world

Guns are on U.S. Supreme Court's agenda days after mass shootings

19 Comments
By MARK SHERMAN

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2021 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed without permission.

©2021 GPlusMedia Inc.

19 Comments

Comments have been disabled You can no longer respond to this thread.

The appeal comes from New York, which gun rights groups say is among eight states that make it difficult if not virtually impossible for people to get permits to carry guns in public. The other states are California, Delaware, Hawaii, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Jersey and Rhode Island.

Of those eight states, six were in the bottom ten for gun deaths per 100,000 in 2019 according to the CDC. Delaware was 11th and Maryland was 22nd.

5 ( +5 / -0 )

Of the states that have constitutional carry, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia and Wyoming, six were in the top ten for gun deaths per 100,000. Vermont was in the bottom ten, at number ten.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Of the states that have constitutional carry, Alaska, Arizona, Arkansas, Idaho, Kansas, Kentucky, Maine, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Utah, Vermont, West Virginia and Wyoming, six were in the top ten for gun deaths per 100,000. Vermont was in the bottom ten, at number ten.

Arizona has twice the number of deaths by firearm per 100,000 population as California has. California is about the ninth lowest state in terms of firearm deaths per 100,000. There are darned few cops in California that want to have to worry about people carrying concealed firearms. Just me maybe, but when I go to Arizona or other states that allow open carry all I can think of is the Taliban, Daesh or some backwards tribal types in Pakistan. Well adjusted mature adults don't walk around with a firearm unless they are military or police. Governments have police and courts with which to settle disputes. That is how a mature society settles its disputes.

7 ( +7 / -0 )

Well adjusted mature adults don't walk around with a firearm 

Nor do well adjusted mature adults have arsenals rivaling those of the police. Nor do they threaten a second civil war if someone even talks about taking away any of their weapons, legal or not.

Governments have police and courts with which to settle disputes.

I agree. Though I fear the notion of overly intrusive governments (see China and other authoritarian nations), I don't hate government like so many gun rights and other right wing extremists do. And though I fear the notion of overly intrusive governments, I have greater fear of the extreme US element that are vehemently anti-government and threaten a second civil war if someone even talks about background checks.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

Though I fear the notion of overly intrusive governments (see China and other authoritarian nations)

Is that the 'guns preserve freedom' argument? Apologies if you were going somewhere else with that. There are certainly examples of that, but there are also examples where that argument doesn't hold. Yemen, 54.8 guns per 100, 000, and Saudi Arabia (35) are among the most repressive countries in the world. Of course, any combination of civilian gun ownership / rates of freedom can be found throughout the world.

https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2013/04/owning-guns-doesnt-preserve-freedom/275287/

The case had been scheduled before a shooter killed eight people at massage businesses in the Atlanta area last week and another shooter killed 10 people at a supermarket in Boulder, Colorado, on Monday.

Georgia is a shall-issue state for concealed weapons licenses. Open and concealed carry are legal in Georgia with a Weapons Carry License or a concealed carry permit from a state Georgia honors. Georgia also has Castle Doctrine and stand your ground laws. None of this prevented the recent shooting there, carried out with a handgun.

By the same token, Colorado has universal background checks, plus locally mandated checks which access local databases on top of those accessed by the federal check, which the shooter there, with history with the police and known (through association with another) to the FBI, passed.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

4% of the world population has over 40% of all civilian owned guns in the world. Absolute lunacy.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

SCOTUS rules on law, not feelings.

There currently is a constitutional right to own firearms.

-1 ( +1 / -2 )

s that the 'guns preserve freedom' argument?

No. I think gun madness has the opposite effect. I want my friends, family and all non-gun owning Americans to be able to go to a movie theater, concert, any place where people gather, without having to wonder whether they should wear body armor to protect them from a gun nut, be the nut a lone wolf wack or a terrorist of some sort who used his 'freedom' to purchase a weapon.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

PTownsend,

Absolutely agree. I didn't mean that you were making the argument, rather that you were responding to it.

The two main arguments for gun rights are the 'insurrectionist' argument that I don't feel holds water, and the self defence argument that I have more sympathy for - of course if attacked one should be able to defend oneself - but I don't agree that one needs a semi-automatic firearm with over, say, 10 rounds in the clip/mag to do it.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

There currently is a constitutional right to own firearms.

Yes. But as with all rights, it is not unlimited. "It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” Scalia, 2008.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

The 2nd Amendment said people of United States were free to own guns, that is a foundation of the American Constitution and it cannot be changed! Then ban the ammunitions! Ban all ammunitions selling in America! Not a single round of ammo can be sell in America! Without ammunitions, guns were safe to the public! And it doesn't matter how many guns you own!

