5 shot at party near Seton Hall in NJ, 1 dead

[depakid]

Source: AP

Authorities in New Jersey say a 19-year-old Seton Hall University student has died in an overnight shooting that injured four other people at a private party. Essex County Prosecutor's Office spokeswoman Katherine Carter says Jessica Moore died from her injuries at 3:20 p.m. Saturday. Moore had been hospitalized in critical condition after the shooting just after midnight.

Police say the shooter was a man who was denied access to the party, then left and returned with a handgun.

Police say that in addition to Moore, four others, who have not been identified, were hospitalized with non-life-threatening injuries. One has since been released.

Police say the shooter remains at large.

Read more: http://www.google.com/hostednews/ap/article/ALeqM5jnqwynM9OiuH9CQpkLQ6qMLbMhfwD9IF7DS80

[RandomThoughts]

1. Essex county? that is signifigant.

That don't impress me much.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XqYp1jpzKCk

[marmar]

2. What does Shania Twain have to do with a shooting in NJ?

nt

[RandomThoughts]

4. The shooting doesn't impress me much.

And there is an Essex in the background of that clip.

I think Shania Twain is great.

[divideandconquer]

3. Just another citizen exercising their 2nd amendment solution to a problem

The tree of liberty just needed a little watering. Just remember before the NRA truthiness squad gets here, the most fascist supreme court (Roberts), the most fascist president (Cheney) and the most fascist "populist" movement (teabaggers) are all fanatically pushing 2nd amendment solutions. It's not an accident.

[bluedigger]

5. I'm sure that other than choice to do their "gardening", the shooter was a fine upstanding member

of society.

In the meantime, let's rush to assumptions and take advantage of this sad story to advance our agenda.

[divideandconquer]

6. I plead guilty to having an agenda

It's far harder to buy guns in the better nations and it's easier to buy guns in most of the worse ones and this unfortunate 19 old woman was a victim of our sicko gun culture. Welcome to another deadly example of third world America!

[Pavulon]

8. like switzerland, finland, norway, murder mecca

of the world. Hey whats the suicide numbers in japan. many more than in Switzerland.. your meme is fucked. your drama is done, your position is done. you should move on to protesting brown vs board of education, you may find more brainless idiots to support what you are pushing there.

[divideandconquer]

9. What advanced nation has weakened it gun laws recently? None!

The NRA has been spanked in Canada and Australia. Gun pushers are on the wrong side of history, a supreme court justice away from the dustbin of bad ideas.
-----------------------------------------------

European Union

In late 2007 the European Union lawmakers adopted a legislative report to tighten gun control laws and establish an extensive firearms database.<16> Passed with overwhelming backing, the tough new gun control rules were "hoped to prevent Europe from becoming a gun-friendly culture like the United States," in the words of the International Herald Tribune.<17> Certain countries such as the United Kingdom are unaffected as they maintain more stringent gun control laws than those effectively set as a minimum by the European Union.
--------------------------------------------

Australia
Main article: Gun politics in Australia

Firearm laws in Australia are enforced at a Federal and State level. The minimum age for any shooter is 12 years. To obtain a full firearm licence a person must pass a background check, a basic course of firearm safety and be at least 18 years of age.

For every firearm, a purchaser must obtain a Permit To Acquire. The permit must be obtained from the local police station, and one of the pre-requisites is that you must a letter from 2 farmers who own more than 100 acres (0.40 km2) of land, to allow you to fire or hunt on their land. All ammunition purchased, must be that of the weapon that is on your licence, no other ammunition can be purchased. The first permit for each person has a mandatory 28 day delay before it is issued. In some states, such as Queensland, this is waived for second and subsequent firearms of the same class, whilst in others, it is not. For each firearm a "Genuine Reason" must be given, relating to pest control, hunting, target shooting, or collecting. Self-defense is not accepted as a reason for issuing a licence.

Since September 30, 1997, the possession of semi-automatic longarms and pump shotguns have been restricted, there was an amnesty for a short time leading up to the passing of legislation. As of 1999, it is now a felony to own such firearms without appropriate licensing.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_politics

[Pavulon]

10. i can link you to some dead fetus signs for you posters, and fake blood mixes

because thats who you share space with now. 2 supreme court cases make you the same as the folks who throw blood on women going to clinics and people who are offended by jews and blacks at their places of employment and recreation. You are on the same road as the pipe bomb crew.

Sorry you may have to swim with black kids but the law is clear. Its an individual right. 2 cases uphold that. Sure bullshit gun law is easier than fixing the real problem but you may have to take a real reach.

And you can take you can buy 556 nato in any fucking gun shop in switzerland, finland or norway.

