WI Britain had the same gun laws as the US?

MerryPrankster

67th Tigers said:
He's since released a new edition, that corrects the data in accordance with the findings. His main thesis, America was not a well armed nation until the late 19th century, remains unchallenged.
Click to expand...

There's more.

http://www.reason.com/news/show/28713.html
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michael_A._Bellesiles
http://www.leftwatch.com/archives/years/2002/000111.html

However, in interest of fairness, I will post one of his rebuttals

http://www.oah.org/pubs/nl/2001nov/bellesiles.html

In any event, you cannot simply blame the NRA for the fact that his work has serious problems.
 

MerryPrankster

67th Tigers said:
The level of force used against Bellesiles is amazing. The anti-Bellesiles sites keep churning out the same old accusations, even after they've been successfully rebutted.

http://www.thenation.com/doc/20021104/wiener

Basically, Bellesiles' work stands, but he's paid a hefty price for publishing it.
Click to expand...

If the Second Amendment was not intended to protect individual gun ownership, why did many of the Founders write about the need of the general public to own guns to deter tyrannical government?

And what force has been used against Bellesiles? Has anyone attacked him physically?
 

MerryPrankster

Faeelin said:
Because different founders believed different things?
Click to expand...

Possible. However, if Bellesiles' theory that the 2nd Amendment was meant to be sure that an ill-armed public had access to guns in the event of an emergency, how come we don't have "policy statements" of any Founders re: that purposes?
 

Dave Howery

I think the 'intent of the founders' argument about the militia and all that loses sight of the conditions of the time that the Constitution was written.... basically, the US had a tiny standing army, and in most of our early wars, militia volunteers filled out the ranks. The founders likely just didn't foresee the future, where we would have a large standing army of permanent soldiers and not rely on militia anymore. Thus, their goal was to make sure that all citizens could own firearms when it became necessary to call up the militia. That's always seemed to be their intention to me....
 
Fletch

Fletch

Being honest, I get the impression that most Brits(myself included) find guns distastful, and see no need for them, and at the same time find anyone who actually wants to own one without a set need, slightly strange, and possibly not right in the head.

The one thing that puzzles me is that we went into Iraq supposedly to remove Saddam Hussains weapons of mass destruction, was he not exhibiting Iraqs right to bear arms?

The answer I would expect is that he was slightly deranged. Well due to a loophole in US law, firearms can be bought legally with no checks whatsoever at a fair. Any nutter can buy a gun. Whats more Congress voted AGAINST closing the loophole a while back.....:rolleyes:

If Britain had the same gun laws as the United States I would be afraid for the future. There is a correlation between gun crime and gun ownership.(going by a previous thread I expect figures from state levels to come my way, leaving out the fact that someone just has to drive from one state to another with stricter laws to commit a crime, the only way it would work would be nationally)

Watch. If there is a reccesion in the United States, gun crime will go up. If an economic downturn happened here, I have no desire to see the same thing happening.
 

Dave Howery

actually, if the UK had the same gun laws as the USA, all Brits would have the right to own them, but it would be up to each province (state? whatever) to set the controls on them.... the US doesn't have one overriding set of laws on firearms...
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top
Top