So Now It's Wrong To Be Racist, Eh?

Just a few short years ago, Attorney-General George Brandis assured us that…

“I'm Sorry, Your Majesty...”

A Tribute to our Late Queen Liz, with Post-Colonial Afterthoughts By Loz Lawrey…

More of the same

1 Here are a few jaw-droppers that are guaranteed to shock you. They…

Shoddy Consultations: Santos, Drilling and First Nations Peoples

Federal Court Justice Mordecai Bromberg has been in the environmental news again,…

Can we avoid mass extinction?

We only have one planet! And we each have only one life! The…

Offence by Another Name: Suppressing Anti-Royal Protest in…

The right to protest, fragile and meekly protected by the judiciary in…

A Tale of Two Women

Death, when it comes quickly for someone we love, tends to blindside…

Crucial progress for women in STEM - but…

Science & Technology Australia Media Release The number of women enrolled in STEM…

«
»
Facebook

Can America really ban guns?

By Kerri Lynn

I just read a NY Times article/debate on the Gun Lobby’s power in US politics and gun control.

We all know the US is slave to corporate power and the continued wealth generated by business. In fact most Aussies know that the US values business over and above people. Some have said life is cheap in China but how cheap is life where regular mass shootings, as a statistic, take out more citizens than in any other country in the world?

I am not alone in suggesting that the US needs war for the business it offers. US corporations, from uniform manufacture to rebuilding nations, thrive on the merry go round of arm a nation, bomb the nation, rebuild the nation.

Without the army, air force and navy the US would have a serious unemployment problem. The same goes for the many police and quasi military bodies who patrol and police American states. (Sherriffs, National Guard, Homeland Security, Marines, CIA, FBI, NSA, State agencies, County agencies, City agencies and University agencies to name a few. I tried to research names but when the Wiki article listed by states, then within that county, and within that . . . OMG! Lists within lists. All this policing and yet still so much crime).

The US corporations also makes a huge yearly profit from guns and all that rampant gun ownership requires: ammunition, storage, carrying equipment, bulletproof clothing and vehicles, camouflage etc. Then there is the huge amount of money tied up in cleaning up after gun crimes. Apart from the actual mess there is the investigation that follows. Would the US need so many law enforcement agencies if no one was shooting up the populace on a daily basis?

We know the US has inefficient healthcare programs so how does the nation pay for rehabilitating and saving the lives of the victims of gun crime? The media focuses on the deaths after the usual US shooting incident (which incidentally I don’t know about you but I am beginning to get confused as to which shooting is which) but next time you see a report have a look at the number of injured. That represents a huge amount of medical costs getting victims treated, rehabilitated, back home and to some sort of life. After their medical treatment there is their mental health treatment which must go on for years for anyone who has witnessed a lunatic enter a building and start taking pot shots at their friends and work colleagues.

Then there is the industry of litigation and civil lawsuits against shooters and the failure to protect the innocent.

It is somewhat shattering to hear that after the latest Oregon Community College shootup the citizens of Oregon went on a gun buying spree as did the citizens of Virginia after the Virginia Tech shooting and the Sandy Hook shooting and pretty much any shooting that has occurred on US soil in the last several years! Anyone who remembers the news images of the 1996 and 2003 gun buyback programs in Australia would no doubt have noted the huge piles of guns sent into the crusher. The images of the claw squeezing the life out of stacks of rifles was very comforting. A bit surprising just how many guns had been surrendered! Imagine the piles of guns the US would have to “buyback”, confiscate and destroy?

So the question I find myself asking today is: What would happen to the US economy if the politicians could muster the guts to ban certain firearms and put restrictions on many others?

Are US politicians more concerned about the huge rift in their economy if they do vote to restrict guns and repeal the 2nd amendment (the right to bear arms) than they are about the deaths of innocent US civilians at the hands of gun owners?

