Scotus rules 2nd amendment is an individual right

Nothing baffling about it. It is a violent society, which is why law abiding Americans want their arms. Of course, this violent obsession doesn't come by the gun, but by Hollywood's glorification of violence.

---

“I know where I am and who I am. I'm on the brink of disillusionment, on the eve of bitter sweet. I'm perpetually one step away from either collapse or rebirth. I am exactly where I need to be. Either way I go towards rebirth, for a total collapse often brings a rebirth." -Andrew Jaramillo

Each state has its own limitations. And even then, specific cities can have ordinances. For instance, concealed weapons permits are not allowed in Los Angeles (which really irks me, as a resident.Some states are more stringent, others not so stringent. Arizona has very lax gun laws. It is not uncommon to see someone walking down the street with a gun on their hip, whereas, in California gun laws are pretty strict. Of course not. Those are highly regulated, military devices I think a .50 caliber rifle is probably the most anyone is allowed, but again, it varies from state to state. And it's not like you can just walk around with it anywhere you damn well please. There are specific transport procedures you have to follow, and you cannot just shoot it wherever either.

---

“I know where I am and who I am. I'm on the brink of disillusionment, on the eve of bitter sweet. I'm perpetually one step away from either collapse or rebirth. I am exactly where I need to be. Either way I go towards rebirth, for a total collapse often brings a rebirth." -Andrew Jaramillo

Then you will at least see the sociological aspect, I take it. In Switzerland, one of the MOST non-violent nations on Earth, the Swiss have the third highest percentage of guns per capita on the planet. Have their rates of violence grown exponentially as a result? Certainly not. Yet somewhere like, say, your country, the violence is much higher. Yet the UK has very stringent gun laws. Why the disparity if guns are to blame? We should expect the exact opposite if there really was a correlation.In fact, Washington D.C. routinely has the most murders per capita within a US city, yet they also had a very strict ban on guns. Major cities like Phoenix, which is much more populated than D.C., enjoyed lower rates of homicide by handgun than D.C., yet Arizona is very lax on its gun laws.The point is that there is no conclusive reason to assume that gun bans stop people from being murdered, either by guns or murdered at all. If one thing can be said about humans is that if determined, they will find a way to enact their malice against another person. Look no further than prison to prove that point. On the basis of statistics. America is a very violent nation. I simply contend that it is not because of our cherished gun laws. The United States is violent because of its culture. South Africa is violent because of its culture. Switzerland is not because of its culture.Think of it this way: Criminals by definition are people who subvert the law. What good will a gun ban do when criminals don't respect the law? Will it stop them from getting a gun? No, it won't. If they are determined to get a gun, they will get one. However, by making gun laws very strict, it greatly impacts people who would otherwise utilize a gun properly by effectively disarming them against the person who does not play by the rules.And you know, even supposing the United States stopped allowing guns altogether, it is too ingrained within us at this point. There are too many guns to even account for. Even for registered guns, imagine having sold a gun that you purchased years ago, yet since your name comes up on the system. Imagine being required to lawfully turn over the weapon, but you really don't have it. You could be jailed for hiding weapons.And what makes anyone think that Americans would quietly turn over their arms to the government? It would never happen, and the government knows it! They wouldn't dare disarm us without expecting a full on revolution as the consequence to their shredding of our Constitutional right. I couldn't begin to quantify the precise reason when, invariably, there are probably many reasons. All I know for certain is that I meet a lot of people from around the world because of my job. Everyday I meet some one from another country. And depending upon their country of origin, I can generally tell how well my reception will be.Of all the countries that I deal with in my job, guess who gives me the biggest problems?Americans... hands down... disrespectful, scornful, uncooperative, unruly, etc. That certainly does not include ALL Americans, and it certainly doesn't mean that every one I meet from another country is full of joy. But whether it is politically correct or not, stereotypes don't invent themselves. And while it is wrong to assume the worst based on those stereotypes, I don't think it is wrong to recognize their existence either. There really are complex social issues at play. And I'm willing to bet that this is the greatest reason for violence.

