Side story on the recent gun spree

[slapout9]

Bloody shame they didn't actually check the history before they posted that. Or actually checked with historians as opposed to legal scholars.

Yes, I had some questions on accuracy myself and since you are one of our resident historians perhaps you could give your historical analysis on the subject?

[slapout9]

And for some additional insight when I was ambushed in my own front yard in 1999 the FULL ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN was in place and it did not do one damn thing to stop the attack. The attacker did what they will do in the future and that is just carry several guns because any criminal knows that the fastest reload and highest capacity magazine is another gun or several guns in my case. Absolutely fascinating how criminals and deranged people know this but policy makers with college degrees just cannot grasp the facts of violent situations so they just make stuff up in order to punish law a biding citizens and protect the criminals ability to conduct mayhem on an unarmed and uneducated public.

[carl]

And for some additional insight when I was ambushed in my own front yard in 1999 the FULL ASSAULT WEAPONS BAN was in place and it did not do one damn thing to stop the attack. The attacker did what they will do in the future and that is just carry several guns because any criminal knows that the fastest reload and highest capacity magazine is another gun or several guns in my case. Absolutely fascinating how criminals and deranged people know this but policy makers with college degrees just cannot grasp the facts of violent situations so they just make stuff up in order to punish law a biding citizens and protect the criminals ability to conduct mayhem on an unarmed and uneducated public.

Not only multiple weapons but multiple attackers. Home invasion crews in Chicago I read were crews, multiple attackers. And any home invader will have the element of surprise on their side. So a home owner unfortunate enough to be confronted by a home invasion is quite likely to face multiple attackers and have very little time to react. But then we are told that that a 10 round mag in that Glock will be just as good as that 17 round mag.

Those policy makers know perfectly well the facts of violent situations. But this is why I figure they act the way they do. In the very back of their well educated minds, where the thoughts they dare not express out loud dwell, they know that criminals can never be a political threat to them. Hoods are hoods and no matter how well armed they are, being hoods they will never be able to organize themselves well enough to pose a threat to their power.

Law abiding citizens on the other hand, can and do organize themselves such that they pose a threat to the political power of the elite policy makers. So if you are an elite policy maker interested in hanging on to power, naturally enough you don't really care that hoods are armed because they pose no real threat. But you are very interested that people who can pose a political threat be unarmed.

[jmm99]

Well, the Brits were to the east of British America, weren't they ?

Seriously, I ran into this article, How the British Gun Control Program Precipitated the American Revolution (by David B. Kopel, 6 Charleston Law Review 283, 2012) (50 pp.), and thought it was material to this thread:

Abstract:

This Article chronologically reviews the British gun control which precipitated the American Revolution: the 1774 import ban on firearms and gun powder; the 1774-75 confiscations of firearms and gun powder, from individuals and from local governments; and the use of violence to effectuate the confiscations. It was these events which changed a situation of rising political tension into a shooting war. Each of these British abuses provides insights into the scope of the modern Second Amendment.

From the events of 1774-75, we can discern that import restrictions or bans on firearms or ammunition are constitutionally suspect — at least if their purpose is to disarm the public, rather than for the normal purposes of import controls (e.g., raising tax revenue, or protecting domestic industry). We can discern that broad attempts to disarm the people of a town, or to render them defenseless, are anathema to the Second Amendment; such disarmament is what the British tried to impose, and what the Americans fought a war to ensure could never again happen in America. Similarly, gun licensing laws which have the purpose or effect of only allowing a minority of the people to keep and bear arms would be unconstitutional. Finally, we see that government violence, which should always be carefully constrained and controlled, should be especially discouraged when it is used to take firearms away from peaceable citizens. Use of the military for law enforcement is particularly odious to the principles upon which the American Revolution was based.

I thinking about that era, I found it an interesting question (for which, I've no ready answer) as to why the American Revolution had no traction in the rest of British America (e.g., Canada and the West Indies).