Would the unemployment created from cessation of manufacture of guns, ammunition, accessories, medical personnel, law enforcement staff and security personnel be such a big problem that the politicians of the day would rather turn a blind eye?

Reports abounded today in the US criticising Australia’s “draconian” gun ownership laws.

Many other American citizens look to Australia as a shining example of how gun control can work, which basically allows recreational shooters some freedom to hunt or practice their skills at a range. And so far we can be pretty proud about that. When, sadly, we do have shootings the number of victims is vastly less than if the killer were allowed multiple or fast action firearms.

Can America really ban guns?

Can they even ban just some guns?

Will they ever be able to find and confiscate any and all guns they do ban?

Will people actually hand them in?

Will they ever be able to get ahead of gun manufacture and distribution which we all know is pretty rampant?

It seems a far greater task than getting to Mars but the US seem more determined to settle life on Mars than to preserve life here on Earth!

Will they allow guns on Mars?

 

 102 total views,  2 views today

29 comments

Login here Register here
  1. TurnLeft2016

    some animal control groups, similar to the RSPCA, are armed like Armageddon militias – like theyre stocking up their own private little army

  2. Sir ScotchMistery

    Why do we look to the USA for intelligence?

  3. Don Wreford

    If America requires full employment and a start up economy? why not have another civil war? in America, this would be a great opportunity for the making of heroes and the creation of medals? what about Europe and America having a show down? we could have allies such as a alliance between America and China versus Europe and Russia? the mind boggles at the many combinations of global war and when one side wins we all change partners? China and Europe for instance?

  4. mars08

    The Second Amendment:
    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.”

    I am totally on-board with that! Provided…. all branches of the US armed forces are disbanded and their weapons are destroyed.

    If a member of the American public wants to own a firearm, let them pledge to volunteer as part of “a well regulated Militia”. The requirement being that gun-owners take on the responsibility of protecting and projecting American interests around the world. Food and transport to the battlefield will be supplied by the government, but the rest of the mission is up to them.

    That should make things interesting…

  5. eli nes

    no chance of banning but the septics need to talk about the gun culture and the ease of supply.
    I like conditions similar to those imposed on women for an abortion.
    A 24 hour cooling off period
    check of suitability from doctor,
    plus
    fingerprints for a police check
    national register of names, finger prints and gun identification.

    As for lobby, there are only a 5 million members of the rifle assoc and families etc may number 70 million but that leaves 250 million???

  6. Jimmy

    Just look at the films and TV shows that come out of the USA. Guns and more guns, shoot-ups everywhere, violence upon violence.
    Fighting, kidnapping, then of course more guns. Then everyone walks away with no consequences.
    No wonder they are all bloody mad. Oh and by the way, you cant show a womans breasts on TV.
    But senseless killing is fine.

  7. mmc1949

    Jimmy – same with books as for films and TV. I won’t have a bar of any of them. Besides, their use of the English language is so impoverished too.

  8. mmc1949

    Surely, Don Wreford, you have noticed that the US uses big guns in all corners of the globe already? Military forays all over the place, invariably on the flimsiest of excuses.
    The US domestic policy and practice re guns is but writ large in their foreign policy and practice with even bigger guns.
    And as with, “let’s move on to the next school massacre” immediately after a similar one has been swept under the carpet, so on foreign soil, as we’re seeing yet again, “Oh, didn’t mean to raze that hospital” – my a*** – and under the carpet that goes too.

    We don’t have a domestic situation like America’s. So why do we have to follow it’s equally abhorrent violent foreign policies and trot into every military cesspit that they create? Has any trouble spot not become worse for American involvement?