Your shit is done, you could spend you time more efficiently herding blacks back to the rear of the bus, this issue is dead and no political party will ever touch it again.

your shit is done, this issue is done, move on. You are like the anti catholic clubs, you time has passed.

[depakid]

12. That's not much of an argument. LOL.

It does coincide nicely with you heated defense of assassinating American citizens not only without charges or due process- but without even the ability of the person targeted to say in court why they shouldn't be!

Not hard to see the common theme here.

[Name removed]

16. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Pavulon]

40. Oh it applies to folks from NSW or tasmanians

what do they call those funny folks in Sydney? Great wall of china vs my right to own a gun, hmm let me think on that. Watch your government, not mine.

[friendly_iconoclast]

83. We prefer not to discuss the fate of the indigenous Tasmanians here.

That's all in the past, don't you know? There's a New Australia, a fine society -apparently full of wowsers who have a compulsion to

complain about places that they don't live in...

[friendly_iconoclast]

82. "Not hard to see the common theme here." Yeah, "the Yanks are bad and Australia is better"

Since they've already accepted you, why the need to dump on your native country?

Aside from the whole "The new converts always sing the loudest in church" bit, I can't see any good reason for it.

[Euromutt]

58. Why would the European Parliament need to push for tighter regulations?

Ah, yes, the original article (http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/29/world/europe/29iht-union.4.8532843.html?_r=1) says:

European Union legislators Thursday overwhelmingly backed tough new gun control rules they said they hoped would prevent Europe from becoming a gun-friendly culture like the United States.

Hold on a second... Doesn't that imply that Europe is/was therefore edging towards becoming "a gun-friendly culture" in spite of the regulations already in place? How could that be?

Sounds to me like the European Parliament, like so many proponents of tighter gun laws, refuse to acknowledge the basic truth of violent crime involving firearms, namely that it is a demand-driven phenomenon, not a supply-driven one. Members of the criminal element don't resort to shooting each other because guns are readily available; they acquire guns, by any means they can, because they want to kill each other, or at least have the ability to do so. Similarly, if private citizens are agitating for the right to possess firearm for the purpose of self-defense, that is a good sign that the local criminal justice system is failing to do its job.

The long and short of it is that people don't go out and shoot others just because local gun laws are too permissive, but because they have reasons to (even if those reasons may only make sense to themselves); conversely, in any place where people don't go out and murder business competitors (including in illicit business), estranged spouses, co-workers, or people who show "disrespect," this because they've matured past thinking that a slight to their honor is worth one or more human lives, not because they can't legally own a gun (because there isn't a place in the world where you can't acquire one illegally).

You actually have something of a point with your trope about "the civilized world," but it's not defined by a country's gun laws. It's defined by whether local culture considers it socially acceptable to place a higher value on your self-image (aka "honor") than on the life of another human being. And I'll acknowledge that that is more of an issue in the United States than it is in western Europe (with the exception of certain immigrant populations), but it's not something you're going to solve with tighter gun laws.

[lawodevolution]

64. Still, if you live in a nation with low gun possession rate your chance if being murdered is higher

All the very high crime nations have very strict gun control

[friendly_iconoclast]

81. What advanced nation has had a decline in murder and violent crime rates recently? The USA!

Always happy to interrupt a self-loathing rant with some inconvenient truths...

[benEzra]

105. You wouldn't like most of Europe so well...

...guns aren't as restricted in most of Europe as you seem to think; the UK is extreme even by European standards.

evil civilian guns in Norway

evil civilian guns in Sweden

evil civilian guns in France

evil civilian guns in Finland

more evil civilian guns in Finland

evil civilian guns in Spain


You wouldn't like Switzerland much at all, even though it is safer than the UK...



and definitely stay far, far away from the peaceful Czech Republic, which is also safer than the UK.


Heck, I don't know if you'd be entirely happy in the UK, either, since even the outrageously strict UK laws still allow ownership of evil high-powered sniper rifles and .73 caliber shotguns...



...not to mention these, which would really rub the neopuritans in this country the wrong way:

The NRA has been spanked in Canada and Australia. Gun pushers are on the wrong side of history, a supreme court justice away from the dustbin of bad ideas.

The NRA is an American organization, not a Canadian or Australian organization.

[cleanhippie]

71. Yes, your agenda is just like the anti-abortion agenda, full of rhetoric and empty of facts.

[one-eyed fat man]

91. Go!

I'll buy your ticket to the "better nation" of your choice...........one way!

Since the grass is so much greener over there just go. Vote with your feet!

Shit or get off the pot.

[SteveM]

95. Funny, most third-world nations have strict gun-control. But you knew that.

[Name removed]

7. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Judi Lynn]

11. Wow! This is the 1st time I've actually shuddered after reading a post.

That's one for the books.