---

“I know where I am and who I am. I'm on the brink of disillusionment, on the eve of bitter sweet. I'm perpetually one step away from either collapse or rebirth. I am exactly where I need to be. Either way I go towards rebirth, for a total collapse often brings a rebirth." -Andrew Jaramillo

Because the pretext of the 2nd Amendment is personal protection, not genocide. Well, that makes sense to me. I can appreciate that. But you wouldn't say it was necessarily wrong because of that, would you? There is no need for automatic weaponry, either to hunt or to protect oneself. It therefore is not legal. Incendiary weapons of any kind serve no purpose other than to kill many people. Its use is then reserved for the military. No, to all of these. Yes and no. You can own an AK-47 if you want, but you cannot have a function that would allow a military version to shoot fully automatic or even a three-round burst. In essence, it has to fire one round per trigger squeeze. To me, asking if bazooka's are legal is silly to me. It seems like common sense to me. But I understand that you are not familiar with these laws firsthand. There is gun control in the United States. Gun ownership, while a it is afforded by the Constitution, is more a privilege than it is a right -- at least that is how it is treated.If you have certain felonies, particularly violence-related felonies, you cannot legally own a gun. You lost your right. You can't purchase a weapon without a background check. You can't own a gun if you are deemed mentally ill in some states, mostly in direct connection with the Virginia Tech incident.As for your countrymen, many of them see the need for the inherent right. I think it is fantastic and hope they are allowed that right.

---

“I know where I am and who I am. I'm on the brink of disillusionment, on the eve of bitter sweet. I'm perpetually one step away from either collapse or rebirth. I am exactly where I need to be. Either way I go towards rebirth, for a total collapse often brings a rebirth." -Andrew Jaramillo

Actually you make my point even better. Violence has always been around, and presumably will always remain to some degree. Violence was here before guns, so that if you melted all the guns in the world, some one would figure out a way to kill their brother some how. I'm saying that glorifying violence perpetuates violence and makes it normative. But then that really kind of goes without saying.The point is that guns don't make killers, it makes them more sophisticated killers. Killers are bred.But now you've piqued my curiosity and I'd like to hear your input. Should all guns be outlawed in the United States?

---

“I know where I am and who I am. I'm on the brink of disillusionment, on the eve of bitter sweet. I'm perpetually one step away from either collapse or rebirth. I am exactly where I need to be. Either way I go towards rebirth, for a total collapse often brings a rebirth." -Andrew Jaramillo

My use of "Hollywood" extends to the entertainment industry as a whole. Video games, movies, television, etc could all fall within that category. I suppose it is a good case for asking whether the entertainment industry receives its inspiration from society, or if the entertainment industry seduces society to act a certain way.

quote:

---

:Should all guns be outlawed in the United States?

---

A yes or no answer would be a whole lot easier than me reading pages of posts. I will take it as a classic dodge and assume that, yes, you want the United States unarmed effective immediately. Edited by Nemesis Juggernaut, : No reason given.

---

“I know where I am and who I am. I'm on the brink of disillusionment, on the eve of bitter sweet. I'm perpetually one step away from either collapse or rebirth. I am exactly where I need to be. Either way I go towards rebirth, for a total collapse often brings a rebirth." -Andrew Jaramillo

While I would agree that Texans have a bad rap; they mostly are very generous and accommodating people, that still does nothing to detract from the ones that would kill you over even the most innocent glance.It's a pretty simple argument, really. Criminals, by definition, are people who either don't follow the law, or break them altogether. Quaint little laws won't dissuade them greatly if they sense they can get away with it. Bad guys don't play by the rules, which is partly what makes them bad in the first place. Bad guys get guns anyway, regardless. A ban only hurts law-abiding citizens.

