Other than bashing Americans, your point also fails to mention Australia has no Second Amendment to it's Constitution. Even your recent visit by your Prime Minster to the US, when ask basically the same point, said Australia and the US are different. With the biggest difference being the Second Amendment. What works there, would have to be addressed differently here in the US.
You did not have 300+ million guns ether or even 10% of our population. It is fallacy to compare the two when it comes to gun policies. So you ether disagree with your own Prime Minsters' stance or just want to bash the US. I am guessing the latter with your tone. :P
Something worth explaining is the idea of an armed populace. Let's say in 50 years, the United States is not the United States we know now. Things have gone drastically wrong, and there's a very real possibility of the government deciding to "enforce" compliance, just bear with me on this fantastical scenario.
Now, imagine the 2nd Amendment has stood, and now, if the government wants to enforce any tyrannical measures, they are going to have to quite literally wage war against their own people. If not ballistic warfare, which would draw international condemnation by itself, the mass shooting of our own citizens, then some kind of drone strikes or missiles. How do you think that's going to go, even if the government has the military firepower to overwhelm? It would basically be an all out civil war, with the government launching missiles against it's own citizens. It would be bloody, messy, and draw widespread international condemnation. It would be the downfall of the United States. Not exactly the outcome a tyrannical government is looking for.
If, however, the 2nd Amendment does not stand, the government simply decrees how things are going to go, how things are going to be, and if you protest, you simply have a gun pointed at you and are then thrown in jail. Nice and clean, very simple. Most will comply.
So it's not as simple as deciding that rifles and handguns cannot match the firepower of the US military, and therefore the 2nd Amendment has no value.
Last edited by Dacien; 2018-02-27 at 02:34 AM.
I'm quite certain I had yours bang on from the first word.
You're like an anthropomorphic nihilism meme.You're an average ass person who will live and die without more than 10-20 people ever caring.
You probably work an average ass, meaningless job. Your relationship with your government is no different from mine.
If our gun issues were as bad as slavery was, it would get amended. But they are not. More people die from many other reasons than gun violence. By far. Yes it can be amended. Odds are overwhelming it will not be however. Get back to me when it is. I think I will die waiting before you do however. :P
Way to miss the point, outside of Washington the majority of the population has no problem with gun control. Even posters that I disagree with on most things find common ground on gun reforms but extremists want no change to the current system sadly they have the NRA's influence backing them up.
From the Asspull Institute of Made-Up Cliche studies.
Kinda like once someone starts saying "Zionism", you know you can stop even bothering to humor them as a serious intellect for politics? The same for people who reduce all political opposition to bigotry. It's really the same phenomenon in both cases.
- - - Updated - - -
No, entirely the point -- the AWB was never subject to constitutional review and probably couldn't survive it because it was an overbroad and ineffectual pile of garbage that had no measurable effect on crime; it corresponded with an increase, and it's lapse corresponded with decrease. Regulations that implicate the 2nd Amendment have to satisfy either intermediate or strict constitutional scrutiny. Public opinion really doesn't matter if the statute isn't constitutional.
It's not even really about the money either, it's that all of the NRA's lobbying comes with the implicit threat that anyone who tries to stop them will be shot. You can't call yourself a law abiding responsible gun owner if you are threatening to shoot people if they change to law to something you don't like.
You've been prancing around like an infant the whole time, what debate has ever started? You seem of reasonable enough intelligence but little inclination to apply it. I just talk about the law here, for the most part. But an obvious and intentional lie like "statistically most gun owners are racists" really can't be allowed to go uncalled.
That's why I said it was an implicit threat, though a lot of gun owners aren't quite as savvy as their propaganda outlet. I've seen more than one poster on here argue that gun confiscation would never work because the police have families to worry about, and this is coming from the side that is supposedly in favor of law and order.
No the point was this was done on a bipartisan basis in spite of the NRA's objections.
But it does matter when you are running an election which was my point thank you for bringing us full circle.Public opinion really doesn't matter if the statute isn't constitutional.
I would not trust anyone like you. And no, they are not worse. 15,000 or so per year dying from criminal gun death homicides, is what % of our 320+ million population? Do you know how many slaves existed back in 1860?
The United States Census of 1860 was the eighth Census conducted in the United States starting June 1, 1860, and lasting five months. It determined the population of the United States to be 31,443,321, an increase of 35.4 percent over the 23,191,875 persons enumerated during the 1850 Census. The total population included 3,953,761 slaves, representing 12.6% of the total population.
This is by far a greater issue here in the US -
Alcohol-Related Deaths:
An estimated 88,0008 people (approximately 62,000 men and 26,000 women8) die from alcohol-related causes annually, making alcohol the third leading preventable cause of death in the United States. The first is tobacco, and the second is poor diet and physical inactivity.9
In 2014, alcohol-impaired driving fatalities accounted for 9,967 deaths (31 percent of overall driving fatalities).10
I am sure percentage wise, Australia is right there with the US with the issue of alcohol abuse. Maybe worse.
Yet we do not hear people in large numbers or the media/politicians yelling to ban alcoholic drinks.
A) They laugh until they need defended.
B) They shake their heads at us until they need our help defending them.
C) A lot of us here in the US, do not give a shit what other countries think when it comes to our right to keep and bear arms.
No desire to live any place else in the world. No desire to visit Australia or any other country actually. Very happy and content to live right here in the USA and enjoy my freedoms.
Last edited by Ghostpanther; 2018-02-27 at 01:57 PM.
I dont know how ppl can survive outside of the US. They live in constant fear getting shot by the criminals who are running around with guns! They can't defend themselves. Just take a look at japan, ppl getting killed, robbed at gunpoint. Schoolshootings everywhere. I wish they could have the right to arm themselves.
It's not the world, within your own border more and more people are reaching the conclusion that some weapons are too dangerous to be in civilian's hand.
Your own FEDEX company had issued that statement.
The younger generation overwhelmingly support a ban on AR-15, and increase gun control laws, especially regarding background check and mental illness.
The NRA is losing support from sponsor left and right.
Can't you see changes are coming?
- - - Updated - - -
nay, in japan, i expect katana and kamehameha.