Oh, boy.

[depakid]

13. It gets creepier. Google the screen name

[Judi Lynn]

24. Imagine the person who would choose that. Hmmmm. Fits.

http://www.animadamnata.com.nyud.net:8090/Damned/pavulon.jpg

Necrosadistic (that word) Injector
I guess the definition explains a lot. Thanks!

[Pavulon]

28. The better half uses pancurium in the ER to save lives

where people cant be treated with opiates. It is a paralytic and was threatened to get me to stfu and listen to her point.

But hey the chavez and anti gun pimp are my heroes and I am very worried about your posting on my username.

[Name removed]

14. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[safeinOhio]

17. Sure hope you meant to say

Jewish and not "jew".

[Name removed]

19. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Pavulon]

45. Boy all the posts are going away.

as I said the people who support yanking rights upheld by brown vs board or any other supreme court case dont care about the Jewish or "jew" designation. Gun control is a lie for them, easier than actually fixing the root cause of violence.

Hate to have the people who are on par with the right to life crew twist up my posts. But hey, once your drug bans work, let me know, will happily turn in my legally owned firearms.

Gun control is cancer it will never pass, they people you see on tv manyana will never touch it. That makes it dead.

[Euromutt]

57. There's an exchange in the TV movie "Skokie"...

...in which Mayor Smith somewhat awkwardly tries to refer to the Jewish members of the community as being "of the, erm, Hebraic persuasion" and Eli Wallach's character cut in and says "It's okay to say 'Jew'; it's not a dirty word."

[X_Digger]

38. Was MLK 'fascist'?

"As we have seen, the first public expression of disenchantment with nonviolence arose around the question of "self-defense." In a sense this is a false issue, for the right to defend one's home and one's person when attacked has been guaranteed through the ages by common law." Martin Luther King, Jr., Where Do We Go From Here: Chaos or Community? Chapter II, Black Power, Page 55, Harper & Row Publishers Inc., First Edition, 1967.

[proteus_lives]

53. Yeah, criminal behavior is the same as having rights.

:eyes:

Interesting that you should complain about fascists. You must be afraid to look in a mirror.

[Euromutt]

56. Exercising one's 2nd Amendment rights... in New Jersey?

You have got to be joking, or you are remarkably ill-informed. New Jersey is one of the most restrictive states in the Union concerning the private ownership of firearms. IIRC, you need one "purchase permit" to buy long guns, a separate "purchase permit" for each handgun, no "assault weapons" and forget about getting a carry permit if you aren't politically connected.

And while I know it's frightfully unoriginal to pull out the old Inigo Montoya line, where the word "fascist" is concerned, I don't not think it means what you think it means.

[merqz]

60. There have even been cases of NYPD cops

who have gotten jammed up for carrying in Jersey (prior to passage of a federal law that allows cops to carry in every state). iirc, the Port Authority of NY/NJ is the only agency where their cops are authorized to carry in both states. NJ also bans hollow points, etc. It is an extremely restrictive state. Not that I would expect that previous poster to be posting from a fact-based perspective. Gun control folks so rarely do.

[SteveM]

94. "POOP" went the river horse, causing a slurry which is "not an accident."

[slackmaster]

15. The shooter should be hit on the head with the Steel Hankie for showing up without a gratuity

He should have at least brought a bottle of wine or a six-pack of beer. Everyone with any sense of decency knows that you just don't show up at a party uninvited without something for the host.

[divideandconquer]

41. Like a bullet!

[RSillsbee]

87. Are you aware that a gun alone can't do anything?

There has to be a human involved.

[Blandocyte]

18. We need a gun ban

Cut down bigtime on the number of guns out there. Keep the other amendments, lose the 2nd.

[Pavulon]

20. Hey, they did that with booze, just get you votes together. Look at the coke and weed ban

for you inspiration. how can you ever fuck it up?

[Blandocyte]

21. It cut the availability down. Let's cut the availability of guns down

It's a start. Let's get started! Turn those effers in!

[Pavulon]

23. Right after you start that black only seperate but equal school in a shit neighborhood.

you guys really dont see how the chess pieces have moved.. Pretty sad.

you have nothing, your done, move on, you would have a better chance working on KKK policy than pushing gun control.

[Blandocyte]

25. Just talking guns here.

Turn 'em in. Melt 'em down.

[Pavulon]

27. Hey, good luck with that.. I bet you can actually find a political party to back that

good luck. you are hanging with the mcveigh crew now. enjoy you company.

[Blandocyte]

29. It seems Mcveigh was pro-gun

And anyway, what does popularity have to do with what's right? The right thing to do is to reduce the number of guns available.

[Pavulon]

30. Or reduce the number of mexicans or blacks, push it man. You can ride that ticket to success

less rights for everyone. I mean win win for you?

[Blandocyte]

31. We're talking guns here

Good luck with the smokescreen. "Your done."

[Pavulon]

32. Try to elect a person that will run on yanking a right.

hey does your guy carry an axe handle around atlanta. Maybe thats before your time but boy does it fit.

seriously you have a better chance electing a candidate on an anti black platform.

[friendly_iconoclast]

90. And good luck with your Bonfire of the Firearms.

Are you perchance a member of the Savonarola Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence?

[cleanhippie]

73. You keep forgetting to add the "a" to it.

its "a" right, confirmed twice now by the SCOTUS. Your side lost, the Constitution won.

[PavePusher]

70. Are you volunteering to go door-to-door collecting them?

Or do you intend to send hired goons, presumably with guns, to back up your edicts?

[SteveM]

97. Noted your "resolve." Fell off?

[divideandconquer]

22. A far better chief justice than we have now said 2nd amendment was for national guard

The Right To Bear Arms
A distinguished citizen takes a stand on one of the most controversial issues in the nation
By Warren E. Burger, Chief Justice of the United States (1969-86)
Parade Magazine, January 14, 1990, page 4

Our metropolitan centers, and some suburban communities of America, are setting new records for homicides by handguns. Many of our large centers have up to 10 times the murder rate of all of Western Europe. In 1988, there were 9000 handgun murders in America. Last year, Washington, D.C., alone had more than 400 homicides -- setting a new record for our capital.

The Constitution of the United States, in its Second Amendment, guarantees a "right of the people to keep and bear arms." However, the meaning of this clause cannot be understood except by looking to the purpose, the setting and the objectives of the draftsmen. The first 10 amendments -- the Bill of Rights -- were not drafted at Philadelphia in 1787; that document came two years later than the Constitution. Most of the states already had bills of rights, but the Constitution might not have been ratified in 1788 if the states had not had assurances that a national Bill of Rights would soon be added.

People of that day were apprehensive about the new "monster" national government presented to them, and this helps explain the language and purpose of the Second Amendment. A few lines after the First Amendment's guarantees -- against "establishment of religion," "free exercise" of religion, free speech and free press -- came a guarantee that grew out of the deep-seated fear of a "national" or "standing" army. The same First Congress that approved the right to keep and bear arms also limited the national army to 840 men; Congress in the Second Amendment then provided:

"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."

In the 1789 debate in Congress on James Madison's proposed Bill of Rights, Elbridge Gerry argued that a state militia was necessary:

"to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty ... Whenever governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia in order to raise and army upon their ruins."

We see that the need for a state militia was the predicate of the "right" guaranteed; in short, it was declared "necessary" in order to have a state military force to protect the security of the state. That Second Amendment clause must be read as though the word "because" was the opening word of the guarantee. Today, of course, the "state militia" serves a very different purpose. A huge national defense establishment has taken over the role of the militia of 200 years ago.

Some have exploited these ancient concerns, blurring sporting guns -- rifles, shotguns and even machine pistols -- with all firearms, including what are now called "Saturday night specials." There is, of course, a great difference between sporting guns and handguns. Some regulation of handguns has long been accepted as imperative; laws relating to "concealed weapons" are common. That we may be "over-regulated" in some areas of life has never held us back from more regulation of automobiles, airplanes, motorboats and "concealed weapons."

Let's look at the history.

First, many of the 3.5 million people living in the 13 original Colonies depended on wild game for food, and a good many of them required firearms for their defense from marauding Indians -- and later from the French and English. Underlying all these needs was an important concept that each able-bodied man in each of the 133 independent states had to help or defend his state.

The early opposition to the idea of national or standing armies was maintained under the Articles of Confederation; that confederation had no standing army and wanted none. The state militia -- essentially a part-time citizen army, as in Switzerland today -- was the only kind of "army" they wanted. From the time of the Declaration of Independence through the victory at Yorktown in 1781, George Washington, as the commander-in-chief of these volunteer-militia armies, had to depend upon the states to send those volunteers.

When a company of New Jersey militia volunteers reported for duty to Washington at Valley Forge, the men initially declined to take an oath to "the United States," maintaining, "Our country is New Jersey." Massachusetts Bay men, Virginians and others felt the same way. To the American of the 18th century, his state was his country, and his freedom was defended by his militia.

