Tag Archives: Gun Control

living in peace

We all want to live in peace having the safety and freedom we deserve because anything less is not life but misery and slavery.

We do not choose misery or slavery as a way of life, not under any circumstances because we know that there is no future in it.

Why then do we succumb to con-artists and slick sales of stuff we don’t need or want?  Who has not met the persistent insurance sales person or the opportunity of a life-time holiday plan or time-share scheme?

gun control

Why then do we succumb to bogus promises of peace and safety by con-artists claiming that if we comply with the Firearms Control Act we will be safe and can live in peace?  Why do we believe the exact same people who have made no effort to help those deprived of their safety,  security and firearms, 700,000 of them.  If they did not help those who needed help why is their bad example and useless advice now seen as having any use or value?

It is quite obvious that the firearms control act was not introduced to further firearms ownership.  This is made quite clear by the preamble which clearly states it is intended to drastically reduce firearm ownership.  There is no ambiguity, no mistake and 10 years later this act has make its promoters proud of the results.
50% of firearm owners have by police estimates been removed.  A success that would not have been possible without the help, aid and collaboration of the organisations which had as a first mandate the duty to protect all firearm owners rights.
SAGA(South African Gun owners Association) so embarrassed by this fact has removed the words “protecting your rights” from its advertising and now claims it is a gun safety organisation.  Instead of apologising for the unforgivable delinquency of collecting membership fees under false pretences SAGA boasts of what it has done to collaborate with police and repair and improve a hardly-functional, non implementable millstone around police necks.
1000 police members do nothing but shuffle gun control paperwork each day in a country with an astronomical crime and murder rate.  All SAGA wants is more money spent, more man-hours and more staff to make firearm owners unhappy about delays and arbitrary decisions happy.  Oppressive unjustified gun control laws are embraced, accepted as valid and must be complied with and the only problem SAGA has is administrative delays and bad decisions.

The questions all good citizens should ask is where does it end?  What is the purpose of this act?  Should we become elitists sacrificing and trampling over all others in the belief we will survive because we collaborated and agreed with this law and sacrificed all who opposed?  Where has appeasement and collaboration with oppression and injustice worked to gain anything but scorn, contempt and loss?

When they come for the elitists guns and our safety, security and peace there will be nobody left who will or want to help elitists, cowards and collaborators who have sacrificed all.  Most certainly not from those they have sacrificed, turning their back on others need guarantees that. If you are willing to sacrifice others why would they or anyone else what to help such a person?  Would you help such a person if you were in their place?

Our lives, safety, freedom and future come at a cost.  If we would enjoy them then we have to value and protect those rights from all incursions. We have to take back what we have foolishly given away and make sure we are never again tempted to fall prey to con-artists and slick sales talk

Arguments for Gun Control and Firearms

Several federal laws have being enacted to promote the regulation of firearms and ammunitions since 1934. Congress is still debating on the efficacy and the constitutionality of these federal laws; this has raised several arguments for gun control and against gun control.

Many a time, crime and morality statistics are used when it comes to dealing with the debates on arguments for gun control. For instance the number of murders committed per year, with a gun, by people within the age range of 14-24 years, increased at a rate of 173% from the year 1985 to the year 1993 and later, it went down by around 47% from the year 1993 to the year 1999.

One of the common arguments for gun control is that it helps to reduce the ability of criminals, juveniles, kidnappers, bandits etc to own or posses a gun, firearms and ammunition. These advocates for gun control argue that the availability of guns can be successfully reduced only by strict federal measures. Some also argue that there should be a registration of all guns and firearms and also the owners.

The two most important federal enactments supporting the arguments for gun control are the Gun Control Act of 1968 and the National Firearms Act of 1934. the 1968 Act prohibits or forbids the inter state sales of guns and mail order sales, it also limits access to new guns, firearms and ammunition weapons and also established licensing requirement and penalties for manufactures, dealers and importers, but the Brady Handgun Prevention Act of 1993 is the law in support of the possession of guns and firearms for the purpose of self defense but only within the environment of the house.

About 30 percent of a typical American household own a gun, this most certainly increases the rate of homicides and suicides in the society. It is not only having a maniac randomly shooting people that is a threat; the fact that there is a gun in a household is also a threat a family member can use it to perpetrate one crime or the other, which is why a lot of people are in support of the implementation of strict federal measures of gun control with penalties if anyone goes against the law. Federal government should insist and ensure that citizens comply with and adhere to those gun control laws, to reduce the rate of gun related deaths and make the society safe for citizens.

