It also wouldn't be compulsory--only if you want citizenship.
Gun ownership. The argument is seemingly always over the ownership of guns. However, most of the gun crime is done with stolen guns bought out of the back of a truck or stolen during a burglary. When you obtain a gun that way, you are in possession of it without owning it.
You don't need to OWN a gun to commit a crime, and yet most of the controls proposed seem to have to do with restricting gun ownership.
Gun possession is the real issue, if you want to restrict gun-related crimes, but only the stupidest criminal would commit a crime using a gun bought legally where the records involved in the transaction (gun registration, credit card transaction records, surveillance cameras) would lead the authorities directly to him.
An excellent point Unseen.
Infringement on any right only leads to infringement of other rights. That said, exercising your rights brings responsibilities, as well.
I have the right to conceal carry without a permit in AZ. I have the shoulder holster and pistol from my time in the Marines. I'm an expert shot, and current with the laws. I still don't carry but, if I think it's needed. I'm glad I have the option.
@Xi Thank you for the backing up. Here is that video embed. Everyone should watch this.
*Edited to see the full video as the reply cut the video off*
I've said this for 20 years.
"You only need a lawyer for two reasons. If you're guilty, you need a lawyer. But, the number one reason for needing a lawyer is if you're innocent."
I am a little surprised to see this subject up for debate on this site but hey, a healthy debate is a healthy debate. As I have seen USA & UK comparisons I will use the statistics of both countries - as gun laws in each are probable polarised at opposite ends of the spectrum.
Being for or against gun control is I believe totally irrelevant, the statistics speak for themselves – which are as follows: (2010 figures ie latest available)
In the UK there were a total of 642 murders, of which 40 were attributed to firearms.In the US there were a total of 12,996 murders of which 8,775 attributed to firearms.
For brevity I have not included injuries or healthcare/insurance cost statistics, and even with population differences US = UK x 3.5 the differences are off the scale of comparison.
1) Of the 642 unlawful killings in the UK, a staggering 110 were due to female genital mutilation – a subject far more relevant to this Forum and one which I would like to see addressed.
2) The US statistics do not include California who withheld FBI Data citing state Freedom of Information laws
As a UK citizen I have no axe to grind on US gun laws, but for all the debate and some of the puerile arguments I have heard used on both sides ie ‘’guns don’t kill people – people kill people’’ (pathetic) and how nice the Swiss are, it all comes down to one very simple question, Which is:
Is any society today willing to silently bear witness to the slaughter of 8700+ of its own citizens, ie almost 3 x 9/11’s – Every Year?
If the answer in the US is “Yes”, then maintain the status quo
If the answer ‘’No’’ then for Fucks sake do something about it
As a bearer/user of arms for big chunks of my working life, I fully understand that there are certain weapons designed purely to kill and maim in the most efficient manner possible, mainly fully auto rifles or sub machine pistols which have no hunting or sport uses - May I suggest a simple law backed questionnaire pre purchase requirement of these weapons containing a single question “Do you need this weapon” and if the answer is yes – then the purchaser is automatically disqualified from ownership
Yes. FUCK YES! Once a population is disarmed, the population is subject to the whim's of criminals and the government. .004% of the population, most of whom are of the criminal element, no actual loss to society, meh. Over a million abortions are performed in the US to put loss of life into perspective.
(T)here are certain weapons designed purely to kill and maim in the most efficient manner possible, mainly fully auto rifles or sub machine pistols which have no hunting or sport uses...
And yet, very few US deaths are due to this sort of gun. Most deaths are due to simple pistols, and yet you, like so many anti-gun people seem obsessed with the weapons least used. Why?
Way more are killed by drunk drivers. Most homicides in America involve the use of a cheap handgun picked up in a back alley for 20 bucks. As Unseen pointed out, the problem is not gun ownership but some punk wielding a cheap handgun he bought for little to nothing from another punk.
The 2nd amendment is very important, and personally i think it does cover individual citizens. It's not the individual with a gun I'm worried about it's the military, police, and militias. Those people have no morals, they only have orders. As long as we as a society are still digging up psychopaths to hold authority over others, and reviling in the inherent sickness of the mob mentality, then individual gun ownership will remain important.
In Syria the military are quickly growing tired of killing their fellow citizens to keep Asad in power. Defection is on the rise. Being in the military does not necessitate the total loss of one's conscious.