Guns In America

Gun policy has been a very contentious issue in recent years, especially in the light of the incidents at Sandy Hook and Aurora. As a result Obama has made some key proposals:

  • Reintroduce an expired ban on “military-style” assault weapons
  • Limit ammunition magazines to 10 rounds
  • Background checks on all gun sales
  • Ban on possession and sale of armour-piercing bullets
  • Harsher penalties for gun-traffickers, especially unlicensed dealers who buy arms for criminals
  • Approve the appointment of the head of the federal Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives

american-flag-gun

Here are some statistics on guns in America which sparked Obama’s desire to propose such changes”

  •  9,960 people were killed by a gun in the USA in 2010, a rate of 3.2 per 100,000 people.
  • They have the 26th highest death rate by guns annually in the world
  • Gun ownership is declining – In 1990 46% of households and 29% of individuals said they owned a gun, today this has fallen to 32% and 21

The second amendment of the constitution gives American citizen the right to “bear arms”. As a result, the reforms proposed by Obama has created arguments, feeling that he is becoming ‘imperial’ in manner, taking the law into his own hands and becoming to dominant – something the Founding Fathers wished to prevent through their implementation of a series of checks and balances on the executive.

Thanks for reading,

Digestible Politics

https://twitter.com/Digest_politics

https://www.facebook.com/pages/Digestible-Politics/476112109093593?ref=tn_tnmn

https://www.youtube.com/user/DigestiblePolitics?feature=mhee

Advertisements

16 comments on “Guns In America

  1. Reblogged this on Jesse Talks Back and commented:
    I will keep my guns, and take my freedom. Only a statist would attempt to use others to enforce their desires by voting.

    What is truly sad is that people are slaves and embracing it,

  2. cb75948 says:

    Great article and very timely. I am nearing 83 and have watched the near destruction of most freedoms and a serious dividing of our people. The sad part is that it is being systematically accomplished on purpose by our socialist Congress and current President and sadly the majority of the people do not care. I am working on an article for my blog to announce a new name for our nation. “The Non-United States of America.

  3. kapoole says:

    I am a firm believer that people have the inherit right to self defense. To me the number of people who have died from gunfire solidifies my point that I should have the right to own a gun. If there are people out there killing others with guns, I feel like I need to be able to defend myself.

    Passing laws does not curb the trend of bad people owning weapons. To me this would allow criminals to be the exclusive owners of guns in America. If the law required that the banned guns were turned in, I’m sure all of the criminals would turn in their weapons! I would not give up any of my handguns or rifles, so I would join the derelict crowd as well.

    I personally believe that the government is going the wrong way with this issue. My suggestion would be more education about firearms and enforcing laws that already exist.

    • croppie123 says:

      If nobody owned guns, nobody would be shooting people. To everyone but America, the need to abolish such stupidly lax rights is greater than ever. Let’s face it, if guns had been outlawed years and years ago, like they should’ve been, there’s a great argument that the Aurora and Sandy Hook shootings may not have happened because the perpatrators behind those attacks wouldn’t have got the guns so easily.

      The whole reason, for Americans to bear arms is to protect themselves from the British, should we decide to invade. Like that’s going to happen (!) The US is more powerful than the UK. The UK is not going to invade. Hence, the Second Amendment being (pretty much) invalid.

      The argument that kapoole mentions: ‘To me the number of people who have died from gunfire solidifies my point that I should have the right to own a gun. If there are people out there killing others with guns, I feel like I need to be able to defend myself’… As a civilised human being, I cannot begin to comprehend your view. If America caught up with the rest of civilisation and outlawed guns, justice would be done.

      The attitude of the people has put the President between a rock and a hard place. He is under pressure from both sides of the argument, but is on the right path. Outlawing guns will be an act that reflects well upon America in later years. However, the people just don’t care. They protest. But how many massacres will it take until their moral compasses point anywhere near north?

      Why is it that many Western countries, such as Britain, only have had to have 1, 2 or maybe even 3 massacres before they raise their hands and say: ‘We were wrong. Guns have got to go’. The UK only had 2 major massacres (Hungerford and Dunblane), each resulting in tightened gun laws. [Northern Island is a little freer, but nowhere near as bad as America.] We do have some pro-gun organisations, but hardly anyone’s heard of them and not a lot care because the UK is safe.
      Check this: The United Kingdom has one of the lowest rates of gun homicides in the world. There were 0.07 recorded intentional homicides committed with a firearm per 100,000 inhabitants in 2010, compared to the 3.0 in the United States (over 40 times higher) and 0.21 in Germany (3 times higher).

      I rest my case.

      • The difference is England is an island and can therefore control its borders better. American has borders to both the north and south. Cartels located in America’s southern neighbor will smuggle anything across the border that will make them money to include drugs and weapons. So your comparison is nothing more than a logical fallacy. Heroin, cocaine, methamphetamine, and ecstasy are illegal in Britain aren’t they? How are you doing with drug addictions?

      • I don’t see how you can’t comprehend my view.

        I can see yours, I just don’t agree with it.

        There are assault weapons everywhere. I don’t see how passing laws is going to stop criminals from possessing them. Even President Obama can’t get his city under control with their strict gun laws. A girl who performed at his second inauguration was slain days later by gun violence. These are illegal guns.

