|
Korean Job Discussion Forums
"The Internet's Meeting Place for ESL/EFL Teachers from Around the World!"
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
ttompatz
Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Location: Kwangju, South Korea
|
 Posted: Tue May 27, 2014 6:28 pm Post subject: Re: ‘No Way To Prevent This' Says Only Nation Where This H |
 |
|
There is no way to prevent it. They have a constitutional right.
. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Tue May 27, 2014 6:35 pm Post subject: Re: ‘No Way To Prevent This' Says Only Nation Where This H |
|
|
| ttompatz wrote: |
There is no way to prevent it. They have a constitutional right.
. |
Says the country who authored the right. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Tue May 27, 2014 7:06 pm Post subject: Re: ‘No Way To Prevent This' Says Only Nation Where This H |
|
|
| KimchiNinja wrote: |
| ttompatz wrote: |
There is no way to prevent it. They have a constitutional right.
. |
Says the country who authored the right. |
No, England recognized and authored the right.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bill_of_Rights_1689
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Right_to_keep_and_bear_arms
| Quote: |
The right to keep and bear arms (often referred to as the right to bear arms or to have arms) is the people's right to have their own arms for their defense as described in the philosophical and political writings of Aristotle, Cicero, John Locke, Machiavelli, the English Whigs and others. In countries with an English common law tradition, a long standing common law right to keep and bear arms has long been recognized, as pre-existing in common law, prior even to the existence of written national constitutions. In the United States, the right to keep and bear arms is also an enumerated right specifically protected by the U.S. Constitution and many state constitutions such that people have a personal right to own arms for individual use, and a right to bear these same arms both for personal protection and for use in a militia.
The concept of the "right of the people to keep and bear arms" is derived from the English Bill of Rights 1689 which states:
That the Subjects which are Protestants may have Arms for their Defence suitable to their Conditions and as allowed by Law.
This must be read in the context of the grievance being addressed, which reads:
By causing severall good Subjects being Protestants to be disarmed at the same time when Papists were both Armed and Imployed contrary to Law.
The English Bill of Rights established that regulating the right to bear arms was one of the powers of Parliament, and did not belong to the monarch.In most common law jurisdictions, this right has since the early 20th century largely been abolished by statute, for example in the United Kingdom, and Australia. In all jurisdictions, common law or otherwise, gun laws vary widely. |
If the United States did not have the Second Amendment, it would still have been a right of common law under which a statute would have been required to abolish it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Tue May 27, 2014 7:14 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| You lost the point, and humor of it all. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ghostrider
Joined: 27 Jun 2011
|
| Posted: Tue May 27, 2014 7:30 pm Post subject: Re: ‘No Way To Prevent This' Says Only Nation Where This H |
|
|
| ttompatz wrote: |
There is no way to prevent it. They have a constitutional right.
. |
The US Supreme Court has already said that criminals and the mentally ill may be banned from owning guns. However, there is too much political opposition to closing the legal loopholes that make it easy for people in these groups to buy guns. The NRA is pretty good at protecting the profits of the gun industry even if a lot of these profits are due to illegal gun sales.
| Quote: |
*Elliot Rodger, the Isla Vista shooter, wrote in his manifesto: “I had already done some research on handguns, and I decided to purchase the Glock 34 semiautomatic pistol, an efficient and highly accurate weapon. I signed all of the papers and was told that my pickup day was in mid-December.”
*The shooter also owned two Swiss Sig Sauer P226 pistols. Rodger wrote that the Sig was “more efficient” than the Glock.
*Both Sig Sauer and Glock are “Corporate Partners” of the National Rifle Association. As detailed in the VPC’s 2013 study Blood Money II: How Gun Industry Dollars Fund the NRA, since 2005, Glock has given between $250,000 and $499,999 to the NRA (the range is due to the giving levels defined within the NRA’s “Corporate Partners Program”).
*Most recently, at the NRA’s annual meeting in April 2014, the NRA displayed a “big check” from Glock to the organization for $50,000 (see photo here). |
http://vpc.org/press/1405CA.htm
The gun industry throws money at the NRA. The NRA throws money at Congress. Needed gun control legislation never gets passed. Mass shootings happen. In response, the NRA tells us we just need to own more guns which of course means more money for the gun industry. The NRA also has a record of lobbying Congress to reduce the funding of the ATF. They know criminal prosecutions aren't good for gun industry profits. Just how things work in the good ole US of A. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 12:23 am Post subject: Re: ‘No Way To Prevent This' Says Only Nation Where This H |
|
|
| ttompatz wrote: |
There is no way to prevent it. They have a constitutional right.