Regards

Mike

[Fuchs]

It's ridiculous how much many Americans read into guns. This goes way beyond rational needs, for all superficially rational arguments face an avalanche of contradicting evidence.

I considered guns as a fringe's weird hobby, and those who read very much in mere individual firearms as part of the ~5% crazy men every country has. I have to concede now; this group is either vastly bigger than 5% or extraordinarily loud.


If only these people could hear themselves with foreign ears, to hear the ridiculousness.


I suppose it's to be filed under "anecdotal evidence for the hypothesis that the U.S. is leaving Western civilisation".
Go on at this pace and the Europe will be less culturally in synch with the U.S. than with the Japanese and South Koreans long before 2030.

[jmm99]

I actually use you as something of a barometer for the eastern segment of "Western Civilization" - ah, the joys of being a "ridiculous" and "crazy" westerner.

That there is a gulf between Europe and the US should be no surprise to anyone. Thus, this might be an interesting idea for further exploration:

Go on at this pace and the Europe will be less culturally in synch with the U.S. than with the Japanese and South Koreans long before 2030.

if you intended to say that the US-Europe gap is likely to widen, and the US-Asian gap is likely to narrow by 2030 (your sentence as written is ambiguous).

Maybe I'll post something about the US-Europe gap in some other thread - and re: more limited subject matter in which I've some competence.

Since I have no fear of either a "Yellow" or a "Brown Peril", I am losing no sleep over closer ties to Latin America (an obvious given), and to Asia from India to Japan (a probable outcome).

Regards

Mike

[carl]

A fringe member, a weirdo and sounding ridiculous to them furriners. A three fer. It's a good day.

Oh yeah, and crazy too. An even better day.

[Steve Blair]

Yes, I had some questions on accuracy myself and since you are one of our resident historians perhaps you could give your historical analysis on the subject?

Many towns passed "no-carry" ordinances at various times, but simply passing such a regulation didn't mean that it would be enforced. Most of the Kansas cattle towns had these ordinances, but they were often only enforced during the off season as a way to raise revenue. There was also a reasonable amount of what might be called "wedding shooting" in some parts of the world that might get recorded as simple disturbing the peace as opposed to assault or something that a legal eagle would notice.

Seeing laws on the books isn't the same thing as seeing them enforced. It also ignores the social conditions that existed in many of those frontier towns. In the earlier days of the mining communities, banishment was a powerful threat that could be used to control or moderate violent behavior, and there was also the penchant of the local populace to string up those who got too carried away (granted this didn't happen all that often, but when it did word traveled fairly fast as the myth took on a life and weight of its own). Cattle towns in Kansas tended to be dominated by leftover passions from the Civil War (since most of the cattle ranchers were Texans), which led to sporadic outbreaks of violence (mainly during the late summer months when the herds were moving toward trailheads). In a number of cases, shootouts in Western towns can often be traced back to a local feud of some kind or another (think gang-bangers shooting it out for a prime street corner and you're close, but on a lower scale).

Checking your guns with a bartender or such had mixed results, obviously, and often the "do not carry" language didn't apply to men with reputations or quick tempers (most lawmen at this time were amateurs at best and weren't likely to press the point). Celebrities always get a pass, so some things haven't changed that much.

As for some of the other Bravo Sierra in the thread...let's just say that your perspective on many things tends to shift when any sort of emergency response time is measured in many minutes or over an hour. Also, I seem to recall reading about a spike in home invasions in Australia after they pushed through some of their more strict regulations.

As an aside, good to see you, Stan! Hope all's well.

[jmm99]

from Fuchs
The felons, the losers, the hungry Irish, the African captives of war, a handful greedy guys intent on robbing natives early on, a couple of his/her majesty's servants from UK/France/Spain and a few fugitives make up the bulk of the immigrating ancestors of the modern U.S. population.

Keep chucking your 50 mph fastballs at me, boyo.

Regards

Mike - the descendent of some felons convicted of treason and attainted with corruption of blood.