The victory at Yorktown -- and the ratification of the Bill of Rights a decade later -- did not change people's attitudes about a national army. They had lived for years under the notion that each state would maintain its own military establishment, and the seaboard states had their own navies as well. These people, and their fathers and grandfathers before them, remembered how monarchs had used standing armies to oppress their ancestors in Europe. Americans wanted no part of this. A state militia, like a rifle and powder horn, was as much a part of life as the automobile is today; pistols were largely for officers, aristocrats -- and dueling.

Against this background, it was not surprising that the provision concerning firearms emerged in very simple terms with the significant predicate -- basing the right on the necessity for a "well regulated militia," a state army.
---------------------------------------------------------------
<http://www.guncite.com/burger.html>

[Pavulon]

26. Your done, there are women having abortions who need to have blood thrown in their face

all that crap has nothing to do with the reality in front of you. I know where you can get a stick and a poster board.

Hey you can work on some prohibition laws it was smashing success last time the idiots passed it

[divideandconquer]

33. Yeah, go tell the European Union, Australia, Japan, Canada, etc all about reality

Like on so many issues, the USA is stuck in previous centuries as is many of it's backward citizens. So be proud to stand with the Dick Cheneys and the teabaggers while you build a bridge to the 18th century.

[Pavulon]

34. hey champ, they have guns in canada

even hand guns and scarry scarry black guns that fire a 22 caliber round. But you can stand with stupid all you want. You lost and you will lose again. The people who show up on tomorrows tv shows and broker power know you position is defunct and will never ever vote for any of the dumbshittery you guys got in the 90's

But hey MC hammer still has some pants you can buy.

[divideandconquer]

43. Canada has a National gun registry and hates pistols

Take your gun to Canada and see what happens. :rofl:

[Pavulon]

47. I shot an IPSC match in canada and had a blast

3rd place in "stock" with a sig 226 that was legal to own and carry there. What happened, I had fun than got hammered with the locals.

No one got shot.

[merqz]

61. That's correct

Even Michael Moore made this point, although many anti-gunners seems to miss it. Canada is NOT the sort of place where it's illegal to own a gun, or very difficult to get one. Concealed carry is nigh impossible to do legally, but ownership and possession on one's own property is quite common. One of my friends is from Canada and her parents live on a farm and they have an "arsenal" that would scare many anti-gunners. The primary difference is in the issue of concealed carry. Canadian citizens own a LOT of firearms and they are hardly banned.

[Blandocyte]

35. It's only a matter of time before we join the civilized world

It's inevitable. The 4th amendment's been shredded, so the 2nd certainly can go. At least we'll have some good come from the latter move.

[Pavulon]

36. Hey you can change that constitution thing. The anti booze people were so successful

I mean learn from them. You can get all the states lined up, pass that law, and man that shit rocked. During prohibition the world was so awesome the little baby Jesus sang everyone's little children to bed every night..

You have a better chance on getting a guy to put a bill on the floor to ban blacks from the library. christ.

[Blandocyte]

37. Gotta take the chance however slim, just like other countries

that have been able to ban guns. It's the right thing to do.

[Name removed]

39. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Pavulon]

42. Good luck. you have a better chance finding a sponsor for the KKK anti black

on you golf course bill. really you are so far out of touch, you have a much better chance with that.

[divideandconquer]

44. Meanwhile in the real world as we speak:8 people shot, 3 stabbed after party By the CNN Wire Staff

2 dead so far tonite, more in the hospital in gun crazed America.

<http://www.cnn.com/2010/CRIME/09/25/california.shooting/index.html?hpt=T2>

[Pavulon]

46. How many dwi bodies, call up and spill some drama for a booze ban

I mean if alcohol was illegal there would be no dwi.

You people know that any gun control out of the mouth of a person that matters is certain death for a political movement. I mean fuck the economy, fuck the wars, they all know gun control is radioactive. The party leadership has no reason to shit on voters with pointless law, with all the important things in the balance.

You really expect people to spend capitol on a LIE.

[divideandconquer]

48. Why do you swear so much?

No debate, just vulgar meanness and promotion of political fear. No wonder the gun pushers have no problems with Al Queda or Mexican gangs buying guns in America.

[Pavulon]

49. Al q buying guns and coke at the same store, oh noes mexicans of evilness with guns

buying belt fed weapons and frag grenades in arizona seriously no one will ever support this shit because it is silly. Really no one that matters supports this floater.

The lie of gun control is crime control is done. Seriously once you realize you are on par with the people who set pipe bombs in front of "abortion" clinics you may find better use of your time.

There is actually a root cause problem to be solved but it is harder to fix than banning a hi cap mag.

[Pavulon]

50. I used fewer bad words to point out how stupid "gun control" is this time

hey tune in tomorrow to the sunday morning shows, see which zombie mentions it. No one will because it is instant political death to push now that people realize it was a giant lie.

