Cyprus-Forum.com

[cyprusgrump]

No, the United States Doesn’t Lead the World in Mass Shootings

[Paphitis]

Thank you! Very informative. Just another example of FAKE NEWS and propaganda. It's amazing what people are willing to accept just because they hear it on the news over and over again ad nauseum.

I'm posting the YouTube found in the above link because I find it very informative.

I have long believed that Gun Ownership in the USA bears little resemblance to mass shootings. It's the illegal guns we need to worry about which is exactly what the NRA are saying.

Also, USA is ranked 62nd in mass shootings and apparently Norway, Finland, Switzerland and Russia have more mass shootings per capita then the USA does. another factor is this, the media in the USA is extremely prolific and liberal. A mass shooting in Russia for instance can go largely unreported and Western Media wouldn't care less and it cares even less so for any mass shooting in Africa for example but any incident in America would be jumped on by the local media and picked up by the overseas media as well.

[Lordo]

more bullshit, what illegal guns, it is perfectly legal to buy a sem-automatic weapon in america. whats even worseis that any gun controls that do apply, only apply to shops, not the gun salesmen who work from home and travel around to sell.

so it seemas trump has got it worked out that it is not the lack of gun control that is causing these mass shootings, it is violent games and websites that are causing it. apparently yhr gun does not pull its own trigger, a lunatic pulls the trigger and than stops there. why not continue with the though that the lunaitc who allows the said lunatic to buy the weapons is also guilty and even the real lunaticwho refers to mexicans and other immigrants ans rapists and drug pushers and murderers and refers to an invasion of their country by the immigrants is the actual instigator.

The fact that the killers in the last few days may or may not be nra members is not the issue. the issue is the inability of the government to be able to pass gun control laws to restrict weapons and to whom they can be sold. unfortunately for obama he did not have the control of the senate or the congress and doubly unfortunate he was not nasty enough in character to declare a national emeregency so as to carry it out.

what a shame the opporotunity was missed.

[Paphitis]

more bullshit, what illegal guns, it is perfectly legal to buy a sem-automatic weapon in america. whats even worseis that any gun controls that do apply, only apply to shops, not the gun salesmen who work from home and travel around to sell.

so it seemas trump has got it worked out that it is not the lack of gun control that is causing these mass shootings, it is violent games and websites that are causing it. apparently yhr gun does not pull its own trigger, a lunatic pulls the trigger and than stops there. why not continue with the though that the lunaitc who allows the said lunatic to buy the weapons is also guilty and even the real lunaticwho refers to mexicans and other immigrants ans rapists and drug pushers and murderers and refers to an invasion of their country by the immigrants is the actual instigator.

The fact that the killers in the last few days may or may not be nra members is not the issue. the issue is the inability of the government to be able to pass gun control laws to restrict weapons and to whom they can be sold. unfortunately for obama he did not have the control of the senate or the congress and doubly unfortunate he was not nasty enough in character to declare a national emeregency so as to carry it out.

what a shame the opporotunity was missed.

All guns in the USA must be registered at the time of purchase to a particular gun owner who has a license to possess those arms.

https://gun.laws.com/state-gun-laws/registering-guns

In some states, some rifles need not be registered but pistols and semi-automatics and above must be registered by the owner.

No POTUS has ever had the ability to change the US Constitution regarding Gun laws. The US Government is unable to unilaterally repeal or inhibit the Second Amendment.

The Second Amendment is a constitutional inclusion and recognition of a right that the US Supreme Court ruled pre-dates the Constitution (the case the gun control crowd intentionally and incompletely misquotes, United States v. Cruikshank, 1876*). As such, the right to arms is recognized as an inherent, innate right. As a part of the Constitution, for the Congress to unrecognize that right, the Second Amendment would have to be repealed. No simple legislation can do this. Congress writes laws based on the outlines and limitations in the Constitution, but cannot rewrite the Constitution itself except by a difficult process found in Article V of the Constitution:

“Article V

The Congress, whenever two thirds of both houses shall deem it necessary, shall propose amendments to this Constitution, or, on the application of the legislatures of two thirds of the several states, shall call a convention for proposing amendments, which, in either case, shall be valid to all intents and purposes, as part of this Constitution, when ratified by the legislatures of three fourths of the several states, or by conventions in three fourths thereof, as the one or the other mode of ratification may be proposed by the Congress; provided that no amendment which may be made prior to the year one thousand eight hundred and eight shall in any manner affect the first and fourth clauses in the ninth section of the first article**; and that no state, without its consent, shall be deprived of its equal suffrage in the Senate.”

What this means is that either 2/3 of all legislators in the House of Representatives and in the Senate must approve by cameral rules any proposed change to the Constitution, OR that 2/3 of the (currently) 50 states’ legislative bodies or a convention of them, any proposal to amend the Constitution. While the 2/3 majority approval to propose amending is not freakishly rare (11,623 have been proposed [senate.gov] ), only 33 such proposals actually made it through all the Congressional debates and votes to make it out of Congress to the states for ratification. There, any circulated amendment proposal faces an even bigger challenge, as per the Constitution 3/4 of the states must vote ‘Aye’ for the proposal to become an actual Amendment. Only 27 have been ratified, but the first ten, The Bill of Rights, were ratified before the end 1790. In the 226 years since then, only 17 of the 1,192 proposed amendments have made it all the way through proposal, debate, vote, distribution to the states, debate, vote, and ratification (1.4%). And two of those were about alcohol. All that was accomplished by the passage under pressure from the Temperance Movement (a vocal minority) of the 18th Amendment was the establishment of large numbers of illegal liquor stills, rum runners, bootleggers, moonshiners, organized crime, untold suffering from dangerous unsanitary liquor, and general lawlessness of a greater reach and proportion than the outlaw days of the Wild West.

The gun control crowd should be very careful what they wish for—if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. It’s not an adage. And there is simply no way a Prohibition era-type period of thuggery would be avoided. No way.

For the purposes of discussion, since the founding, only 1.4% of amendment proposals ever get added to the Constitution. So as you see, it is nearly impossible to get the Constitution changed, which was of course the Founders’ intent.

*Cruikshank is the case of which gun-grabbers like to say “the Supreme Court says the right to bear arms is not in the Second Amendment”, and indeed it does say that…but they conveniently, dishonestly, and shamelessly omit the entirety of the statement which is, quote, “The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second Amendments means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress, and has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the National Government.” (emphasis added)

So, as defined by Cruikshank, simple repeal of the Second Amendment still wouldn’t ban guns, but it would allow the Federal government in the form of Congress to thereafter legislate a ban. No amendment stating arms ownership was illegal would be required in the absence of the Second, which refuses the government that action.

**translated to modern English, the sentence between these two semicolons says ‘so long as no amendment is made to the Constitution before 1808 (the earliest date Congress could abolish slavery) that changes the language or meaning of Article I, Section 9, clauses 1 and 4 of the Constitution’.

There was a period of 20 years between ratification of the Constitution (21JUN1788) and the provision of Article 1, Section 9, clause 1’s maturation, meaning, Congress could abolish slavery (of course it could not do so then because all the Southern states blocked attempts to until after the Civil War). In that 20-year period, 8 new states joined the Union, but 4 of them were slave states, so slavery still couldn’t be abolished—because the US Constitution as it stood had to be ratified by new states as a condition of admission, and although not mentioned by name, slavery was the central issue of the Three-Fifths Compromise, and it was in the Constitution. It could not be legislated away, nor did Lincoln’s Emancipation Proclamation have constitutional authority. So the 8 new admissions had no effect on Article 1, Section 9, clauses 1 and 4 ( not 1 or 4), and thus slavery remained until the ratification of the 13th Amendment on 06DEC1865.

[Paphitis]

The reason why its so difficult is because its The Bill of Rights. This is where the civil rights of all US Citizens are enshrined in the Constitution.

Yes, it's the greatest democracy in the world. You got that right!

You have total freedom in the USA not some kind of watered down freedom or democracy.

Now I am not against tougher gun laws if that can be achieved without any direct impact on the Bill of Rights.

But I will call all of you the biggest f@#ked up hypocrites of all time just for being against the Mexican Border wall.

And for that reason alone, I fully support the positions of the NRA and the re-election of Trump as The POTUS.

[Lordo]

The reason why its so difficult is because its The Bill of Rights. This is where the civil rights of all US Citizens are enshrined in the Constitution.

Yes, it's the greatest democracy in the world. You got that right!

You have total freedom in the USA not some kind of watered down freedom or democracy.

Now I am not against tougher gun laws if that can be achieved without any direct impact on the Bill of Rights.

But I will call all of you the biggest f@#ked up hypocrites of all time just for being against the Mexican Border wall.

And for that reason alone, I fully support the positions of the NRA and the re-election of Trump as The POTUS.

how many times gavole.. it is not in the bill of rights it is an ammendment. the ammendmeent was passed to change the bill of rights so it clearly can be done even if it is in the bill of rights but an ammendment can certainly be ammended and even removed.

it is the only country on earth that allows mass population to posses weapons.

[Paphitis]

The reason why its so difficult is because its The Bill of Rights. This is where the civil rights of all US Citizens are enshrined in the Constitution.

Yes, it's the greatest democracy in the world. You got that right!

You have total freedom in the USA not some kind of watered down freedom or democracy.

