10-21-2024, 09:40 AM
With some caution, I chime in to this conversation (of which I may not rightly be considered a part.)
Your opinion and words are no less valid than anyone else's here.
I would labor to pay little mind to characterizations in politi-speak, as such they hardly ever reflect the reality of a person's nationality.
I do understand that American Constitutional rights are literally 'alien' to most of the world's population. However, the liberty to scrutinize and debate their meaning applies to anyone, including British citizens. But I remind you, and everyone else, that the British outlook on American gun policy is mostly more common with the rest of the world, and Americans often find themselves characterized as "gun-toting lunatics", "crazy about their "so-called" rights"...
Along with that reminder I must add that this IS America these Americans are talking about. Your society (as well as many others) don't ken to the rationale which led to the 2nd Amendment, and as long as that works for your respective countries, that's fine by me (and likely many, if not most, Americans.)
That we concern ourselves with self-sufficiency in defense of our property and persons is (or must be) alien to you as well.
That we believe that the moment our "government" asserts we cannot do so, they are crossing a line... in this case codified in the Constitution... namely, that such assertions can never be given by a government that has the "authority" to oppress you.
In doing so, they will have ceased to be "of the people," opting for actively managing us like children, or cattle.
Besides, no one can say that guns "kill" unless they tacitly maintain that guns "do" things on their own.
Most every non-violent fatality or injury is an accident...
Every violent gun crime is the work of a person.
All I can offer is that even in your country, (which I love, by the way) that grants no acknowledgement to a "right to bear arms" as in the US, the only manifest difference it makes is that violent crimes take a different form... removing the weapon does not seem to stop violent crime, nor does it diminish its severity in terms of human pain.
The gun argument has no resolution, unless we can utterly lay down our guard and "trust" the government to protect us as we face harm.
They haven't demonstrated that capacity to us in over 200 years.
Your opinion and words are no less valid than anyone else's here.
I would labor to pay little mind to characterizations in politi-speak, as such they hardly ever reflect the reality of a person's nationality.
I do understand that American Constitutional rights are literally 'alien' to most of the world's population. However, the liberty to scrutinize and debate their meaning applies to anyone, including British citizens. But I remind you, and everyone else, that the British outlook on American gun policy is mostly more common with the rest of the world, and Americans often find themselves characterized as "gun-toting lunatics", "crazy about their "so-called" rights"...
Along with that reminder I must add that this IS America these Americans are talking about. Your society (as well as many others) don't ken to the rationale which led to the 2nd Amendment, and as long as that works for your respective countries, that's fine by me (and likely many, if not most, Americans.)
That we concern ourselves with self-sufficiency in defense of our property and persons is (or must be) alien to you as well.
That we believe that the moment our "government" asserts we cannot do so, they are crossing a line... in this case codified in the Constitution... namely, that such assertions can never be given by a government that has the "authority" to oppress you.
In doing so, they will have ceased to be "of the people," opting for actively managing us like children, or cattle.
Besides, no one can say that guns "kill" unless they tacitly maintain that guns "do" things on their own.
Most every non-violent fatality or injury is an accident...
Every violent gun crime is the work of a person.
All I can offer is that even in your country, (which I love, by the way) that grants no acknowledgement to a "right to bear arms" as in the US, the only manifest difference it makes is that violent crimes take a different form... removing the weapon does not seem to stop violent crime, nor does it diminish its severity in terms of human pain.
The gun argument has no resolution, unless we can utterly lay down our guard and "trust" the government to protect us as we face harm.
They haven't demonstrated that capacity to us in over 200 years.