  9. kerri

    Eli nes I once had a rather heated discussion with a group of gun owners regarding conditions of ownership. The line I was pushing was as you have said, every gun linked to the fingerprints of its owner! They immediately became defensive! “I am not a criminal! I will not be fingerprinted! What if someone steals my guns?”
    But that’s the point! If your gun is stolen then the fingerprints will not be yours and therefore you are innocent!
    But if someone intending a homicide, or even an armed hold up has to have their fingerprints registered with police they will maybe think twice about committing the crime?
    One guy, a friend whom I love dearly, argued that if someone breaks into his daughter’s bedroom he would want to defend her. “Fine I said but breaking and entering is not a capital crime and you are not judge jury and executioner! Besides the damage would be done before you knew the intruder was on your property.”
    I was a geography teacher when the arch at the Twelve apostles collapsed. We (qualified Geographers well versed in Geomorphology) debated in the staff room the geological circumstances and the fortunate fact that no one was actually on the part of the arch that collapsed.
    One teacher was adamant that he would jump clear if he had been on the arch!
    “How would you know the arch was about to collapse before it did in order to jump clear?” I asked?
    The superhuman concept that people can prevent something when they have no idea it is about to happen drives many in the gun debate! We need more stats on the response of people who are armed when a shooting occurs.

  10. mmc1949

    Kerri, you could substitute drugs for guns in the above. So much money is also invested in the illegal drug industry that substance abuse can’t possibly be treated as a health issue or too many profiteers would lose big time.
    But surely Australia is not in such thrall to business that we can’t make the change from crime to health? Or having privatised so many prisons already, is it too late here too?
    Australia depresses me so much. It used not too, not a bit.

  11. corvus boreus

    Recently, whilst ‘discussing’ the latest of their all too regular mass-murders of innocent citizenry by armed malcontents, some Rupert puppets on Fox were decrying Australia’s absolute lack of freedom due to us having basic gun control laws.
    They had a complete disconnect from the obvious consequential reality of having such a highly weaponized society.
    For example, I think that little piece of shit who shot dead a man in Parramatta the other day would have probably been able to do a hell of a lot worse had he access to the array of weaponry readily available to whatever nut-job wants them in the good old USA.

    In 2013, the US had 33,565 gun deaths.
    Australia had 226.

  12. Wally

    “In fact most Aussies know that the US values business over and above people.”

    Figures on poverty levels show that twice as many Americans per capita live in poverty compared to Australia, maybe they think if they shoot it out often enough they can reduce poverty levels? As a nation they should be ashamed that they spend so much money on war, dictating what should be to other countries and focusing so much on making the rich richer. Sounds like the policies of that bloke who just got booted out of the top job here in Australia.

    About 50 million Americans live below the poverty line, which the federal government defined in 2013 as an annual income of $23,550 for a family of four. In 2007, the year before Obama took office, the poverty rate was 12.5 percent. http://www.newsmax.com/Newsfront/poverty-line-grows-under/2014/01/08/id/545892/

    And yet, research released by the Committee for Economic Development of Australia on Tuesday finds that 4 to 6 per cent of Australians – that’s between one and 1.5 million of us – live in poverty, with little hope of escaping it. http://www.smh.com.au/federal-politics/political-opinion/one-million-australians-living-in-poverty–its-just-not-good-enough-20150421-1mple6.html#ixzz3nsHNaOuE

    Americas social injustices go well beyond the lack of realistic gun laws and the mind boggles as to why we align ourselves with them at all.

  13. Richard Schmidt

    Your article seems a fairly accurate description of America today. The gunners are many, the guns moreso–300 million and counting. We do not care how many children are assassinated. The paranoid delusionals want/need their guns. And No, we will never have the brains to restrict guns.
    We are a sorry-assed country.

  14. Matters Not

    Having a ‘sensible’ conversation with many US citizens when coming from an Australian ‘common sense’ is usually an exercise in frustration if not futility. Been there done that.

    While one shouldn’t generalise about ‘Americans’ (or Australians for that matter), I, nevertheless, assert that the ‘perceived relationship’ between the Australian citizen and the US citizen re the ‘government’, broadly defined, is of utmost importance.

