Hot Topics

Another mad gunslingin' shooting in the USA

  Quickbeam 08:14 03 Dec 2015
Locked

I hear...

God bless America.

  Forum Editor 08:33 03 Dec 2015

From the BBC website:

**"Police have identified Syed Rizwan Farook, a 28-year-old US-born male, and Tashfeen Malik, a 27-year-old woman, as the two dead suspects. The FBI said it was not ruling out the possibility of terrorism but the situation was still being investigated."**

Reading the full account, I didn't get the feeling it was a terrorist-related incident, but you never know.

  spuds 10:35 03 Dec 2015

"The Inland Regional Center, where the shooting took place, provides services for people with developmental disabilities, but the shooting appeared to be unrelated to its clients."

Would seem to suggest that there was other motives for this attack.

  john bunyan 12:55 03 Dec 2015

This type of event is so regularly encountered in the USA, it has (however hard this sounds) become routine. We have debated this before, but I suspect the NRA answer would be that "people with developmental disabilities" should be armed to protect themselves, as they have done for schoolteachers. This will go on, and on, I am afraid.

  Forum Editor 13:11 03 Dec 2015

"star wars storm-trooper stylee kevlar workwear,"

In fairness, if my job entailed facing a deranged gunman who had just shot 14 people dead I would want all the Kevlar I could get.

  Quickbeam 13:24 03 Dec 2015

Apparently it was after an argument at the office Christmas party.

Peace on earth and goodwill to all.

Do I sound cynical...?

  spuds 14:09 03 Dec 2015

"In fairness, if my job entailed facing a deranged gunman who had just shot 14 people dead I would want all the Kevlar I could get."

Here's one typical example, and there are many more like it, possibly on a regular basis! click here

  BT 08:17 04 Dec 2015

..the right to bear arms as part of a properly constituted militia..

Exactly! The 'Right to Bear Arms' was never intended to allow individuals to carry guns on an individual basis. There is a vast amount of opinion available as to the meaning of the Second Amendment and the great majority of it comes from those who perceive it to mean that it gives individuals the 'Right' to carry guns for 'Personal Protection'.

  Forum Editor 08:37 04 Dec 2015

never mind about the finer points of the second amendment - the US Supreme Court has ruled that most Americans have a constitutional right to own guns for the purpose of self-defense or certain legal activities, such as hunting or target practice.

The Supreme Court ruling included a statement that that the original reference to militia was simply an explanation of why Congress ratified the amendment. It wasn't relevant to the current situation.

I think we can take it that as far as current American law is concerned, most ordinary citizens have the right to own guns.

Taking away that right would, in the eyes of the gun-owning population be unthinkable. It would be a little like to telling the population of this country that eating fish and chips and drinking a pint of bitter was going to be made illegal. It would be perceived as a direct attack on a basic American cultural ingredient.

Nobody seriously believes that ordinary Americans will ever be called upon to defend their homes against an invading enemy, but that's not the point here. These people are steeped in frontier-style history, and it's difficult for us to understand. Eventually, the right to own guns will disappear but anyone who thinks it will be soon or easy is very wide of the mark.

The way it will be done is in dribs and drabs. Bit by bit the gun laws will be tightened and children will be educated until eventually the citizens of America will stop themselves from becoming gun owners.

  spuds 10:23 04 Dec 2015

"who perceive it to mean that it gives individuals the 'Right' to carry guns for 'Personal Protection'."

Off subject perhaps, but the above just doesn't apply to America. I have worked in countries that the same rule applies. In fact, some of those countries I would have even was allowed to apply to carry and use a firearm for self protection.

Here in the UK, there were many people who were allowed to hold firearms, including those obtained from a Littlewoods/Vernons shopping catalogue. The laws changed after Hungerford and similar incidents, but this didn't prevent some firearms being retained, and the actual authorities know very little about the firearms in circulation, ever for personal protection or possible criminal activities.

Like I said, this as nothing to do with the introduction of this post by Quickbeam, but thought it might be worth adding!.

  spuds 10:26 04 Dec 2015

Whoops - I would have even was allowed to apply to carry and use a firearm for self protection.

Should have been "I would have even 'been, and actually' was allowed to apply to carry and use a firearm for self protection.

This thread is now locked and can not be replied to.

Elsewhere on IDG sites

How to make yourself look better on a webcam

Doraemon postage stamps? Yes please!

Users report serious problems with macOS Catalina 10.15.4

Les clés Windows pas chères fonctionnent-elles ?