Critics Tell GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert What To Do With Her ‘Prayers’ After Boulder Shooting | HuffPost UK


Yet another shooting and loss of life in America, when will it stop?

The gun lobby feel it will when everyone carries a gun, but was that not the case before ‘so called’ Law and Order was established in America. This was referred to the ‘Wild West‘, when virtually everyone carried a gun.

WShen it did not stop gun killings then and it will not know. Since then the range of firearms has increased considerably, as had the fire power of these weapons, for now instead of the six shot gun, the weapon of favour is the AR-15 semiautomatic rifle, a weapon with so much more fire power as the old six shot guns, a weapon of ultimate destruction, which is put forward as a weapon of defence. With a weapon of that nature there is no defence, just killings.

The only sure way of bringing the killings down is for very tight gun control, a ban on personal use of semiautomatic rifles and a removal of ‘open carry’ for the general population, this is what we do in the UK and our gun killings are no where the numbers of in America.

The referred defence is the, The Second Amendment, one of the ten amendments to the Constitution comprising the Bill of Rights, states: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”.

Which means ‘The right to keep and bear arms (often referred to as the right to bear arms) is a right for people to possess weapons (arms) for their own defense.’.

It was adopted on 15 December 1791, this is well before the development of semiautomatic rifles and should therefore only relate to the firearms of that time and not of the current time.

For today , in certain areas, is back to pre 1791, they have learnt nothing over the years, so the killings go and on.

Where is the Human right to Life in America, for it appears to not exist.

Source: Critics Tell GOP Rep. Lauren Boebert What To Do With Her ‘Prayers’ After Boulder Shooting | HuffPost UK

Print-your-own gun debate ignores how the US government long provided and regulated firearms : The Conversation


The current debate over a Texas company’s “right” to allow anyone to download blueprints to its 3D-printed guns is following the same well-trodden terrain as every firearms fight for the past few decades: differing interpretations of the Second Amendment.

Cody Wilson, the founder of Defense Distributed and the creator of the first working plastic gun in 2013, argues it’s about every American’s right to bear arms. “I believe that I am championing the Second Amendment in the 21st century,” he told “CBS This Morning.”

On the other side are the federal judge who is temporarily blocking the release of the blueprints, the eight state attorneys general who sued Wilson’s company from putting the designs online and gun control advocates across the country who want the government to do more to regulate firearms.

This misses the point. Government regulation and the gun industry are not natural enemies. They have a historical synergy that long predates Supreme Court rulings on the constitutionality of gun control legislation. It was not until 1886 that the Supreme Court even addressed the federal government’s ability to regulate gun ownership. For most of the nation’s first century, the government perceived its constitutional duty as providing guns – not protecting an open-ended “right to bear arms.”

My research on the history of the government’s intervention in the arms industry suggests a return to its role as guarantor of the gun trade would allow it to do more to reduce gun violence and mass shootings without trampling on the Second Amendment.

 

Source: Print-your-own gun debate ignores how the US government long provided and regulated firearms : The Conversation

Reality Check: The True Meaning of the Second Amendment


It may be the most controversial right we have as U.S. citizens: the right to keep and bear arms. The root of that controversy is in the often misunderstood intention of the Second Amendment. So what is it really about? This is a Reality Check you won’t get anywhere else.

 

Source: Reality Check: The True Meaning of the Second Amendment

5 types of gun laws that the Founding Fathers supported : Business Insider UK


The Second Amendment is one of the most frequently cited provisions in the American Constitution, but also one of the most poorly understood.

The 27 words that constitute the Second Amendment seem to baffle modern Americans on both the left and right.

Ironically, those on both ends of our contemporary political spectrum cast the Second Amendment as a barrier to robust gun regulation. Gun rights supporters – mostly, but not exclusively, on the right – seem to believe that the Second Amendment prohibits many forms of gun regulation. On the left, frustration with the lack of progress on modern gun control leads to periodic calls for the amendment’s repeal.

Both of these beliefs ignore an irrefutable historical truth. The framers and adopters of the Second Amendment were generally ardent supporters of the idea of well-regulated liberty. Without strong governments and effective laws, they believed, liberty inevitably degenerated into licentiousness and eventually anarchy. Diligent students of history, particularly Roman history, the Federalists who wrote the Constitution realized that tyranny more often resulted from anarchy, not strong government.

I have been researching and writing about the history of gun regulation and the Second Amendment for the past two decades. When I began this research, most people assumed that regulation was a relatively recent phenomenon, something associated with the rise of big government in the modern era. Actually, while the founding generation certainly esteemed the idea of an armed population, they were also ardent supporters of gun regulations.

Consider these five categories of gun laws that the Founders endorsed.

 

 

Source: 5 types of gun laws that the Founding Fathers supported : Business Insider UK