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Yes. But as with all rights, it is not unlimited. "It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose.” Scalia, 2008.

True. .50cal requires a federal firearm license. That's a clear, agreed, limitation.

I'm not pro- or anti-firearm. My family did go hunting together. It was fun. We also went fishing, hiking, camping together. I have fond memories of those days away from the city when Dad was just Dad, not being interrupted by the phone or his 24-hr a Motorola "brick" radio. It was really the only time he wasn't on call for about 6 years. He wasn't allowed to leave the base - ever.

The SCOTUS has to rule on the US Constitution and how state and local laws either align or are against that higher document. They have to look over prior rulings and avoid conflicts with those as well. Regardless of their personal feelings for what is "right" or what they think is the ideal solution for the country, they have to rule on the actual laws.

To gain more safety with firearms, the Constitution needs to be amended. But to do that over 60% of Americans have to agree. A small shift could be possible that would lead to large impacts. Removing completely the rights of firearm owners will not pass.

What can reasonably be accomplished? Only compromise will provide that answer

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Who needs a 0.5cal ammunitions? Is someone want to shoot down an aircraft or helicopter? Ban all ammunitions, just ban ammos! Without ammunitions, guns were safe! Very safe!

-3 ( +0 / -3 )

theFu

The SCOTUS has to rule on the US Constitution and how state and local laws either align or are against that higher document. They have to look over prior rulings and avoid conflicts with those as well. Regardless of their personal feelings for what is "right" or what they think is the ideal solution for the country, they have to rule on the actual laws.

Very true. I'd argue, however, that there is a certain room for interpretation. Case in point, prior to Heller in 2008, the court interpreted the Second Amendment to give a collective right to defence, i.e., state militias. The individual rights theory was adopted in Heller.

Interestingly, since Heller, and despite the NRA's best efforts, lower courts have upheld lots of gun laws as constitutional, including laws restricting the concealed and open carry, bans on assault weapons, extreme risk protection orders, safe storage, waiting periods and private-sale background checks. The Supreme Court itself has refused to hear many gun rights cases and appeals.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

The 2nd Amendment said people of United States were free to own guns, that is a foundation of the American Constitution and it cannot be changed!

There are 27 Amendments to the US Constitution. The 2nd is just one of 27. A good argument could be made that the 1st, 4th, 5th and maybe the 10th are more fundamental to what made the US different from every other nation in the world when the Constitution was ratified. I would hardly call the 2nd Amendment the foundation of anything but rather it has proven to be an engine off needless death that undermines many of the other rights the US is rightly proud of.

4 ( +4 / -0 )

 Well adjusted mature adults don't walk around with a firearm unless they are military or police. Governments have police and courts with which to settle disputes. That is how a mature society settles its disputes

The NRA under Wayne LaPierre has stoked shrieking hysterical fear into the masses to the point that guns are now gods. And who needs to carry weapons on their body if they're not military or police? Look at the trashtramps, gun nuts, thugs who carry weapons on them - paranoid militia scum with racist, sexist, anti-Semite, homophobic agendas. Wayne LaPierre keeps howling and fanning the flames and he collects the money and influence and laughs. He's a greedy American Qaddafy. George Bush was right to quit those jerks in 1995.

1 ( +1 / -0 )

Only a bunch of very insecure weirdos feel the need to keep firearms.

2 ( +3 / -1 )

The NRA under Wayne LaPierre has stoked shrieking hysterical fear into the masses to the point that guns are now gods

Right. Actual NRA membership is only around 5 million, but much more insidious is the way they've hijacked the gun debate in the public sphere, to the point where any common sense gun legislation attempted becomes 'jack-booted thugs armed to the teeth who break down doors, open fire with automatic weapons and kill law-abiding citizens.” Even more scary is that there is a not insignificant number of people who believe the NRA has gone nowhere near far enough, want unregulated access to automatic weapons and RPGs and such, and see any and all gun control as an infringement.

Only a bunch of very insecure weirdos feel the need to keep firearms.

I think that's an exaggeration. There are some legitimate reasons for gun ownership such as hunting, sport shooting, collecting, pest control, film and television. In America self defence is a legitimate reason for ownership, but to that I'll say many (most?) countries will recognise a citizen's right to defend themselves, including use of a firearm if proportionate. Also, I'm happy that in the several countries I've ever lived in, of which the US is not one, I've never wanted/needed a gun to defend myself and not had one. Yet.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

I've never wanted/needed a gun to defend myself and not had one. Yet.

Sorry, that sounds wrong. I've never wanted/needed a gun to defend myself.

2 ( +2 / -0 )

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites