Bahamas Warns Citizens About USA

[Sea Dreaming]

Our police need more training like these fellows.

Swedish cops on vacation in New York stop a brutal assault on subway | Daily Mail Online


Surely we can do bette than to shoot first?

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by REsCat

I always thought the "gun rights community" and the NRA are one and the same...
Every political debate,commentary, analysis I have ever heard both from the US and abroad has reinforced this central theme.
But that's just my interpretation...

OP and others, forgive me for contributing to thread drift on this sobering thread topic and especially for mentioning "guns" which does crash a lot of threads...

Bob

At the risk of pushing the gun thread button-of-doom, I feel I need to add that polls consistently show strong majority support for some forms of gun control in the USA. The bill that recently died in Congress, which would have put controls on gun sales to people on terrorism and no-fly lists, is supported by strong majorities when the public is polled. So if it were true that politicians are just chasing votes, they should have passed this law. They did not.

The USA presents a number of challenges for foreign travellers, not least of which is the level of violence (both criminal and legal). We routinely discuss the dangers in other countries. I think this thread is good education for those of us who travel to the USA.

[Jdege]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

The bill that recently died in Congress, which would have put controls on gun sales to people on terrorism and no-fly lists, is supported by strong majorities when the public is polled. So if it were true that politicians are just chasing votes, they should have passed this law. They did not.

Chasing votes could be complicated.

The Dems offered a bill that trampled on fundamental rights without even a shred of due process. The GOP countered with a bill that offered an after-the-fact band-aid to create the appearance of due process. (Any right-thinking person would have opposed both.)

The fact that not a single Dem voted for the GOP bill indicates to me that the Dem leadership was far more interested in generating outrage and maintaining this as an issue they could shout about than actually accomplishing anything.

[Mike OReilly]

Originally Posted by Jdege

Chasing votes could be complicated.

The Dems offered a bill that trampled on fundamental rights without even a shred of due process. The GOP countered with a bill that offered an after-the-fact band-aid to create the appearance of due process. (Any right-thinking person would have opposed both.)

The fact that not a single Dem voted for the GOP bill indicates to me that the Dem leadership was far more interested in generating outrage and maintaining this as an issue they could shout about than actually accomplishing anything.

I'm sure you understand the nuance of your government's actions far better than I (a foreigner). I am aware, however, that most public opinion polls do show strong support for some forms of gun control. Yet your Congress seems completely unable to do anything. Is this b/c each side is just trying to score points?

[smj]

Originally Posted by Jdege

Chasing votes could be complicated.



The Dems offered a bill that trampled on fundamental rights without even a shred of due process. The GOP countered with a bill that offered an after-the-fact band-aid to create the appearance of due process. (Any right-thinking person would have opposed both.)



The fact that not a single Dem voted for the GOP bill indicates to me that the Dem leadership was far more interested in generating outrage and maintaining this as an issue they could shout about than actually accomplishing anything.

Please explain the fundamental rights that would have been trampled on.


Sent from my iPad using Cruisers Sailing Forum

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by Mike OReilly

At the risk of pushing the gun thread button-of-doom, I feel I need to add that polls consistently show strong majority support for some forms of gun control in the USA. The bill that recently died in Congress, which would have put controls on gun sales to people on terrorism and no-fly lists, is supported by strong majorities when the public is polled.

While I support as just "common sense" these gun control to terrorist/watch list type of people - we haven't really had a problem with these people doing these shootings. Our problem is mainly with illegal guns owners shooting each other and getting a by-stander once in a while, and the freaking CRAZY people who just go off.

Mostly we don't have a gun problem in the US, we have a US citizen with a gun problem.

[siamese]

If anyone on the no-fly list is prohibited from exercising their constitutional right to own and bear a gun, then the government would have the ability to take away a citizen's right simply by placing them on the list. Whether they belong there or not.

That takes away due process. Even if the government says it will have an appeal process, when that process drags on or finds against a citizen for no reason, what then? This is the government where increasingly, when it's bureaucrats are called to answer for their transgressions they take the fifth (the IRS / Lois Lerner) and nothing is done. The VA? They cannot be trusted...nor should they.