---

“I know where I am and who I am. I'm on the brink of disillusionment, on the eve of bitter sweet. I'm perpetually one step away from either collapse or rebirth. I am exactly where I need to be. Either way I go towards rebirth, for a total collapse often brings a rebirth." -Andrew Jaramillo

Yes... This also worked well in Germany and the Soviet Union -- in the 1930's and 1940's. The only problem was, the bad guys were the government. Both Stalin and Hitler confiscated weapons, effectively making it impossible to defend themselves in the face of tyranny.When the Constitution was written, it was during a tumultuous time in its early history where it wanted its independence from England. Instead of fleeing the problems of the King, the King followed them and started declaring the nation was an extension of himself. Obviously, a revolution broke out. It became very necessary that the citizens be able to defend themselves, not only physically, but financially, and any other way one's freedoms would be protected.And as I've argued before, the Second Amendment is far too ingrained within the culture for the government to make the mistake of trying to have her citizens surrender their arms. They won't do it for the sole fact that a new revolution would ensue. That is how it is done now. Chemically marked ammunition would have to be molecularly different for each individual case of ammunition. That would be very difficult to do for each armed citizen in a laboratory. Plus, it would not mean that the person that was issued said chemically marked ammo necessarily pulled the trigger. It would be a good way to frame someone for murder.

---

“I know where I am and who I am. I'm on the brink of disillusionment, on the eve of bitter sweet. I'm perpetually one step away from either collapse or rebirth. I am exactly where I need to be. Either way I go towards rebirth, for a total collapse often brings a rebirth." -Andrew Jaramillo

Well, then I apologize if I jumped to any conclusions. You seemed as if you were arguing that no one needs a weapon to defend themselves in a major city. If I somehow misconstrued that, then I wholeheartedly apologize. Well said. That was what I was alluding to -- that society plays the biggest role in violence, not the guns or even the accessibility to them. Americans are often shrewd, arrogant, and in general, consumed by violence. As an American, I don't like to even admit these inequalities. But really they are apparent when you compare them with, as you did, the Swiss. Why precisely this is the case, I do not fully know. I suspect there are so many variables at play that to speculate would only detract from something else that invariably compounds the problem. I watched that movie, and the whole documentary seemed to have him explaining why the accessibility of guns perpetuated gun violence. Have a look-see. Now, of course I would agree that dumb asses exist. Just have a look at this pointless, and idiotic spectacle that only serves to perpetuate the stereotype. Forget the fact that it is a complete waste of ammunition. What's with lighting it on fire? That's just stupid. Well, I would be inclined to agree. Americans have owned guns since its inception. And while we had pockets of unmitigated violence -- Wild West, 20's era gangsters, 90's era gang violence, etc -- the history of gun ownership has been pretty tame. High schools used to have gun clubs, for chris'sakes. Could they do that now? Absolutely not. And that is because American society has changed. It has grown very callous, very dejected, very angry, very cynical, and very violent.

---

“I know where I am and who I am. I'm on the brink of disillusionment, on the eve of bitter sweet. I'm perpetually one step away from either collapse or rebirth. I am exactly where I need to be. Either way I go towards rebirth, for a total collapse often brings a rebirth." -Andrew Jaramillo

I know it's really, really hard to believe, but... I am actually not infallible. I know, I know... Twilight Zone kind of weird, right? But it's nonetheless true. Actually they don't. They used to be just as accessible in Canada, but it changed has slowly changed. Regardless, there still is a noticeable disparity in general attitudes. I don't think its past has anything to do with it. Americans seemed far more respectful and less violent in general, certainly more so than the extremely violent era of the 1990's. He certainly is good at making entertaining documentaries. I just happen to also think he caters to a very specific demographic. Compared to the 90's, violent crime in general has gone way down. Again, why?, I have no idea. It just serves as a testimony that, as you already stated, it is a very complex issue. There is no single reason why America is more violent than the Swiss. There are multiple reasons, and they each play a role in that. Well, when you have mobsters praying the rosary right before they give some poor soul a Colombian neck tie, you have to wonder whether or not their religion has more to do with cultural influence than it does with an actual well-thought-out acceptance of said religion.

---

“I know where I am and who I am. I'm on the brink of disillusionment, on the eve of bitter sweet. I'm perpetually one step away from either collapse or rebirth. I am exactly where I need to be. Either way I go towards rebirth, for a total collapse often brings a rebirth." -Andrew Jaramillo