem with your point is that figure is dropping.

The question:Would you like to see gun laws in this country made more strict, less strict, or remain as they are?
People who think the laws should be more strict has gone from 54% in 2001 to 49% in 2007.

The question: In general, do you feel that the laws covering the sale of firearms should be made more strict, less strict, or kept as they are now?

Those answering "More strict" went from 79% in Sept. 1990 down to 56% in Oct. 2006.

See a trend here anyone?

The majority of the questions in the poll that have results spanning greater than a 10 year period have remained statically flat.

Read the entire poll results and you will discover that the publics desire for stricter gun laws is declining, not increasing.
You will also see that the publics attitude towards guns has remained relatively the same since the 50's. It's the news media and the politicians that are trying to convince you otherwise.
I wonder why that is?
Think about it.

[marcus]

My point was that you don't need to go to a foreign country to find people who oppose unlimited gun availability, and the statistics do not discount this point at all. Even counting the drop in these numbers over the time period you state, a wide plurality support stricter gun laws. And have as long as they have been taking this survey. And it will be a while before this is not the case.

If you look at the question "In general, do you feel that the laws covering the sale of firearms should be made more strict, less strict, or kept as they are now", the percentage favoring "more strict" went up from 2001 to 2007.

I don't think the point about politicians and the media wanting us to think this way is really accurate either. Harry Reid is quoted as saying there won't be any hand wringing in congress over gun control after what happened at Va. Tech, and I don't think we will see any. The last major piece of gun control legislation was the assault weapons ban of 1994, which expired in 2004 and has come up for renewal a few times and been shut down. As for the media, I have seen (or heard) several more people in the media decrying the fact the VT is a gun free zone than they fact that the guns this insane asshole used were quite easily and legally attained.

The fact of the matter is that gun control (or lack thereof) is much more of a passion for gun enthusiasts than those who are for more gun control. Quick, name the gun-control counterpart to the NRA!

The problem with your point is that figure is dropping.

The question:Would you like to see gun laws in this country made more strict, less strict, or remain as they are?
People who think the laws should be more strict has gone from 54% in 2001 to 49% in 2007.

The question: In general, do you feel that the laws covering the sale of firearms should be made more strict, less strict, or kept as they are now?

Those answering "More strict" went from 79% in Sept. 1990 down to 56% in Oct. 2006.

See a trend here anyone?

The majority of the questions in the poll that have results spanning greater than a 10 year period have remained statically flat.

Read the entire poll results and you will discover that the publics desire for stricter gun laws is declining, not increasing.
You will also see that the publics attitude towards guns has remained relatively the same since the 50's. It's the news media and the politicians that are trying to convince you otherwise.
I wonder why that is?
Think about it.

[marcus]

I also point to this as evidence that democratic politicians have given up on gun control:

http://www.foxnews.com/images/142098/7_23_102104_kerry_hunting.jpg

[rjohnstone]

Quick, name the gun-control counterpart to the NRA!

That would be "Stop the NRA".

I also point to this as evidence that democratic politicians have given up on gun control:

http://www.foxnews.com/images/142098...ry_hunting.jpg

What does that picture have to do with anything?
John Kerry is well known for being a hunter. That has absolutely nothing to do with the "gun control" debate, which is focused on hand guns and assault weapons.

[fett]

It's really quite simple. We 'mericans just love our guns. It's a Wild West thing. You don't have to control the guns. There are about a bazillion out there. Just go to a pawnshop. All we have to do is eliminate the ammo and it will go away, eventually. I like BB guns. They look cool and they won't kill anyone. You guys are getting way to deep. Guns that kill suck. Any gun that is shorter than a rifle should not have ammo made. Any gun that doesn't force you to shoot and load, shoot and load should be outlawed. All pistols that aren't pull the trigger and shoot and then have to do it again with a 6 shot max should be outlawed. The cops and Feds can have have autos because they have to deal with all the assholes that slip through the cracks. If I ever get confronted with a person with a gun, all I will do is take off my pants and say; "Come and get it":ROTF:

[marcus]

Stop the NRA is the name of the website. Its actually "The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence". I am guessing that most here have not heard of it, and for good reason, in 2006 it donated a grand total of $90,000(!) to anti-gun candidates.

