There's a famous saying that, "Those who fail to learn from the mistakes of the past are doomed to repeat them."


I can't recall the originator - but with recent events in America - and the resulting pathetic rhetoric about political behavior, ignoring the smoking gun/elephant in the room - can America ever shed its historical feudal right to bear arms? Does anyone else think its about time it did?


There really is no need for a civilian to bear arms in the modern USA and despite all the laws - and the impenetrably powerful gun loonie lobby - isn't it about time American politicians grew spines and decided that this really is enough.


A little girl, born on 9/11/2001 lost her most basic and precious right, life itself because another man had the right to carry a gun. Americans you have Megan's law - how about a law to remember this little girl and abandon your primitive right to hold a tool which serves no purpose than to take life.


I note the the people most pro guns are also the most right-wing, pro-Life and pro-God - and if that doesn't prove what an anachronism this law is, I don't know what does.

Views: 299

Replies to This Discussion

This is not a solvable problem in the US.  You will never get rid of guns in the us.  It's just too much of a cultural thing and there are damn too many of them to boot.  Just push for the restrictions you can get.

Yes, that's right. Because true atheist believers (!?) are socialists.

Pragmagtic, anyway.


The full memoryplex hypothesis looks at this sort of effect. Shannon is quite right - some of us just think it's OK to carry a loaded gun because no one has ever effectively challenged that idea; even though the necessity passed into memory a century or more ago.

Another observation I have made is that the more we try to prove someone wrong, the more they believe in their own argument (even if they can see the errors in it). Dale Carnegie mentions the same thing in How to Win Friends...

"...some of us just think it's OK to carry a loaded gun because no one has ever effectively challenged that idea; even though the necessity passed into memory a century or more ago."

This is where you're wrong, Marc. The necessity is still alive and well. Have you not noticed that bad guys don't follow your laws? It's all well and good to call the police after a crime has been committed, but if you're ever mugged, you just try flipping open your cell to call the police...see how that works for you.

"... the more we try to prove someone wrong, the more they believe in their own argument..."

I'm eagerly awaiting your proof.

Proof? Read the OP, Bobb - carefully. The very question is rhetorical.

If that does not convince you consider this - the 2nd amendment was not intended for today's world. Bad guys carry guns in most parts of the 1st world; as do the police and military. However, America is unique I believe, in supporting basic rights to firearms for everyone: with few restraints or checks.

The UK has more people per sq. mile of land than America by a huge amount; and the bad guys carry guns (knives and other shit). Yet our murder rate -particularly where firearms are concerned- is a tiny fraction of the US. The same is, I believe, true of all of continental Europe.

Guns are not the problem - the 2nd Amendment is; although the problem itself runs deeper than that, the 2nd is what created it in the first place.

John D, pull your head out yer ass. I ain't no stinking Libertarian, although I do favor free markets and liberty, I am an anarchist. (I think people on this list don't like labels for some reason...but you can stick 'em all over my once hot body. Just make sure you use the right ones, k?)
Yaaaaaayyy!  Stickers!!!
Ah. You're in UK. That explains the fundamental reason you can't understand the burning desire American's have to breathe free; You prefer a monarch. I get you now.

But I'll continue our pointless debate anyway for the rest of us.
Your "proof" is "A little girl, born on 9/11/2001 lost her most basic and precious right, life itself because another man had the right to carry a gun."?
Please offer some real proof, k? There's a who internet of data out there. I'm sure you can find your proof that humans are not born with an inalienable right to defend themselves against aggressors.

Oh and hey, while your looking for your data, have a gander at this:

I hope you'll tell me please which of the 23 countries with a higher per capita murder rate than the U.S. has a Constitution with a stated right to keep & bear arms.
As to the debate between murder by bullet or murder by edged weapon, I've been both cut and shot and truthfully, the bullet hurt a lot less. If I had my druthers, I'd live forever young and beautiful. Since that was never an option anyway, I'd prefer to go in my sleep. Or be shot. Knife wounds really hurt badly.

Bobb, that chart, like your argument, is frankly asinine - as is the reference to a monarch. Who said I prefered a monarch? America is a young democracy - and a burgeoning theocracy - which is why the muslim countries hate her so much. Ad hominem attacks (even by proxy) only go to demonstrate my point further.


As for your chart - I very specifically stated FIRST world countries - not second or third world. It's quite spectacular how one can distort a fact with a carefully chosen statistic. I also note that of those countries listed, the older democracies have the lowest murder rates (by and large).


America is violent and many of its people are arrogant, aggressive and introspective with little care or regard to the damage they are causing to the planet they share. Fortunately, those people are in the minority among educated atheists.


The 2nd amendment is an anachronism: its time has passed but like any vestigial organ on any given creature, it is bygone memory of an outmoded piece of evolutionary history.


You want to play with statistics? Here:


or this perhaps?


Where is America now - given that these charts is more relevant to the discussion? And where do you think most of Columbia's illegal arms originate from?


I don't really care if you have a violent past. I care that your country cannot see beyond its own boundary. I care that your short-sighted right to carry a weapon allows a crazy person to take a life: and that is somehow OK.


Life is pointless but that does not give anyone the right to deny the life of another human being at will: which is what happened to that little girl. America needs to wake up and smell the coffee before it implodes under its own hubris.

John, we still do have a Queen (and an idiot son destined to follow!) but although we're legally a monarchy, our daily-stuff is left entirely to parliament.

Sorry John, just the way it read left you open for some smart-assed response. I appreciate there are a lot of folks like you out there - shame there is so much water between us!


Oh... and let's not forget Prince Chuck - he talks to plants and uses homeopaths you know! :-(

Wisdom comes with two things: age and experience.

Chuck has age, certainly, but his experience is rather limited and very coloured. So long as the Parliament can keep him in check, we'll maintain the status quo quite successfully.

We should really forgive Bobb his ignorance (which is all it is) clearly his experiences have led him down this path - and he is probably representative of a large section of your country.




Update Your Membership :




Nexus on Social Media:


© 2018   Atheist Nexus. All rights reserved. Admin: Richard Haynes.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service