[divideandconquer]

51. Only in America, the civilized world is far different about guns

Proud to line up with dick cheney? Watch your face.

[Pavulon]

52. Please. Your shit is done. Just like mc hammer pants

the gun control fad is over. Logic prevailed. Get one person to speak for your position tomorrow and I will not outright dismiss you like the KKK or some right to life clinic protesters.

Your done, no one will entertain you position. It is dead. Move on.

ESAD.

[lawodevolution]

68. Yes in Nigeria they have a gun ban, 500 people were killed in one mass violence event

Mexico has a gun ban.

[Bold Lib]

78. Please define a "civilized would".

[friendly_iconoclast]

79. Dick Cheney supports the right to same-sex marriage. Do *you* support it?

[SteveM]

101. You support gun bans, and Cheney supports you...

because you keep the issue in full-view at a Democratic web site. C'mon, you're just getting off to your own stuff. You really don't care about progressive issues; you only care about punking.

[SteveM]

100. Are you celebrating or mourning? I think we know the answer to that.

[Kringle]

55. yah sure, Nigeria .nt

[Euromutt]

59. Are you familiar with the origins of gun control in "the civilized world"?

Gun control in Europe was pretty much non-existent up to the First World War, during which various countries imposed "temporary" gun control measures, not in the least place to disarm any members of the citizenry who might be opposed to the war (as well they fucking might) and might take it into their heads to overthrow the governments that were feeding thousands of their young men into the meat grinder every week, though such measures were sold as being to disarm "subversive elements," of course.

More permanent gun control measures were imposed when the war ended (and the excuse for the "temporary" ones ran out). They were prompted by the overthrow of autocratic regimes in Russia (1917) and Germany (1918), both of which involved (rightly) disgruntled military personnel. And if there was one thing most European governments found they had a plentiful supply of, it was disgruntled military personnel, many of whom weren't even allowed to vote. If you want it in class warfare terms, gun control in Europe was imposed by the upper and upper-middle class to deprive the working and lower-middle class of the means to overthrow governments that had squandered whatever popular mandate they ever had.

In Germany, a complete ban on private ownership of firearms was imposed under the terms of the Treaty of Versailles; nevertheless, Communist and proto-Nazi party militias engaged in firefights (even with automatic weapons) on the streets of major German cities throughout the 1920s. The law was relaxed in 1928, permitting private firearm ownership under a strict regime of licensing and registration, and the Nazis arguably loosened the gun laws further in 1938, but only for ideologically reliable individuals (particularly Nazi party members) while completely outlawing weapons ownership for "undesirables" such as Jews, trade unionists, socialists, communists and the like.

In Italy, Mussolini's Fascist government imposed gun control in the mid-1920s primarily to disarm the Socialists and the Communists and prevent them from overthrowing the Fascists, or even trying to.

The history of gun control in "the civilized world" is mostly that of governments with dubious claims to legitimacy depriving the disenfranchised of the means to rise against those governments. And of their successors deciding to maintain those controls "just in case," much like the Belgian government retained the personal identification card, and the requirement to show it to any cop who demands it, after the Nazis were driven out. And post-9/11, other countries in Europe have finally followed suit.

But in the past couple of decades, the limitations of European gun control have been laid bare; comparatively low rates of violent crime weren't the result of restrictive gun laws, but of the overwhelming majority of people simply not resorting to extreme violence to resolve interpersonal conflicts. The landscape changed with successive waves of immigration; post-decolonization, and post-Cold War. Following in the wake of the people seeking gainful employment came the organized criminals, the traffickers in drugs, humans, and weapons, who also needed weapons themselves to settle "business disputes." From Jamaicans and Pakistanis in the UK, to Moroccans and Algerians in France, to Turks and Yugoslavs in Germany, and various combinations thereof everywhere else, Europe has experienced an influx of people who hold on to cultural notions that their host nations discarded during the Enlightenment (not least by shipping their remaining adherents off to North America). With the end of the Cold War and the accession of most of the former Warsaw Pact to the EU, and the resultant stream of migrants from eastern/central Europe westward, things have become even more complex.

In a very real sense, the United States will not join what you term "the civilized world"; rather "the civilized world" will join us (and again, note that I am speaking as an immigrant from western Europe), because it's followed the United States in accepting an influx of outsiders who may draw the continent back further than shipping the religious whackjobs off to America allowed it to advance.