Freedom isn't always easy, but it sure beats the alternative.

By the way, the Bahamians are just being jerks.

[Factor]

You guys have amended your constitution in the past, as have we, why can't a rational discussion be held to amend it now?

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by siamese

Freedom isn't always easy, but it sure beats the alternative.
.

Lots of countries are enjoying Freedom pretty easy without having a gun culture.

But excuses of why we need guns in the US and reasons why any attempt at reasonable control is "against our rights" never end. Facts are facts and we just want the ability to shoot each other.

[Sea Dreaming]

Originally Posted by Jdege

Chasing votes could be complicated.

The Dems offered a bill that trampled on fundamental rights without even a shred of due process. The GOP countered with a bill that offered an after-the-fact band-aid to create the appearance of due process. (Any right-thinking person would have opposed both.)

The fact that not a single Dem voted for the GOP bill indicates to me that the Dem leadership was far more interested in generating outrage and maintaining this as an issue they could shout about than actually accomplishing anything.

The limits of the 2nd amendment are contentious at best. No one has yet decided where gun rights end. Given that this debate is at the heart of the matter it is erroneous to say "dems trampled on fundamental rights without due process" . Especially because due process inclueds the right of the house to vote on the matter. Represenation is what our political system is all about. Your gop reps are alive and well and thus they too had a say and a vote. This is the very heart of due process and why our system works as it does. Not getting your way is not "trampling on rights without due process".

Gun rights are hotly debated in the US. For our fellow international voyagers, the big debate in the US is just what did our founding fathers mean by "the right to assemble melitia"? Does this line go to the individual right to bear arms or states right to muster?
While many would have the world belive that the 2nd amendment guarantees a right for the individual to "bear arms", the fact is, this is not defined without limits. As a nation we have allowed that interpretation but the 2nd amendment can be curtailed to limit the types of guns and number of guns without trampling the heart of the second amendment if we choose.

I liken this to pies and cakes. Your mother might agree you can eat cake, she did not tell you that you can eat all the cakes in the house. Some gun rights people would have you believe that the 2nd amendment guarantees gun gluttony. It does not.

[sailorboy1]

Originally Posted by Factor

You guys have amended your constitution in the past, as have we, why can't a rational discussion be held to amend it now?

You are confused or you would know we aren't rational.

[Sea Dreaming]

Originally Posted by sailorboy1

You are confused or you would know we aren't rational.

[Jdege]

Originally Posted by Sea Dreaming

The limits of the 2nd amendment are contentious at best. No one has yet decided where gun rights end. Given that this debate is at the heart of the matter it is erroneous to say "dems trampled on fundamental rights without due process" .

On this particular question it's very much correct to say that the dems trampled on fundamental rights without due process. And so did the repubs.

There's no possible way of construing the enforcement of restrictions on fundamental rights without opportunity to present evidence, face accusers, etc., to be other than trampling on them.

Both parties are equally wrong, here.

And that applies to the idea of forbidding people to fly just as much as it does forbidding people to buy guns.

Who gets on these lists? By what standard? Where is the opportunity to refute the charges?

The dems would have people blocked simply for being on the list. The repubs would have the case referred to a judge, for an in-chambers decision, still without opportunity to provide a defense, or challenge ones' accusers.

The idea should be anathema to anyone who cares about individual liberty.

[siamese]

I'm an American who believes the United States Constitution is mankind's single greatest accomplishment. Limits government and guarantees liberty. Whether it was a stroke of genius or a stroke of luck, I'm grateful for it.

Sure, it can be amended, but to reduce or eliminate basic freedoms, no thank you.

Guns don't kill people, people kill people. Americans are increasingly fat too, but let's not blame the spoons. If our culture has gone awry, let's address that, but we'll likely have to be a lot less PC to accomplish anything.

[MarkJ]

Originally Posted by Jdege

that trampled on fundamental rights ....

USA gun laws are not 'fundamental right's. But in 2008 and 2012 the Second Amendment was backed by the Supreme Court to be a personal right.

(You guys should know this )

So it is difficult to change gun laws. Neither party want to go to an election stripping a personal right.

Because it won't get elected.



Sent from a stupid phone that replaces words with weird stuff.