Supreme Court overturns Handgun Ban

[Malacite]

Freaking unbelievable...

CNN: Supreme Court ‘Kills’ DC Handgun Ban, Slants Toward Gun Victim | NewsBusters.org

BBC NEWS | World | Americas | US court overturns DC handgun ban

US supreme court overturns Washington gun ban | World news | guardian.co.uk



When will you people learn...

[Feba]

Re: Supreme Court overturns Handgun Ban

like it or not, the law is unconstitutional. We need to get enough support to change the constitution to change it, not enact local laws. Personally, I don't mind that very much, considering that also keeps local officials from restricting free speech and other amendments.

[Jarre]

Re: Supreme Court overturns Handgun Ban

Would be interesting to see if murder rates go up due to this in DC. If it does then this will proove a point about the problem the US has.

[Mhurron]

Re: Supreme Court overturns Handgun Ban

Criminals use illegal weapons to begin with. The murder rate in DC didn't go down when they did this waste of taxpayers money anyway.

[Callisto]

Re: Supreme Court overturns Handgun Ban

Not like murder rates in DC could get a whole lot worse by normal human standards anyways, that's like saying "I wonder if the muder rates in Philly will go up?"

[Feba]

Re: Supreme Court overturns Handgun Ban

No, it's more like saying "hm. I wonder if Antarctica could get much colder."

[Caspian]

Re: Supreme Court overturns Handgun Ban

Criminals use illegal weapons to begin with. The murder rate in DC didn't go down when they did this waste of taxpayers money anyway.

precisely, the percentage of legally bought firearms that are used in violent crimes is ridiculously small. The law prevented law abiding citizens from owning handguns, not criminals from obtaining them.
Scalia had one of the greatest quotes ever today, too.

[Feba]

Re: Supreme Court overturns Handgun Ban

precisely, the percentage of legally bought firearms that are used in violent crimes is ridiculously small.

not really. And even if the percentage were small, the NUMBER would still be significant.

The problem is the AVAILABILITY of guns, regardless of legality. If it's hard to get a gun, but it's legal, then you'd have much less of a problem than if they're common but illegal. And enacting a local ban in the US is pointless-- there aren't (and shouldn't be) border checks between states, so it's insanely easy to acquire a gun legally and then move it to that location.

[Caspian]

Re: Supreme Court overturns Handgun Ban

Out of curiosity, what do you consider difficult? If the 5 day waiting period with background check is done properly, would you still not consider it to be difficult?
If not, what would you like to see done in regulations regarding firearm purchases?

[Feba]

Re: Supreme Court overturns Handgun Ban

Requiring an educational course and passing a test (both a written test with basic safety questions, and a test making sure you can actually functionally use, control, maintain, and etc. one. For example, going to a firing range and showing that you know the various functions and features of your weapon, show an ability to aim reasonably well, and act responsibly with it).

I mean, you require that much to be given a driver's license, considering they're extremely dangerous machines. Given that guns are exclusively designed to kill, I see no reason why they should be treated lighter than machines which happen to kill frequently.

[Caspian]

Re: Supreme Court overturns Handgun Ban

Requiring an educational course and passing a test (both a written test with basic safety questions, and a test making sure you can actually functionally use, control, maintain, and etc. one. For example, going to a firing range and showing that you know the various functions and features of your weapon, show an ability to aim reasonably well, and act responsibly with it).

I mean, you require that much to be given a driver's license, considering they're extremely dangerous machines. Given that guns are exclusively designed to kill, I see no reason why they should be treated lighter than machines which happen to kill frequently.

I can see that. Texas has a required hunter's safety course, but obviously thats just to obtain a hunting license, not to purchase the gun.

[Callisto]

Re: Supreme Court overturns Handgun Ban

That was actually a much better reply that I had expected Feba, well said.

















You're still a bastard.

[Neomage]

Re: Supreme Court overturns Handgun Ban

Criminals use illegal weapons to begin with. The murder rate in DC didn't go down when they did this waste of taxpayers money anyway.

Exactly. If we outlaw guns, only outlaws would have guns(Who said that?). Alternatively, if everyone had a gun, criminals would be a lot more afraid to pull one because they know that then they would get shot.

[Caspian]

Re: Supreme Court overturns Handgun Ban

More I think about it, Feba's idea is nearly identical to Texas' concealed handgun license requirements, would just mean applying it to gun sales, too.
I really don't think I'd be too opposed to it, I'm sure some would, but I'm the guy who thinks there should be a test in order for people to get to vote and copulate.

[Feba]

Re: Supreme Court overturns Handgun Ban

If we outlaw guns, only outlaws and police officers who have been professionally trained to deal with them would have guns

Fixed.

Alternatively, if everyone had a gun, criminals and those who fear them would start an arms race.

Fixed. Bullet proof vests aren't that hard to come by. Criminals have a pistol, you buy a rifle; criminal buys a vest and a semi-auto, what are you going to invest in for your safety, an RPG? Encouraging criminals to wear body armor, kill anyone around (before they would have the chance to kill the criminal), and use more powerful weapons != crime deterrent.

There's also the amount of gun injuries and deaths caused by people that simply do not know how to properly handle one and should not own one. Every time you've ever heard of one kid shooting another kid, for example. Those guns shouldn't have been left out where a kid could get them.

If you want to be safe from criminals, you'd be far better off investing in a Safe Room. Those can also serve alternate functions, such as storm and bomb shelters. It can also of course be simply used as a room (most common is probably a bathroom) when there is no emergency. But really, an alarm system (and sticker/sign, of course) is going to do more to keep you safe from criminals than a weapon. They don't know you have a weapon; and once they learn that you do it's far more likely to escalate the situation and cost you your life than save it.
______________________________

would just mean applying it to gun sales, too.

Well, not so much to gun sales as having a gun license which would be required by an arms dealer before they could legally sell you a weapon. It would actually probably significantly ease the process for anyone who intends to own more than one or two guns. Oh, and toss in a psyche test; at least require someone to sit down with a shrink for an hour and talk to them to make sure they aren't too likely to go batshit insane and do something to make national news.

but I'm the guy who thinks there should be a test in order for people to get to vote and copulate.

I'd agree, but only if it's on an "under a certain age" basis. There are some teenagers (and even kids) who are more ready to vote than many voting adults; same with sex; but requiring it for EVERYONE would be A- too easily exploitable (in the first case) and B- Impossible to constitutionally enforce (in the second case)