Guns aren't the cause of the problem; they're simply a tool. What is much more readily identifiable as a problem is personal "honor"; most of the problems of violence in western society can be traced to people who, as matter of culture, consider their self-image to be more valuable than human life. This includes Jamaican "Yardies" in London, and their disciples in the segment of the African-American population involved in the drug trade, killing another guy for "showing disrespect"; it includes British residents of Pakistani origin murdering a female relative in an "honor killing" because she had the temerity to sleep with someone of whom the family didn't approve. Ditto among various other immigrant populations all over the place.

At present, the American non-firearm homicide rate is higher than the overall homicide rates of most European countries. The problem is not the availability of firearms, but a cultural tendency to think that murdering the other person is a socially acceptable way of resolving an interpersonal conflict. As the proportion of the European population who are or are recently descended from immigrants increases, this will make European society more like American society. It already has. And as European criminal justice systems prove themselves unable to provide public safety, more European citizens will argue that, if the state can't keep them safe, the state needs to stop preventing them from acquiring the means to protect themselves.

[merqz]

62. We stand apart from the civilized (alleged) world on both our 1st and 2nd amendments

I like it that way. You may not. It's our constitution, like it or not. I like it.

[Euromutt]

63. On most of the other ones as well

There really are no organizations comparable to the ACLU in the European Union, which will support the efforts of plaintiffs who object to having their freedoms of religions, speech, the press and to peaceably assemble, or their right to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures violated, to the point of paying for the lawyer.

As someone with dual citizenship of both a western European country (by birth) and the United States (by naturalization) I will say that while European governments and society will be more reticent to obviously violate your civil and human rights than various levels of American government will, when such a thing does occur, it is far easier to gain redress in the American system.

[divideandconquer]

67. Funny you bring up the ACLU, they agree with Chief Justice Berger

Gun Control
Updated: 7/8/2008

The Second Amendment provides: "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."

ACLU POSITION
Given the reference to "a well regulated Militia" and "the security of a free State," the ACLU has long taken the position that the Second Amendment protects a collective right rather than an individual right. For seven decades, the Supreme Court's 1939 decision in United States v. Miller was widely understood to have endorsed that view.

The Supreme Court has now ruled otherwise. In striking down Washington D.C.'s handgun ban by a 5-4 vote, the Supreme Court's 2008 decision in D.C. v. Heller held for the first time that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right to keep and bear arms, whether or not associated with a state militia.

The ACLU disagrees with the Supreme Court's conclusion about the nature of the right protected by the Second Amendment. We do not, however, take a position on gun control itself. In our view, neither the possession of guns nor the regulation of guns raises a civil liberties issue.
---------------------------------------
<http://www.aclu.org/racial-justice_prisoners-rights_drug-law-reform_immigrants-rights/second-amendment>

[merqz]

76. and they (ACLU) agree with the decision in Citizen United case

it is certainly interesting that the ACLU disagrees with even many liberal legal scholars on the 2nd (who have come around to an individual rights interpretation DESPITE their opposition to it as POLICY e.g. Larry Tribe). I would prefer it if the ACLU agreed with the RKBA interpretation . They don't. At least I am happy to see that many well respected legal scholars from all over the political spectrum disagree with the ACLU. I'm not accusing you of an argument from authority, but I certainly do not take my constitutional interpretation marching orders from the ACLU or anybody else. I didn't see a lot of people here trying to justify the Citizen United case by saying "the ACLU agrees it's a free speech issue".

[SteveM]

102. Still getting support from...

Cheney and the teabaggers? They LOVE IT when you keep "gun control" front 'n' center. Oh, but I forgot. You really don't care about this issue or most anything progressive; you only care about punking.

[divideandconquer]

66. We stand apart as the world's richest third world nation and high murder rate

You may enjoy that but many Americans are deeply embarrassed and disturbed by our degenerate gun culture.

[lawodevolution]

69. You don't speak for Americans. Only 35% want more gun control.

http://www.rasmussenreports.com/public_content/politics/current_events/gun_control/67_say_cities_have_no_right_to_ban_handguns

[divideandconquer]

85. Rasmussen is not a legitimate polling agency, Faux News of polling

It makes me suspect your political allegiance to quote them.

[X_Digger]

88. Try gallup or CNN..

http://www.gallup.com/poll/117361/recent-shootings-gun-control-support-fading.aspx

http://articles.cnn.com/2009-04-08/politics/gun.control.poll_1_gun-laws-gun-owner-rights-people?_s=PM:POLITICS

eta: fixed link

Now, a recent poll reveals a sudden drop -- only 39 percent of Americans now favor stricter gun laws, according to a new CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll.

And that was a year ago.. notice gallup's trend line..

[SteveM]

104. Your political allegiance...

is evidently well beyond suspect. You keep a golden issue (for the G.O.P.) alive and kicking, and do so within a Democratic Party forum. 5CR/3RD?