Now I am not against tougher gun laws if that can be achieved without any direct impact on the Bill of Rights.

But I will call all of you the biggest f@#ked up hypocrites of all time just for being against the Mexican Border wall.

And for that reason alone, I fully support the positions of the NRA and the re-election of Trump as The POTUS.

how many times gavole.. it is not in the bill of rights it is an ammendment. the ammendmeent was passed to change the bill of rights so it clearly can be done even if it is in the bill of rights but an ammendment can certainly be ammended and even removed.

it is the only country on earth that allows mass population to posses weapons.

Read what I posted about Amendment V

Basically, it's impossible for the US Government to repeal the Second Amendment.So yeh, you are full of shit. The US is the only country in the world that has a Bill of Rights like that and I support this and changing one aspect for me is a dangerous slippery slope against the Civil Rights of individuals which the Americans are very protective of.

What this means is that either 2/3 of all legislators in the House of Representatives and in the Senate must approve by cameral rules any proposed change to the Constitution, OR that 2/3 of the (currently) 50 states’ legislative bodies or a convention of them, any proposal to amend the Constitution. While the 2/3 majority approval to propose amending is not freakishly rare (11,623 have been proposed [senate.gov] ), only 33 such proposals actually made it through all the Congressional debates and votes to make it out of Congress to the states for ratification. There, any circulated amendment proposal faces an even bigger challenge, as per the Constitution 3/4 of the states must vote ‘Aye’ for the proposal to become an actual Amendment. Only 27 have been ratified, but the first ten, The Bill of Rights, were ratified before the end 1790. In the 226 years since then, only 17 of the 1,192 proposed amendments have made it all the way through proposal, debate, vote, distribution to the states, debate, vote, and ratification (1.4%). And two of those were about alcohol. All that was accomplished by the passage under pressure from the Temperance Movement (a vocal minority) of the 18th Amendment was the establishment of large numbers of illegal liquor stills, rum runners, bootleggers, moonshiners, organized crime, untold suffering from dangerous unsanitary liquor, and general lawlessness of a greater reach and proportion than the outlaw days of the Wild West.

[Kikapu]

Unfortunately guns will always exist in the USA, because it is in the American culture and psyche to be armed, going back to the wild Wild West. There‘s no point in trying to ban guns as it won’t happen. Most American are law abiding citizens, as a such, they are allowed to have guns because the constitution says so in the 2nd Amendment, so that should there come to be a tyrannical governments in the US, it can be fought with self armed American militia groups.

All common sense approach to make gun ownership safer often is refused by the NRA, because the feeling is, once you give an inch, the government will try to take a mile. No government, no upper or lower house, governors et al will ever be able to take away guns from the people.

America is a violent Country on many levels, but not necessarily a violent society when it comes to the majority. Crime generally comes from poverty, hopelessness of prosperity , lack of education, broken family structure, street gangs with turf wars and so on. Crime will not stop even if all the guns were taken away. Of course the tourist do not see much crime, because their two weeks in the states does not bring them face to face with these problems, unless they go looking for them, in which case, they may well become a victim themselves.

[Lordo]

nobody is saying that crime will stop or even gun violence will stop if you ban guns completely. ilegal guns will always be avaialble. the point is very simple. if you banned guns and forced people to surrender them and those who do not will be sent to prison, lets see how many people have th eballs to face prison for their right.

with 359 million guns in circulation and i do not beleiev that everybody has a gun becasue those who have guns have multiple number of them, suggests that majority of us citizens do not have guns. the problem is not voting but the power nra has over mebers of both houses and the financial support they give them.

sometimes people have to sacrifice their own election with principle and continue in a principle position and sooner or later people will come around. talat did this in cyprus and eventually won and not only did he win he also turned the population to accept bbf

[cyprusgrump]

nobody is saying that crime will stop or even gun violence will stop if you ban guns completely. ilegal guns will always be avaialble. the point is very simple. if you banned guns and forced people to surrender them and those who do not will be sent to prison, lets see how many people have th eballs to face prison for their right.

with 359 million guns in circulation and i do not beleiev that everybody has a gun becasue those who have guns have multiple number of them, suggests that majority of us citizens do not have guns. the problem is not voting but the power nra has over mebers of both houses and the financial support they give them.

sometimes people have to sacrifice their own election with principle and continue in a principle position and sooner or later people will come around. talat did this in cyprus and eventually won and not only did he win he also turned the population to accept bbf

In the past 48hrs, the USA horrifically lost 34 people to mass shootings.

On average, across any 48hrs, we also lose…

500 to Medical errors
300 to the Flu
250 to Suicide
200 to Car Accidents
40 to Homicide via Handgun

So are you going to ban everything else too?