Should assault rifles be banned in the US?

[Sammi79]

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

looting, rioting and mass hysteria are not imaginary things, dont get me wrong... im nto a prepper, and im not preparing for doomsday, its just that im better prepared to keep a hoard of looters off my family and property than someone who only has a .38 special

So civilians being armed does not prevent these things? It might seem reasonable to expect a reduction but how much? doesn't it just mean that when looting or rioting, all parties will be armed?

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

Thus far using assault rifles to assist the military has not been necessary, but you must also consider that the second amendment arms the citizens not only for the purpose of assisting the federal government but also ensuring that it does not grow tyrannous.

I do appreciate the concept from its time. I am unsure if it still applies today. Most European countries are not tyrannical dictatorships yet do not generally allow civilians to be armed. Is there any real risk of your government becoming tyrannous?

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

yes, even my own life is worth that right. This maniac would have committed this crime even if he had to do it with sharp sticks or machetes

Fair enough, your position is clear. However you have no reason to assert he would have done it with knives or sticks as that would be a far more difficult, time consuming and cold blooded task, that he may not have been capable of, and even the unarmed teachers may have been able to halt. The gun makes the kill relatively quick and easy. I know I know... arm the teachers. More guns is what you need. Fancy that, more guns than people and you haven't got enough!

Seriously though, fair enough. If you accept these events as a necessary evil and stand by it, it's your country sir.

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

I have the right to own firearms just as i have the right to free speech or trial by jury... all of those rights are critically equal in their importance and i wouldn't surrender a single one of them

I know you have that right, I am simply questioning the validity of the contemporary justification for it. It doesn't bother me here if you own guns or not, but I worry that maybe in USA the majority of people would like tighter gun laws and that your view is in the minority. What is the split between owners /non owners? I found this after a quick search :

http://www.theatlanticwire.com/natio...raphics/60131/

From 2008, not sure how accurate. Do all non gun owners oppose gun ownership? Are all gun owners opposed to increased restrictions?

Originally Posted by GoldenRivet

should we stop publishing certain types of books for fear of giving crazy people ideas? should we not print certain news stories for fear of eliciting an emotional response from certain ethnic groups? would you give up your right to free speech to prevent these things? should we surrender our right to a fair trial because so many people are caught in the act and are clearly guilty?

Free speech and fair trial I would not give up. Besides, fair trial is to ensure against mistakes that with capital punishment cannot be corrected. It was a mistake to legally allow this woman to own that firearm. It was a mistake for her to train her son to use it. It was a mistake for her to not make it impossible for him to obtain the firearm that day or any other. These mistakes are easily made without fear of the consequence because it is normal, it is her right, and would seem normal to you as I understand it. Kid was a loner. Funny thing about loners is, people leave them alone, or simply ignore them. I'll bet that most will say he was a bit weird but otherwise okay.

These mistakes cannot be corrected.

Fantastical doomsday prophecies combined with the tendency of people to desire and propagate the assumed truth of such things probably doesn't help, but if you look at the demographics of gunshot fatalities in USA, it is clear that events like those in Newtown are still technically freak occurrences.

Sam.