    Just one example. Ask an Australian citizen if he/she needs a gun to protect themselves from ‘government’ and the most likely response would be a ‘blank look’. Not so in the US. There, the ‘government’ (no matter whether it be Democrat or Republican), is seen as always a ‘threat’ to life, liberty and whatever. The US Citizen needs a gun (for a whole variety of ‘perceived’ reasons) but most definitely include ‘protection’ from government.

    Understanding the concept of ‘rugged individualism’ might be helpful.

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rugged_individualism

  15. Jexpat

    In 2013, the US had 33,565 gun deaths. Australia had 226.

    Keen observers will note that the raw numbers reflect over a full order of magnitude when we’re thinking in terms of gun deaths per capita.

  16. diannaart

    America getting its paranoia based on reality – well, like, never, their greatest enemy have always been the massive corporate monopolise – however, now, perhaps, its citizens do have a reason to fear their government given how inextricably linked big business and government has become – a situation which has watered down the many ideaks Obamama started out with.

    No need to boast here in Australia – our gun laws are far from adequate as a concession to the gun lobby here – not as powerful as in the US but a disturbing and well financed irritation nonetheless.

    A lesson for Australia to learn from the failure of the United States Congress to support tough gun laws is that firearms laws are not to be taken for granted and are susceptible to erosion by the force of pro gun lobby groups.

    In the last two years, the Commonwealth, Queensland and New South Wales have all established Firearm Consultative Committees to advise government on firearm issues.

    The Committees are stacked with pro gun lobby groups and include no gun control, public health, domestic violence or suicide prevention representatives. The membership includes: Rob Nioa, Managing Director of one the largest arms importers in the country, the Sporting Shooters Association, Field and Game Council, Coalition for Women Shooting and Hunting and Federation of Hunting Clubs and Game Council.

    The pro gun make-up of these Firearm Consultative Committees has ensured a focus on reducing “red tape” and “regulatory burden” for gun owners, rather than increasing public safety for all.

    http://www.openforum.com.au/content/still-long-way-go-australia%E2%80%99s-gun-laws

  17. Matters Not

    mars08 thanks for the link. Certainly insightful.

    Yesterday the MSM reported that more than 200 police raided 4 homes and arrested 4 people. Overkill writ large. (No budget problems when it comes to ‘terror’ real or imagined.)

    Within hours, three of the arrested were released without charge.

    But I suppose the goal of increasing the ‘fear’ alert was realised.

  18. kerri

    Mars 08 good link! The US has so many ridiculous problems that they cannot see and yet still purports to be the world’s police? The bombing of the MSF hispital is just the latest in a longline of US errors and further galvanises the attitudes of states like Russia in opposing US actions.

  19. mars08

    To watch the American news programs … you would think that middle aged, Christian, heterosexual, American white men were the most endangered animals on the planet.

  20. diannaart

    @mars08

    …middle aged, Christian, heterosexual, American white men were the most endangered animals on the planet.They certainly qualify as the most easily threatened.

    …. something about holding power by illegitimate means, creating paranoia.

  21. kerri

    The US has always had to have someone to fear and hate!
    Gaddafi. Hussein. Putin. Mao. Hitler.
    Psychologically they “need” an enemy.
    Someone to point at and criticise!
    Someone to prove they are better than!
    At the same time they suffer a lack of royalty and so “make” royalty of their celebrities and are obsessed with parades and ceremonies celebrating all things US.

  22. Wally

    “The pro gun make-up of these Firearm Consultative Committees has ensured a focus on reducing “red tape” and “regulatory burden” for gun owners, rather than increasing public safety for all.”

    They haven’t lobbied to change the laws or to make access to guns possible for undesirables so what is the problem? If people have a valid reason/purpose to own guns they should not be hampered by excessive red tape, to do so is harassment. I would prefer to see more effort stopping illegal gun imports, locating illegal weapons and efforts to ensure criminals cannot access weapons. Sometimes our society spends more time, money and resources victimising innocent people than it does catching the bad guys.