. |
Actually there really is no way to prevent it if you have a large population and someone with enough motivation to engage in such an attack.
In Mexico which has a total gun ban, we have what amounts to a Narco state where something like 70,000 people have died in drug wars. Brevik sought like 80 people in Norway. Just this week we had a shooting at a Jewish museum in Brussels. If its not guns, its knives or bombs. China had a bombing and a spate of mass stabbings. Japan had Aum Shinrikyo. Spain? Madrid bombings. London? Tube bombings.
Crazy is crazy. The deaths only change based on the skill and planning of the attacker, police(armed) response time, and luck. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Fox
Joined: 04 Mar 2009
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 1:47 am Post subject: Re: ‘No Way To Prevent This' Says Only Nation Where This H |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
In Mexico which has a total gun ban ... |
... and one of the world's biggest arms dealers right to the North for easy smuggling. Let's not trivialize the impact of that on a gun ban.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| The deaths only change based on the skill and planning of the attacker, police(armed) response time, and luck. |
There is one more factor: the weapon with which the attacker is armed. I remember some time back a mass stabbing occurred in China. The gun enthusiasts on our forum more or less crowed about it in triumph, insistent that it was proof that weapon restrictions can't stop mass attacks. Yet out of 24 victims in that attack, zero died, because kitchen knives simply aren't anywhere near as effective a weapon as guns. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
radcon
Joined: 23 May 2011
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 2:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| In this latest incident, the killer was a wimpy little dude yet he was able to stab and kill three men before shooting three more people. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kuros
Joined: 27 Apr 2004
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 3:30 am Post subject: Re: ‘No Way To Prevent This' Says Only Nation Where This H |
|
|
| ghostrider wrote: |
| ttompatz wrote: |
There is no way to prevent it. They have a constitutional right.
. |
The US Supreme Court has already said that criminals and the mentally ill may be banned from owning guns. However, there is too much political opposition to closing the legal loopholes that make it easy for people in these groups to buy guns. The NRA is pretty good at protecting the profits of the gun industry even if a lot of these profits are due to illegal gun sales.
| Quote: |
*Elliot Rodger, the Isla Vista shooter, wrote in his manifesto: “I had already done some research on handguns, and I decided to purchase the Glock 34 semiautomatic pistol, an efficient and highly accurate weapon. I signed all of the papers and was told that my pickup day was in mid-December.”
*The shooter also owned two Swiss Sig Sauer P226 pistols. Rodger wrote that the Sig was “more efficient” than the Glock.
*Both Sig Sauer and Glock are “Corporate Partners” of the National Rifle Association. As detailed in the VPC’s 2013 study Blood Money II: How Gun Industry Dollars Fund the NRA, since 2005, Glock has given between $250,000 and $499,999 to the NRA (the range is due to the giving levels defined within the NRA’s “Corporate Partners Program”).
*Most recently, at the NRA’s annual meeting in April 2014, the NRA displayed a “big check” from Glock to the organization for $50,000 (see photo here). |
http://vpc.org/press/1405CA.htm
The gun industry throws money at the NRA. The NRA throws money at Congress. Needed gun control legislation never gets passed. Mass shootings happen. In response, the NRA tells us we just need to own more guns which of course means more money for the gun industry. The NRA also has a record of lobbying Congress to reduce the funding of the ATF. They know criminal prosecutions aren't good for gun industry profits. Just how things work in the good ole US of A. |
Correct, the mass shootings have little to do with the constitutional right to bear handguns within the home. Its the NRA lobby and its effectiveness. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ttompatz
Joined: 05 Sep 2005
Location: Kwangju, South Korea
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 4:14 am Post subject: Re: ‘No Way To Prevent This' Says Only Nation Where This H |
|
|
| Kuros wrote: |
| Correct, the mass shootings have little to do with the constitutional right to bear handguns within the home. Its the NRA lobby and its effectiveness. |
They go hand in hand... NRA lobby wouldn't work without the 2nd amendment.
. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
KimchiNinja
Joined: 01 May 2012
Location: Gangnam
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 4:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
LOL, you guys make everything so complicated.