Just for the record, I am for gun regulations, but I am not a crusader, and I don't think I have ever voted for or against someone for their positions on gun control. My point was that this kind of support for gun control is much more prevalent that the ferocious "you'll be prying my Smith & Wesson from my cold, dead hands" type of support that pro-gun side has. I believe that is largely the reason why we have a large plurality (if not majority) of people in this country that support stricter gun laws, but yet we aren't getting stricter gun laws. To boot, the laws we have are spottily enforced and have huge loopholes (the "gunshow" loophole to name one).

That would be "Stop the NRA".

[marcus]

What does that picture have to do with anything?
John Kerry is well known for being a hunter. That has absolutely nothing to do with the "gun control" debate, which is focused on hand guns and assault weapons.

The picture was a joke. The national media sure took it that way when the picture was published.

I would say though that he was not well known as a hunter, thus the photo-op.

[rjohnstone]

Oh I agree that certain loopholes need to be addressed.
But making a new law is senseless if the current ones are not enforced.
This is my main point of issue with "gun control" advocates.
There are already more than enough laws regulating firearms on the books. The local, state and federal agencies should focus on enforcing them. That's what my tax dollars are paying them for... to enforce the law.

Guns are not going to go away. They are a fact of life in America.

Some day the lobbyists will realize this and try a different approach.
We need to focus on the cause of violent behavior and not the tools used.
They're trying to treat the symptom and not the cause.

[marcus]

I wouldn't actually say that I support new gun laws either. I have somewhat of a libertarian streak in me when it comes to the government telling me what I can and cannot have (within reason, of course). Not to mention that I don't trust our current government (or any politicians, ever) to ever treat this issue seriously and draft effective gun regulations. The assault weapons ban of 1994, for example, seemed to ban guns mainly on appearance, as far as I can tell.

I think if you scratch the surface of most people, pro-gun included, you will find that they support some amount of weapons regulation. At that point, it is just a matter of where you draw the line. I believe we will be arguing about where to draw the line for the forseeable future!

That being said, I must admit, I do actually enjoy shooting guns. I'm from the South, dammit!

Oh I agree that certain loopholes need to be addressed.
But making a new law is senseless if the current ones are not enforced.
This is my main point of issue with "gun control" advocates.
There are already more than enough laws regulating firearms on the books. The local, state and federal agencies should focus on enforcing them. That's what my tax dollars are paying them for... to enforce the law.

Guns are not going to go away. They are a fact of life in America.

Some day the lobbyists will realize this and try a different approach.
We need to focus on the cause of violent behavior and not the tools used.
They're trying to treat the symptom and not the cause.

[fett]

marcus. You sure as hell picked one hot topic. You noob, you. And welcome to the board.

[SouthPlatteDemon]

I have guns.

As humans we choose our own destiny. I prefer to keep it that way. Let me choose my own destiny.

People trying to force themselves on others is what created the need for handguns and assault weapons. Isn't that ironic?

[marcus]

I realize that I may have jumped in the deep end here, I have never really known anyone to change their minds on this topic! Thanks for the welcome, maybe I will get around to introducing myself here (in one of the other areas) so that I'm known for more than being the "gun control devils advocate guy" or whatever the hell it is I'm doing!

marcus. You sure as hell picked one hot topic. You noob, you. And welcome to the board.

[Evol]

"Mass killings were rare when guns were easily available, while they have been increasing as guns have become more controlled"

Great quote,and something to think about.

[fett]

The human race just likes to kill each other. Name the weapon. It doesn't matter. Something just went haywire way back when in our little brains. It has gotten so far away from defending. Now, we are on the offense. I really don't think the human brain knows what it means to kill someone. It's an abstract. In the good old days, you really had to get close to the person to kill them. As in sword and the like. Then we invented arrows. That was impersonal. Then we invented bullets and the ability to make them go so fast we couldn't see the projectile of A hitting point B. So there is no connection between the firing of a shot and the result. And that's why we love boxing. Because you can see a cause and effect. I'm rambling now. But, the point is we have become a bunch of whining ass gun lovers that take the notion of killing something out of our hands. Literally.

[fett]

I realize that I may have jumped in the deep end here, I have never really known anyone to change their minds on this topic! Thanks for the welcome, maybe I will get around to introducing myself here (in one of the other areas) so that I'm known for more than being the "gun control devils advocate guy" or whatever the hell it is I'm doing!

Back up 5 and punt. No one is going to give an inch on this topic.