        To me this is foreshadowing of what is to come. If America were to outlaw all the weapons that Senator Feinstein suggested, I could see an America like this. A state with undefended law-abiding citizens that are easy prey to gun toting criminals.

        Here is a bigger threat to consider:

        Auto fatalities are 10.8 per 100,000 people.

        That’s over 3 times as much as firearms.

        Should we start an emotional campaign to eliminate cars from the United States?

      • Thank you for your input and thank you for reading my blog!

  4. croppie123 says:

    Reblogged this on croppie123 and commented:
    The text I am about to post after this is my reponse to this article. Enjoy.

  5. I love the simplicity of what you’re doing here with this blog! Educating people on current events and making it easy to understand. Excellent work! Despite being a blogger, I don’t follow too many, but I have a feeling I’ll be reading all your stuff as it’s produced and even sharing much of it with others. Thank you for following my blog and the reason why I chose to comment on this particular story is because I wrote one similar to it about a gun rally I covered for my newspaper and I think you’d find it quite interesting. It’s titled Firearms, Second Amendment and Gun Proposals, Oh S***! I NEVER plug my blogs when I post on others, but I really think you’d enjoy reading it.

    • Thank you very much for your kind comments and it is truly appreciated! The blog is created for the sole purpose of making politics easier to understand and encouraging debate. I am very happy to hear that you shall be returning to read more of my posts and following my blog. Your article was a VERY interesting read and very well written and I look forward to checking out more of your posts in the future…

  6. kiannuzzi says:

    To the gun ban fool…. We have 50 states and one of the largest land masses on earth, we also have over 300 million people. And as another pointed out we have Canada above and Mexico below that will bring guns in illegally, also we have gun manufacturers that will keep making guns no matter what you ban.

    England is an island and has what 53 million people ?

    Bad people will get guns, and what if the scum bag at Sandyhook brought a samurai sword and killed a bunch of unarmed teachers and children ? He could’ve, and what would’ve stopped him ?

    • brucethomasw says:

      With a Samurai sword, very likely less people would have been killed. A kindergarten student could tell you less guns equals less killing. i

      I beleive it is time for Americans to re-consider that their so called “God given right to bear arms.” It is an archaic tradition, like slavery was, with no positive outcomes other than death & destruction.

      To others reading this, check out my April 12 photo blog from ‘through the luminary lens’ where I expand on this. Here is the link –

      http://throughtheluminarylens.wordpress.com/2013/04/13/weekly-photo-challengechange-un-arms-trade-treaty-and-i-aint-a-gonna-study-war-no-more/

      I have deep respect for many people and leaders in the military. I think of Dwight D. Eisenhower of the United States, and retired Lt. General Romeo Dallaire in Canada. The jobs they do “with a reponsibility to protect”, are difficult and dangerous – often glorified and misunderstood.

      Like many of the posts of ‘Digestable Politics’ end, so I too will end my thoughts with a question.

      Could it be that many Americans and are addicted to militarism and gun ownership, and could it be that these people are in serious denial about how it is affecting the world around them?

      Thak you for this opportunity to dialogue – Bruce

  7. The second amendment doesn’t “give” citizens the right to bear arms, it guarantees that right. The right to defend oneself is a given.

  8. jamiewaller2 says:

    How can some Americans look at Europe with its far tighter gun control laws and think “Damn, why can’t our gun death rate be as low as theirs? We better do the exact opposite to them.”

  9. The whole concept of rights is based on the notion of autonomy and liberty. The great proponents of liberty and autonomy in political theory were John Stuart Mill and Immanuel Kant. Mill and Kant argued for any and every individual being equally able to decide for themselves what is moral and what constitutes the good life. However, Mill argued liberty extends only so far as it harms others. Kant argued we exist in reciprocal relations, where one person practicing their autonomy can restrict another person’s autonomy. All of the gun rights arguments favoring gun rights are appeals to fear-fear of some potential crises based on slippery slope arguments. The debate needs to step out of the rhetorical use of fear and really examine the hard evidence, the morality, and the historical significance of why the U.S. had the right to begin with, thus, if it is even still relevant now. At the time, muskets were arms. It took minutes to reload a musket and it could fire one shot. At the time, and this is really important, THERE WAS NOT A WELL ORGANIZED STANDING U.S. MILITARY. At the time, there was a mish-mash of militia from separate states thrown together to fight the revolution. (http://www.fpri.org/footnotes/1210.200704.maslowski.creationusarmedforces.html) So, yes the citizens had to bear arms to protect themselves. Further, the right, 2nd Amendment, states “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 militia needed for security of a free state in today’s era is called THE NATIONAL GUARD-every state has one. Per Mill and Kant, rights extend only so far as they do not harm others. A military style weapon in the hands of people who snap, who had no previous reason which would have prevented them from legally owning a gun, harms other people. The major shootings are are not about criminals, they are about people who snap and who obtained the guns legally or by getting them from family members. The founding fathers of American saw the need to amend the constitution based on changes in society. Gun rights advocates fail to realize that no rights are so set in stone as to be absolutely guaranteed.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s