Evaluating the Arguments about Gun Control

If we talk in general terms, then gun control is the effort made by governing bodies or state authoritarians to restrict or keep a check on the production, manufacturing, sale, purchase and usage of arms and ammunitions to ensure law and order and safety of the people. This is one issue in American politics which has always been debated on arguments about gun control, and always has been in the lime light.

Previously, possessing a gun use to be a part of American heritage reflecting their culture and also became style statement for the Americans. Their inclination with this culture reflected in their movies, television, music and various other creative forms such as art. Many films were based upon the theme of the so called ‘gun culture’. A good number of people in the US have seen the destruction and been victims of the crimes that happened by the abuse of fire-arms. Hence, they have been supporting the laws corresponding to the arguments about gun control and have been insisting the government to enforce them more strictly to lessen the chances of gun going into the hands of wrong people or children or young adults, so that the innocent people do not have to bear the brunt of fire-arms. Another important one of the arguments about gun control is that it will reduce the number of suicides.

On the contrary, there is a segment of population that does not believe in Government imposing laws over acquisition of gun. What they believe is that these rules will make an impact on the good citizens of the country who abide by law, but will not make any difference or exert pressure on the criminals.

No one should be de barred from owning arms for their self defense which is a constitutional right of the citizens .The crux of the story is, the legislations are not going to lessen the crime rate in any way. They also justify themselves by giving a counter arguments about gun control. Their own safety comes at stake when the laws prohibit themselves to own a gun. In their opinion, this will increase the rate of crime as guns will not be available and people will be inclined to indulge in illegal practices like smuggling or importing arms through illegitimate means. However, the enactment of these legislations depends on the political party in power, their affiliations, their collective ideas, standards of morality and experiences and sometimes for personal interest.

Gun Control Legislation- How people are embracing them

In the general terminology, ‘gun control‘ means the efforts of the government or the authoritarian body to keep a check on the selling-purchasing and using of the guns by the citizens within their jurisdiction area. The gun control legislation in one area is usually different from other. They encompass the sale, purchase, ownership, usage and the distribution. The examples of such laws are the Gun Control act which was passed in the year 1968 and National Firearms Act passed in 1934.

gun control legislation

A man named Richard Hofstadter had introduced a term ‘gun culture’ inAmerica, seeing the nation’s interest and inclination for fire-arms. To own a gun for self defense used to be a part of American traditions. This is still followed as a tenet in some parts, especially in the southern and western regions. It became a style statement among the people and its popularity made it films, music, television, museums etc. Hunting, an eminent sport in the US, also realizes the importance of gun.

Gun politics in the US has been in the lime light as it was one of the most controversial issues in the political history of America. For the past many years, the power holders in US have been debating over devising the gun control legislation availability of the fire arms and means to restrict them. This is the government’s duty to check the crime, maintain law and order and ensuring the safety and well being of its citizens.

The honorable Supreme Court of the USestablished the second amendments which protect the right of the individual to poses an ammunition for the purpose of self defense against foreign enemies, but it is a must to re affirm to use it within the boundaries of gun control legislation. The repeated rounds of polling stated revealed that a portion of the people believe that the laws give them the right to own a gun for their own protection, while the others wanted the laws at present to be more stringent and strict, which can avert the possible abuse of fire-arms. Not even half of the population supports the fact that the gun control legislation is effective enough to reduce violence in US. In the year 2k9, a significant percentage of people had voted to completely ban the use of firearms in the country. If the statistical facts are to be believed, then US tops the list of nations where people because of crimes with firearms.

Win or lose it’s a choice

Never in the history of firearm ownership have firearm organisations won a sustained victory over gun control.  There is no country in the world that has less strict firearm laws than it did fifty years ago.

The future of firearm ownership deserves a bit more than that from firearm organisations who have nothing of value to show anyone for their effort.

gun

Not once have firearm organisations ever seen a need to examine their failure or bothered to try not to repeat the reasons and mistakes why they fail.  Firearm organisations have absolutely no idea of why they fail.

Firearm organisations polarise and split firearm owners into two groups and the divide and rule principle applies.  As long as these two groups are willing to fight each other nothing else will be achieved.  Firearm organisations pretend they are doing something worthwhile but instead they send in the lawyers to do their fighting for them.  When the lawyers lose it is falsely claimed by organisations that they did the best they can and lost, there is nothing anyone can do, accept this law, you can still own guns….

The two groups are exact opposites, one group is firmly opposed to gun control.  The other accepts gun control in some form or the other, at some level which is undefined and unknown not even to themselves.

One group has no hesitation in rejecting gun control that cannot be justified.  The other wants to discuss ways of accepting controls or what and how much they think they can accept, this time.

There can be no co-operation between these two groups, they are opposites, they will fight to the end.  In principle you have objection and resistance vs collaboration and submission.