    Being overly strict with gun laws gives paranoid American’s more excuses not to introduce realistic restraints that are in balance with what the community needs. In Americas case getting guns out of the reach of children to prevent the accidental deaths would be a step in the right direction. And while we are bagging out America lets also be critical of Africa and the Middle East where teenagers walk the streets with machine guns and fully automatic assault weapons.

  23. diannaart

    @Wally

    The pro-gun lobby is not restricted to just the FCC – have you missed Kaye Lee’s report on yet another (Australian) middle-aged white-man, Senator David Leyonhjelm?

    Libertarian loony or Tea Party turkey?

    Do you really believe we can just relax because our ‘rules’ are superior to the USA’s? Is that your point, or are are you simply being disagreeable for the entertainment value?

  24. Wally

    diannaart

    I had not read the article about David Leyonhjelm at the time I wrote my comment above and I certainly do not agree with him, but I did comment on Kayes article that in the long run idiots like this do more damage to their cause than they do good.

    I suggest that we maintain a balanced position and, use the resources we have wisely so we can protect our society from criminal elements and I don’t believe many licenced gun owners fall into the categories that endanger our society. I live in the country and at a guess I would say that over half the people I know are gun owners but I have not owned guns myself since the post Port Arthur law changes.

    “Do you really believe we can just relax because our ‘rules’ are superior to the USA’s?”

    We can never relax the laws we have in place need to be maintained but I don’t believe we need to make changes to gun laws in any direction, harsher/leniency. Honest law abiding people should not be treated badly, harassed or hindered excessively because of criminals.

    “Is that your point, or are you simply being disagreeable for the entertainment value?”

    My comment is my opinion on the subject but given that I had not read Kayes article on David Leyonhjelm in hindsight it was poorly timed.

  25. diannaart

    Thank you for your thoughtful reply, Wally.

    However, I had posited the opinion on this thread that Australia can ill afford to rest upon its laurels.

    No need to boast here in Australia – our gun laws are far from adequate as a concession to the gun lobby here – not as powerful as in the US but a disturbing and well financed irritation nonetheless.

    A lesson for Australia to learn from the failure of the United States Congress to support tough gun laws is that firearms laws are not to be taken for granted and are susceptible to erosion by the force of pro gun lobby groups.

    In the last two years, the Commonwealth, Queensland and New South Wales have all established Firearm Consultative Committees to advise government on firearm issues.

    The Committees are stacked with pro gun lobby groups and include no gun control, public health, domestic violence or suicide prevention representatives. The membership includes: Rob Nioa, Managing Director of one the largest arms importers in the country, the Sporting Shooters Association, Field and Game Council, Coalition for Women Shooting and Hunting and Federation of Hunting Clubs and Game Council.

    The pro gun make-up of these Firearm Consultative Committees has ensured a focus on reducing “red tape” and “regulatory burden” for gun owners, rather than increasing public safety for all.

    http://www.openforum.com.au/content/still-long-way-go-australia%E2%80%99s-gun-laws

    I merely referenced Kaye’s article to support my opinion.

  26. watcher

    Their is only one reason the US is not a Dictatorship, and that’s the 2nd amendment (the right to bear arms)! Anyone who has been paying attention to the police state of control over there can see it.

  27. iggy648

    Hi watcher. I have to admit I haven’t been paying attention. Could you elaborate a bit please mate?

  28. Richard Schmidt

    Watcher, you have been watching too many movies and perhaps watching whatever your equivalent is to Fox News. Maybe you need to come for a visit and cruise around the country in a car. We won’t bite, even if the paranoid delusionals who love their guns think we do.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

The maximum upload file size: 2 MB. You can upload: image, audio, video, document, spreadsheet, interactive, text, archive, code, other. Links to YouTube, Facebook, Twitter and other services inserted in the comment text will be automatically embedded. Drop file here

Return to home page
%d bloggers like this: