Philosophy Now Forum

Henry. I think you're right. I reckon that the gun problem in America has got so out of hand that any gun control measures are unlikely to have much effect in the short term. However there is still a good reason to introduce such measures because what needs to change in the US is people's general attitude towards guns and this is likely to take several generations and a massive public education campaign extended over a long time frame. What it will take to set the ball rolling is genuine political will for change and it's very hard to see how this could happen in the absence of a grassroots initiative from the majority of the people themselves. You guys are truly stuck between a rock and a hard place.

henry quirk wrote:As I recall, you asked me a similar question about licensing a while back, in another thread, and Leo inquired about licensing then too.

While I get your point, I'd object to having to register my gun or obtain a license for it.

There is, in place now, a half-assed background check system (gettin' better all the time, though) that goes some little way to keeping guns out of the hands of stupid criminals, but it would have been useless to prevent the last few years of mass shootings (done by disturbed, but not previously convicted, folks, and terrorist types who got guns outside of legal gun dealers), and it is (and will continue to be) useless in stopping the smart criminals from getting guns.

Take Chicago where the gun violence is high: most of the guns used aren't coming out of gun shops directly, but are stolen and/or bought on the street...effective background checks and licensing would have liitle effect in cleaning up Chicago in the same way the 'war on drugs' has done little to curb the appetite for, or supply of, drugs.

So: licensing would, practically, only affect the law abider cuz, by definition, the law breaker will not comply.

Duh, but you a crim could get put away for holding a gun - get it?

Bu hey what the fuck statistically you probably won't get shot, just some school kids or people that 'get in the way'.

An interesting FACT. The National Security Agency in the US has placed an unknown number of people on what they are pleased to call the "Terrorist Watch List". Anybody whose name appears on this list is forbidden by federal law to fly on any commercial aircraft. However they are not forbidden to buy firearms because to enact such a law would be deemed unconstitutional. Would somebody like to explain the logic of this?

Obvious Leo wrote:An interesting FACT. The National Security Agency in the US has placed an unknown number of people on what they are pleased to call the "Terrorist Watch List". Anybody whose name appears on this list is forbidden by federal law to fly on any commercial aircraft. However they are not forbidden to buy firearms because to enact such a law would be deemed unconstitutional. Would somebody like to explain the logic of this?

Yeah, Yanks are stooopid.

Obvious Leo wrote:An interesting FACT. The National Security Agency in the US has placed an unknown number of people on what they are pleased to call the "Terrorist Watch List". Anybody whose name appears on this list is forbidden by federal law to fly on any commercial aircraft. However they are not forbidden to buy firearms because to enact such a law would be deemed unconstitutional. Would somebody like to explain the logic of this?

The so-called "Terrorist Watch List," which is itself clearly unconstitutional, is another U.S. government intrusion into people's lives. Fortunately, the government agency that created and maintains this list has no control over guns, the ownership of which is protected by the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution, to be used as a last resort against such agencies and the entire government if necessary. Citizens of other countries, including Australia, don't have this protection against government tyranny.

I presume our secret police has some sort of a watch list of its own and attempts to keep a close eye on evil-hearted shitheads who are contemplating wrongdoing against our population, and I have plenty of concerns about the level of intrusion into people's privacy which such surveillance necessarily entails. However there is a small amount of comfort to be derived from the fact that at least the people who are suspected of hatching such plots are not legally allowed to acquire the wherewithal to bring them to fruition. It's not a perfect system but it's better than nothing.

As always such questions always boil down to the simple dichotomy of evaluating the rights of the individual in a society against the rights of the society itself. Margaret Thatcher once famously said that there is no such thing as a society, and she was certainly diligent in her determination to destroy what remained of her own, but was she right? Is the notion of a social contract a myth? Do the rights of the individual take precedence over the rights of the many?

Obvious Leo wrote:Australia's system is not a perfect system, but it's better than nothing.

Let's see, better than nothing can be infinitesimally small, while sacrificing something that can be incredibly large, the ultimate defense against a tyrannical government. But, of course, you might be relying on the United States coming to your ultimate rescue. We don't have that luxury.

Rescue from whom? The US has been in plenty of wars over the past half century and it's managed to lose every single one of them so the last thing we need is a gang of incompetent cowboys raping and pillaging our country.

As it happens I agree that your government is a tyrannical one compared to ours and that your anachronistic constitution is such that it would be very difficult for this situation to change. You have my compassion, Bob, as do all people in all nations who live under the boot-heel of tyranny, but the remedy to your woes lies in the hands of your own citizens. The history of 20th century geo-politics has shown us that people power revolutions are absolutely unstoppable and as long as they are non-violent they always lead to better outcomes for ordinary citizens.

If you don't like the way your country is being governed then it's quite clear that you're not alone but if you haven't got the balls to change it then you're only getting what you deserve. There was a time when other nations looked to the US for leadership and guidance but nowadays all we get from the US is geo-political incompetence on the international stage and Pythonesque comedy on the domestic front. You guys are the laughing stock of the entire world and if it wasn't so tragic it would be fucking hilarious.

bobevenson wrote:

Obvious Leo wrote:An interesting FACT. The National Security Agency in the US has placed an unknown number of people on what they are pleased to call the "Terrorist Watch List". Anybody whose name appears on this list is forbidden by federal law to fly on any commercial aircraft. However they are not forbidden to buy firearms because to enact such a law would be deemed unconstitutional. Would somebody like to explain the logic of this?

The so-called "Terrorist Watch List," which is itself clearly unconstitutional, is another U.S. government intrusion into people's lives. .

The country you pretend to love is full of shit.

Obvious Leo wrote:Rescue from whom?

A tyrannical government. Of course, that could never happen in Australia, right?

bobevenson wrote:

Obvious Leo wrote:Rescue from whom?

A tyrannical government. Of course, that could never happen in Australia, right?

No. It couldn't happen here. We've had no shortage of incompetent governments over the years, and we're currently saddled with yet another one, but a tyrannical government would be a quite impossible eventuality because of the Australian cultural zeitgeist. There is an indelible ethos in this country that Jack's as good as his master and those who seek to place themselves above the common herd do so at their peril. In most cases this principle is honoured as much in the breach as it is in the observation but we do not place our billionaires and our self-proclaimed leaders on a pedestal and honour them for their success. By and large we assume that they're a pack of shifty bastards who clawed their way to the top by trampling over their fellow man. It keeps them humble and reminds them that governments can only govern with the consent of the governed.

Australians are also inveterate travellers and most people here know very well how people live in other parts of the world, including in the US. This makes us realise how bloody lucky we are and what an important bequest we owe to our children. However I'm not a utopian fantasist because I'm a much travelled man myself. I see plenty of injustice and failed policy in my own nation but I don't see what I see in your country, Bob. In your country I see despair.

Obvious Leo wrote:

bobevenson wrote:

Obvious Leo wrote:Rescue from whom?

A tyrannical government. Of course, that could never happen in Australia, right?

No. It couldn't happen here. We've had no shortage of incompetent governments over the years, and we're currently saddled with yet another one, but a tyrannical government would be a quite impossible eventuality because of the Australian cultural zeitgeist.

I guess kind of like Germany in 1933, huh?

My guess is that you know about as much about Nazi Germany as you do about the history of any other place in the world. NOTHING.

Obvious Leo wrote:My guess is that you know about as much about Nazi Germany as you do about the history of any other place in the world. NOTHING.

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to suggest that you fucking Australians might be susceptible to another Hitler!

bobevenson wrote:

Obvious Leo wrote:My guess is that you know about as much about Nazi Germany as you do about the history of any other place in the world. NOTHING.

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't mean to suggest that you fucking Australians might be susceptible to another Hitler!

Now you've got me totally confused. If this isn't what you were trying to suggest then what was it that you were trying to suggest? I am but a humble wordsmith subject to the foibles of all others of my kind. I do not read the tarot and my crystal ball is on the blink and thus I have no choice but to leap to the unwarranted assumption that your intended meaning must be contained in your words.