The sad part is that firearm organisations accept gun control‘s view.  Urging firearm owners to be “reasonable”, give up fighting claiming those who object will destroy any hope of victory and must comply with the demands of unjustified gun control laws.  That fighting and objection gives firearm owners a bad name and and will destroy any hope we have of gaining governments approval or recognition.  Firearm owners are told it is useless to fight, that it is impossible to win and that nothing can be done by anyone. Just accept that it is hopeless and accept what government hands out.

The result of this acceptance is a total demoralisation of all firearm owners and the total destruction of any hope of ever gaining any real victory for firearm ownership.  An incredibly stupid and self defeating strategy that removes all opposition and hope that firearm owners once had.  No faith can or will ever be placed in cowardice and a deliberate choice to appease injustice and beg for mercy.

It takes brave people to stand up to injustice and cowards prefer to run and hide but leaders have no excuse.

What is gun control debate?

The battle between personal freedom and public safety in America is termed as gun control debate. According to this debate, person cannot keep or bear arms. After the act of 1934, people were provided with this right. They can keep guns for the sake of safety and self-defense. A person can purchase fully automatic weapons and lethal guns after examining his family background. If he has a clean and good family background then he can keep any type of weapon for self-defense.

gun control debate

         In 1968, after the assassination of two important political persons, it becomes the rule to give serial number to every gun that will belong to the original owner of the gun. In1990’s, the sale of the guns to felons was completely prohibited. Further family background of the person is checked before selling him the gun.

It is very much interesting to note that some states have their own gun control legislation while the remaining states follow federal act of 1968. Hence we can say that there is complete check on gun control debate. Every state has its own level of restrictions on weapons. Most of the states don’t allow the people to carry guns or lethal weapons openly. Contrary to this, some states that have their own gun control legislation allows the people to carry their guns openly. As an example, New York has many restrictions in this regard Whereas Texas and Arizona is considered most relaxed states. One can easily carry his weapon openly in these states.

There is latest amendment in gun control debate. According to this amendment, sale of semi-automatic assault weapons is completely prohibited. This is done to ensure the safety of the citizens. Thus amendment was made in 1994, so no one can purchase any semi-automatic weapon that is manufactured after 1994. The supporters of this ban said that it helps in keeping assault weapons out of the street.

Most of the people think that selling gun to citizen increases the safety and self-defense level. Contrary to this, there are many people who think that carrying guns openly basically increases the crime rate and thus increases insecurity. Both the arguments in gun control debate are correct. So it is advised to reach the optimum solution of this problem by keeping the safety of people in mind. There should be a solution or act on which all states can compromise without any objection and hesitation.

The holy grail of firearm ownership

Some of the most important aspects of continued firearm ownership are.

  • People who will protect those rights, all of them no matter what. Which  excuse will you accept for not protecting your rights?
  • People who respect and understand at all times that firearm ownership has responsibilities that go far beyond just being a “safe” sport,  “filling the pot” or is a luxury that has occasional uses for self defence.  Firearm ownership has rights that need protection.
  • Organisations which are not motivated by filling membership lists and gathering money and protect those rights to the fullest and never stop.
  • Organisations which protect our property and protect our rights as the most valuable thing we have. They are ours until we give them up or give them away.

 

Firearm ownership or support of firearm ownership is a first requirement to make any firearm organisations existence possible.  Protection of the right to ownership is a prime mandate of any firearm organisation.

It is essential for people who join an organisation to ensure the organisations does what is wanted and expected in protecting and forwarding those rights.  To expect and demand those rights be protected to the fullest at all times.  Silence and inaction is acceptance and acceptance of any wrong is the first step to defeat.

This  protective function of all firearm organisations is vital to continued firearm ownership.  It includes the public image of firearm owners.  Gun control attacks our public image, we need to protect it.

What is your holy grail of firearm ownership?  Who is looking after your rights?  You, firearm organisations or government?  Do you subcontract your rights, property and safety to government or incompetent organisations that don’t care?  Do you care enough and values your rights to invest a small amount of your time in protecting your rights and the public image of firearm ownership?

Introduction to laws for gun control – Read Now

Many people have discussed about the laws for gun control in the USA in recent years. For the local people living in the country, they may have heard that there are a lot of incidents in which people use the firearms in a wrong way. Although there are laws for gun control in the country, it seems that these laws are not very effective.

In different parts of the country, the efforts of controlling firearms usages would be different. InNew Jersey, the state has passed a straight set of gun control law in 1996. However, the crime rate did not drop. Instead, it increased a lot and the rate of robbery event increased twice.

InHawaii, harsh gun laws were passed in 1968. At that time, the rate of murder was quite low. But nine years after the laws were adopted to control firearm purchases and sales, the crime rate increased by three times.

InWashingtonD.C., the situation is not better indeed. In 1976, the state passed the gun control law which was a major one for the state. But the rate of murder went up to around 1.5 times of before even though the murder rate of the wholeUSAdropped.

In many other parts of the country, you can find similar trends of statistics. This type of statistic could provide insights that the effectiveness of the laws for gun control is in doubt. There are a lot of restrictions on people for buying and selling these guns. However, there are still a lot of crimes happening in the states and it seems that there are also a lot of other ways for people to commit crimes other than using the firearms.

In recent years, it is also the fact that large scale gunshots still happen in some parts of the country. A lot of innocent people were killed. There are still some people who could enter a university or college casually and use their guns to kill somebody that they dislike. This would not be a right thing that people expect with the existence of laws for gun control. In other words, many people are disappointed with the gun control laws nowadays and they want the government to do more in order to protect people in the country. This is something that the government should address properly or otherwise it would not be easy for the government to claim that it is protecting the life and safety of people.

Why gun control – It’s good, bad and importance?

Nowadays people ask why gun control? And there is no easy answer to convenience them all of a sudden. You might have heard that there is lot of discussion happening between gun control advocates and gun rights advocates in the recent times and the issue is expected to split the entire US nation into two parts. While 50 percent of the public are going against passing laws for gun control, about 45 percent of people say they want bill to pass to mandate some gun control laws. A recent survey conducted reveals that there is considerable decrease in the people opposing gun control.

gun control

Why gun control is good?

  • By controlling guns, the police are allowed to investigate the civilian cases to the most without the intervention of other civilians who are probable gun owners.
  •  In majority of gun defenses related to civilians no shot is fired and hence guns are treated unnecessary (in 98% of times).
  • Gun control is good because most of the drug dealers and city gangs use guns and other firearms illegally.
  • By controlling guns we can reduce the crime rate to the minimum level possible.

Why gun control is bad?

With people expressing different views on gun control, it is found bad for half of the US residents. Let’s see why gun control is bad. People say if gun control is more then there is reduction in the related crimes as less number of guns is used. Some gun rights advocates say that gun control is against the constitution and they term gun control laws as unconstitutional laws. Every individual has right to own arms for self defense so that they can protect themselves at the time of emergency. By allowing gun control laws, people are disassociated themselves with one of their fundamental rights and is not acceptable at all. Any fundamental right should be expressed to the fullest possible and same thing holds good here also.

Some people also say gun control is very important because it helps to create the safer environment among the people by restricting them from possible crimes all the time. About 5 percent of people not sure about whether gun control laws are good or bad. They say, at one or the other point of time gun control laws are required so that people understand their boundaries but it should not restrict them all the time. Anyway don’t cross your boundary!!

Who is for gun control, Agenda of gun control and the truth?

Gun control is the most controversial and debatable topic happening in the world right at the moment. While some people are opposing gun control others are encouraging it. After all who is for gun control? And what is its plan? The answers to these questions can be found here without worrying much. In the past guns were treated like ‘peace weapons’. With the change in trend and people actively involving in crime, the mindset of people started changing and today they are treating more like killer weapons. Crimes and murders using guns have become very common nowadays.

gun control

Who is for gun control?

Strict gun control rules apply for people who misuse guns to conduct various criminal activities like murder, robbery, kidnapping and many more. With the increase in transgression rate, legislators in various countries have promised to come up with strict action in the form of gun control laws. The strict rules apply to people who own shotguns and rifles. The latest gun control amendment by Barack Obama, the president of United States of America clearly explains who is for gun control and why it is important.

Gun control rules also apply to people who are unlawfully using the guns and became addicted to this controlled substance. The person who has been imprisoned for conducting any type of crime is also entitled to come under the scanner of gun control. Gun control has become a serious and complex issue inUnited States of America. While some people talk about right for protection and arms others explain their disadvantages and how people misuse the guns.

For instance the United States Gun laws control the sales and transportation of ammunition and firearms. Each and every state follows their own rule and is very different from that of federal firearms laws. Most of the times, the lawmakers and officials representing the gun possession take parts in the inclusion of who is for gun control. They discuss this issue with various government agencies responsible for gun manufacturing and come up with a final decision and the respective gun control policy. Various gun control laws are also found question the ownership of guns. Irrespective of whether it is used for sporting purpose or defense purpose, you always need to give detailed explanation before handling them. The leftist politicians and liberal media are found be to be the front and prime followers of gun control. Brady Bill, Gun Control Act and National Firearms Act are some of the known gun control laws ofUSA.