[merqz]

77. two points

1) Calling us a third world nation is ridiculous, not supported by evidence, and just exposes you as prone to silly rhetoric instead of rational discourse

2) Our gun culture is a SEPERATE issue from our 2nd amendment rights. Assuming arguendo that we have a "degenerate gun culture", that's really tangential to the fact that we recognize broader right to self-defense than most any other nation, and more individual citizen empowerment w/o govt. interference. I live in a right to carry state, in an area with extensive firearms ownership and carry and very little of any "degenerate gun culture" as well as quite a low crime rate (far lower than many allegedly civilized countries). I note that many epicenters of "degenerate gun culture" where life is cheap and violence is common are also locations where gun rights are ignored (e.g. Chicago). You could also argue that we have a "degenerate speech culture". Regardless, I wouldn't cede either my 1st or 2nd amendment rights. I've spent a lot of time in allegedly "civilized" nations (France comes to mind). I loved being there. But, except when it comes to food!, I saw no evidence that they were more civilized. When you step outside the touristy areas, you see a country with plenty of problems and plenty of course culture and govt. power.

[oneshooter]

86. Please explain what a"degenerate gun culture" consists of. n/t

[friendly_iconoclast]

89. One whose attitude toward guns differs from theirs, it would seem.

Our interlocutor apparently derives inspiration not only from Sarah Brady but Cotton Mather as well.

Hence the religious tone to their arguments, and the intolerance of facts.

[Euromutt]

92. Hold up; is the United States a "third world nation" or not?

Because if it is, then you have to accept that the valid comparison is with other developing countries, and in that context, the U.S. is remarkably mild both in its homicide and violent crime rates. Fact is, of course, that the United States compares favorably to quite a few developed countries in the field of violent crime; it's just homicide where the U.S. stands out. If, that is, you regard the U.S. as a "developed (First World) country"; if you count the U.S. as a "third world nation," Venezuela, Brazil, most of Central America, most of sub-Saharan Africa, all score worse.

[SteveM]

103. You need more correction...

Actually, MOST Americans are in support of the Second Amendment. But you knew that as well.

[SteveM]

99. Many rather uncivilized countries have strict gun-control laws.

So, am I reading you correctly that "The 4th amendment's been shredded, so the 2nd certainly can go" is your logic? What other Amendments would your logic "shred?"

[SteveM]

98. Anyone standing for strict gun-control laws...

enables the Dick Cheneys and the teabaggers far more than those defending the Second. But you knew that.

[cleanhippie]

74. Aren't you missing from your Sunday morning protest at the abortion clinic?

[proteus_lives]

54. Sorry, are you on the right website?

[slackmaster]

65. You are free to ban guns from your home

Not from mine.

[cleanhippie]

72. Is ignorance bliss?

[SteveM]

96. 5CR/3RD? BTW, whould we ban marijuana. Oh, wait! We've done that.

If you want to repeal the Second Amendment, you are free to try, but even the stand of the Democratic Party on guns enunciates support for the Second. So you will be in opposition to the Democratic Party.

[HardWorkingDem]

75. On a troubling side issue.....(American racial component, unfortunately)

How to put this delicately.

So far none of the wire reports have included a description of the suspect. I did go to the website of a local news report and of the one I read, no descriptors were their, either.

Of course, the online comments were atrocious.

I bring this up because does not the obvious censoring of this information create more issues than it would by printing the information? On one hand you have those that assume the description and make comments according to their perceptions.

And does not the scrubbing of information show a systemic "political correctness" (I really detest that phrase) that does not allow for discussion?

For one thing, many of those well educated in issues of racial discussion consistently say this country needs to discuss race more openly, but if we have become so sensitive to the topic that news reports completely leave out information for whatever reason, what impact does that have on information and discussion?

(And before anyone asks what is the importance of the description of the suspect - from the latest reports the suspect is still at large and there is a $10,000 reward offered).

[Bold Lib]

80. How very odd. Post a reward and tell everyone he is still at large but DON"T say what he looks like

I didn't notice that but your are 100% correct. I've noticed this when it happens locally in my local news but I guess I glossed over it in this case - not local to me.

[friendly_iconoclast]

84. The advertisement of the reward is meant for the suspect's "friends".

In cases like this, it doesn't mean like Chandler and Monica from Friends, rather more like The Friends of Eddie Coyle

kind of "friends".


It's not a racial thing, it's an invitation for someone with knowledge of the suspect to dime them out.

[shadowrider]

93. I have RW friends

Who have noted when a description is not given, the suspect is usually, 9 times out of 10, either black or hispanic. I didn't pay attention to it either until they said something. I've been following it ever since and find it, for the most part, to be true.