And so blood will continue to be shed needlessly. Business as usual then. At least over here in the UK we only get the occasional nutter getting hold of a gun. I know where I feel safer.
Mobile phone app replaces Congressional TV as Democrats stage sit-in
In an extraordinary intervention of app technology into modern democracy, TV station C-SPAN chose to rebroadcast streaming video from a mobile phone inside Congress during a representatives held protest after its cameras were turned off. Democratic politicians in the House of Representatives decided to stage a sit-in on …
-
-
Thursday 23rd June 2016 02:53 GMT Anonymous Coward
Unsafe Space
That blood wasn't needless. Allah (apparently) smiles upon the shed blood of infidels. And you would disarm every law-abiding citizen in the face of such savagery. Talk about needless bloodletting.
Sorry, but I don't like being told I have to disarm, and just let the (temporarily) leftist-controlled government pretend to protect me, next time 'sudden jihad' breaks out nearby. The US Government has a rotten track record and their current Master in Chief appears to side with the savages at every opportunity.
Molon Labe.
-
Thursday 23rd June 2016 05:38 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Unsafe Space
No one is trying to disarm you, just prevent those on watch lists from being able to buy guns. While I respect the due process arguments since I'm sure there are people on terrorist watch lists or no fly lists who don't belong there, so let's do a compromise between the republican and democrat versions that prevents the purchase but puts in place a simple appeal process where the government has to justify the inclusion in a watch list within a reasonable period of time (let's say a week) and a judge has to agree, or the sale is allowed.
Currently there is no appeal process to get off the terrorist watch list or no fly list - or even to find out if you are on these lists unless you e.g. try to fly so this is a much needed reform even aside from the gun sale issue.
But yeah, I know neither side is going to consider compromise because they care more about scoring political points than doing their jobs of running the country. No one should wonder why Congress has a single digit approval rating with the circus both sides have put on this week.
-
Thursday 23rd June 2016 15:57 GMT Mark 85
Re: Unsafe Space
Currently there is no appeal process to get off the terrorist watch list or no fly list - or even to find out if you are on these lists unless you e.g. try to fly so this is a much needed reform even aside from the gun sale issue.
Therein is the problem. No redress. I have no qualms about blocking someone from flying or being on the watch list (and hence unable to buy a gun). But there has to be a method to challenge this. As it is, it's a secret list and based on whatever "they" want it to be based on.
I'm not sure why they keep it secret unless they feel that this would let the "terrorists" know that they are being watched.
-
-
Thursday 23rd June 2016 08:59 GMT kmac499
Re: Unsafe Space
If widepsread public ownership of guns is such a good idea. Here's a suggestion.
Why not apply similar rules to guns as cars
Take a gun test like a driving test. If you can't indentify and hit a target you don't get a licence
Have a 'Drunk in Charge' offence no packing while drunk.
Compulsory Insurance
etc..
A final thought if guns are so good then surely licenced holders should be allowed to take then on aeroplanes. After all guns make places safe don't they??
-
Thursday 23rd June 2016 13:16 GMT Anonymous Coward
The difference between guns and cars
While both are deadly if misused or used with the intent to kill, the right to bear arms was specifically written into the Constitution, right after the right to free speech. While one can argue about the intent of the wording (for each) and obviously some limits can and have been placed on each, there is no right to drive in there. Until such an amendment is added, it will be FAR easier to put legislative limitations on driving than gun ownership. You may not like this, but that's how US law was structured by the founding fathers.
Remember, the Constitution itself is a list of powers the government has, and what isn't in there isn't in its purview (or at least isn't supposed to be, 227 years of legislative creep notwithstanding) The Bill of Rights was added to explicitly clarify what the government cannot do. Listing free speech and bearing arms among those leaves it a pretty high bar to restrict gun ownership. If you had to "pass a test" how is that really any different than having to have the government approve your "free" speech before it could be published, to insure you aren't inciting riot or other types of speech that the courts have determined can be limited? You can disagree with conflating the two, but they are listed in consecutive paragraphs, ahead of other very reasonable limitations on government power like requiring due process. Read into that what you will.
-
Thursday 23rd June 2016 13:28 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: The difference between guns and cars
While both are deadly if misused or used with the intent to kill, the right to bear arms was specifically written into the Constitution, right after the right to free speech.
You show me your membership in a "well-regulated militia" and you can buy a gun. But, ammosexuals sure forget about half that amendment, don't they? AC because I live in the United States of Asshattery.
-
Thursday 23rd June 2016 13:59 GMT NotBob
Re: The difference between guns and cars
In the words of Benjamin Franklin, "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
The well regulated militia explains the reason for the amendment, but is not written as a litmus test for its application.
-
-
Thursday 23rd June 2016 16:00 GMT Graham Marsden
@DougS - Re: The difference between guns and cars
> If you had to "pass a test" how is that really any different than having to have the government approve your "free" speech before it could be published
Because the first four words of the Second Amendment are "A well regulated militia..."
At the moment there is insufficient regulation of the Right to Bear Arms.
-
-
Monday 27th June 2016 20:47 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: "the right to bear arms was specifically written into the Constitution"
And that was changed via an amendment. If you want to clarify the meaning of the second amendment to allow only members of the armed forces and police to have guns, start petitioning and try to get 3/4 of the states on board and get past congress. Good luck with that!
-
-
-
Thursday 23rd June 2016 16:32 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Unsafe Space
Take a gun test like a driving test. If you can't indentify and hit a target you don't get a licence
You're clearly not familiar with the process in many states.
I already have to take a test to purchase a firearm and retake it every five years. I have to pass a safety course to get a hunting license. I have to take another safety course and test to obtain a license to carry a firearm, take the same test again with every firearm I would like to carry, and I have to retake the course and these tests every five years. Many states do not recognize out of state carry licenses and may or may not allow non-residents to obtain a license. I have to pass a background check and usually have to wait, often several days, to take home a firearm I purchase even though it may not be the first one I have purchased or own. Oddly many states will recognize the safety course for a hunting license but not a carry license.
I do not have to take a test to buy a car, only to drive a car on public roads. I do not need to take a test in every different car I may wish to drive, any car will do fine as, like firearms, they operate mostly the same way. I do not need to take a test a get a driver's license in every state I wish to drive. I do not need to retake the driving test every five years. I do not need to pass a background check to buy a car. I can buy or sell a car in any state I choose. In many states I do not need to register a car that I don't use on public roads or property. I can usually take a car home the same day I purchase it.
If you really want to apply similar rules, I'd be grateful because it would make my life easier or everyone who drives a lot harder and maybe they wouldn't bother which would make my commute a lot easier.
-
-
Thursday 23rd June 2016 09:17 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Unsafe Space
"...and just let the (temporarily) leftist-controlled government pretend to protect me, next time 'sudden jihad' breaks out nearby"
You're right, it worked well in Orlando, just think of the massacre that would have occurred if people were restricted from buying guns.
:facepalm:
-
Thursday 23rd June 2016 09:20 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Unsafe Space
So unconcerned are patriots about giving up most of their privacy just to provide a bit of perceived protection against terrorists but heaven forbid asking questions of a suspect terrorist sympathiser about whether he should be sold an assault rifle as it is such a breach of his American rights.
-
Thursday 23rd June 2016 15:48 GMT Ye Gads
Re: Unsafe Space
I agree entirely. What's more, had the occupants of the club had large quantities of C4 they could have blown escape holes in the building. That the US government is restricting the sale of C4 to the general public is outrageous: the more people that have access to this life-saving resource the more likely that they will be able to use it to make ad-hoc escape tunnels when necessary.
Sorry, must go: time for my medication...
-
Friday 24th June 2016 10:03 GMT Anonymous Coward
Re: Unsafe Space
"disarm every law-abiding citizen in the face of such savagery"
Other countries (like say the UK) have well trained police armed response teams backed up by specialist forces like the SAS that are remarkably effective in quickly eliminating such treats.
Unfortunately the US seems to have a police force that are in general much like the US army - very poorly trained and gung ho.
-
Friday 24th June 2016 10:03 GMT TheVogon
Re: Unsafe Space
"And you would disarm every law-abiding citizen in the face of such savagery."
Absolutely. Like most civilised countries already do. Gun owners are many times more likely to use the gun in a crime or have it used on them by a criminal than to ever use it in self defence.
As America already has more guns than people and firearms related deaths are still stratospheric, clearly having more guns doesn't stop gun deaths. Quite the reverse in fact.
-
-
-
-
Thursday 23rd June 2016 02:51 GMT Mark 85
I find this embarrasing to see these guys in their suits, sitting on the floor.
It would appear that Congress has resorted to the equivalent of "holding their breath until they turn blue". Or maybe it's all the old former hippies who thing sit-ins get results but without the pot and good music of the '60's/'70's
Do they seriously think this will change minds on the other side? If so, they forget history where the other side basically digs in and waits them out.
-
Thursday 23rd June 2016 06:01 GMT Voland's right hand
Re: I find this embarrasing to see these guys in their suits, sitting on the floor.
Do they seriously think this will change minds on the other side
No they do not. It is however an election season and the Democrats have finally decided to show some guts when dealing with the NRA. Probably not for long.
-
Thursday 23rd June 2016 09:10 GMT Warm Braw
Re: I find this embarrasing to see these guys in their suits, sitting on the floor.
Seriously, it's not nearly as embarrassing as the Dickey Amendment which prevented the CDC from even looking into gun violence. Both the legislative and executive branches of the US government were happy to block research (and even information gathering) by the CDC into a major cause of death and injury (12,000 and 23,500 respectively in 2014) because "guns don't kill people, people kill people" and to even question this mantra is a form of state-sponsored anti-gun propaganda.
And that ban has been in place since 1996 despite being periodically reviewed - most recently after another regular mass shooting last year. What's embarassing is that your elected representatives are conspiring to prevent facts coming to the attention of their voters and won't even permit discussion of the gun issue in the national forum for, er, discussing issues.
-
Thursday 23rd June 2016 14:10 GMT NotBob
Re: I find this embarrasing to see these guys in their suits, sitting on the floor.
Look at what the CDC does in areas that are clearly within their purview, though. Do a quick google on that and you'll find fun tings like:
USA Today - CDC inflated number of obesity deaths
American Nutrition Association - CDC inflated flu numbers
-
-
-
Biting the hand that feeds IT