It's not complicated. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Steelrails
Joined: 12 Mar 2009
Location: Earth, Solar System
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 5:38 am Post subject: Re: ‘No Way To Prevent This' Says Only Nation Where This H |
|
|
| Fox wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
In Mexico which has a total gun ban ... |
... and one of the world's biggest arms dealers right to the North for easy smuggling. Let's not trivialize the impact of that on a gun ban.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| The deaths only change based on the skill and planning of the attacker, police(armed) response time, and luck. |
There is one more factor: the weapon with which the attacker is armed. I remember some time back a mass stabbing occurred in China. The gun enthusiasts on our forum more or less crowed about it in triumph, insistent that it was proof that weapon restrictions can't stop mass attacks. Yet out of 24 victims in that attack, zero died, because kitchen knives simply aren't anywhere near as effective a weapon as guns. |
True, the presence of the U.S. next door certainly impacted things, but I think its more about the US market, rather than US gun supply. I mean, any nation around the world could have a gun ban, but if you are a major conduit for drug production and distribution, you're going to get drug gang wars, and arms will find their way into the nation. It would be interesting to look at some Latin American states farther south that also had serious drug gang violence and if they had gun bans. Also, if Mexico had been halfway across the world, the only difference might be them shooting each other with Soviet/Chinese black market arms instead of American weapons.
As for the weapon, while I think guns do add potential, I think the skill and planning of the attack, combined with certain luck factors, has greater significance than the weapon. For example, car bombs can go off and either kill dozens or injure 3, as we've seen through years of headlines. Even shootings can vary widely in the number of victims. A psychotic firing off unaimed rounds at a crowd might do little more than injure a few people, where as someone methodical like Breivik can kill a large number of people. Likewise, with a knife someone can indiscriminately slash and not kill anyone, but a calculated killer might do something like lock a bunch of kids in a classroom and methodically kill them one by one. Given the extreme nature of these incidents, its hard to draw any conclusions, although in time with the number of knife attacks in China and shootings in the US, we will probably see a greater number of deaths with guns, but there will be at least a few high-death incidents with knives. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bucheon bum
Joined: 16 Jan 2003
|
| Posted: Wed May 28, 2014 9:52 am Post subject: Re: ‘No Way To Prevent This' Says Only Nation Where This H |
|
|
| Steelrails wrote: |
| Fox wrote: |
| Steelrails wrote: |
In Mexico which has a total gun ban ... |
... and one of the world's biggest arms dealers right to the North for easy smuggling. Let's not trivialize the impact of that on a gun ban.
| Steelrails wrote: |
| The deaths only change based on the skill and planning of the attacker, police(armed) response time, and luck. |
There is one more factor: the weapon with which the attacker is armed. I remember some time back a mass stabbing occurred in China. The gun enthusiasts on our forum more or less crowed about it in triumph, insistent that it was proof that weapon restrictions can't stop mass attacks. Yet out of 24 victims in that attack, zero died, because kitchen knives simply aren't anywhere near as effective a weapon as guns. |
True, the presence of the U.S. next door certainly impacted things, but I think its more about the US market, rather than US gun supply. I mean, any nation around the world could have a gun ban, but if you are a major conduit for drug production and distribution, you're going to get drug gang wars, and arms will find their way into the nation. It would be interesting to look at some Latin American states farther south that also had serious drug gang violence and if they had gun bans. Also, if Mexico had been halfway across the world, the only difference might be them shooting each other with Soviet/Chinese black market arms instead of American weapons.
As for the weapon, while I think guns do add potential, I think the skill and planning of the attack, combined with certain luck factors, has greater significance than the weapon. For example, car bombs can go off and either kill dozens or injure 3, as we've seen through years of headlines. Even shootings can vary widely in the number of victims. A psychotic firing off unaimed rounds at a crowd might do little more than injure a few people, where as someone methodical like Breivik can kill a large number of people. Likewise, with a knife someone can indiscriminately slash and not kill anyone, but a calculated killer might do something like lock a bunch of kids in a classroom and methodically kill them one by one. Given the extreme nature of these incidents, its hard to draw any conclusions, although in time with the number of knife attacks in China and shootings in the US, we will probably see a greater number of deaths with guns, but there will be at least a few high-death incidents with knives. |
It's not just having a gun ban, but good governance. There is a reason why Honduras, and to a lesser extent, Guatemala, became hotspots for drug trafficking and its related violence while Nicarauga and Costa Rica saw little to none of it. Costa Rica has a fairly clean, effective government that can enforce its somewhat restrictive gun laws (and it has no military either). Nicaragua's government isn't exactly great, but it is more stable and stronger than Honduras or Guatemala. It also helps that it doesn't share a border with the USA or Mexico... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
