The right to bear arms....

But then someone had the political will to change the law in this country, which I should imagine the vast majority of the population agreed with.

For me the trouble is that the persons needing to change the right to bear arms in America are dealing with a culture that has been inplace since before independance.

The statics that have been posted are i am in no doubt correct,and again i say i would love to see a ban on firearms,hunting knives and such,but those in the pro gun league will no doubt want those statistics to show just how many firearm deaths were in relation to gang on gang incidents,which would mean,in most cases,that the firearm was illegal.

If the majority of American people do not wish to change their gun laws, American people will continue to kill American people.

If they are happy that so many of their people are being killed by fellow Americans, fair enough, but it makes no sense to me. 

'But' implies that you're disagreeing with me in some way, so I don't really understand what you're saying. The argument is simple, we have very tight gun control in this country as a consequence of which we have few deaths from guns. They ought to have similarly tight controls in the US in order to achieve the same thing. 

There was no question of 'changing the law' in this country, we've never had a constitutional right to bear arms as in the US. 

Forgive me I'm wrong but I thought the law regarding guns was changed after a mass shooting somewhere in this country.

"but" was perhaps the wrong word to use.

I agree with others sentiments of the mentality never changing, but I'm naive( American nationality) enough to believe that compromise can be campaigned for and achieved. 

I think more than anything a changing attitude and stance towards handguns would go a huge way in regards to those horrible statistics.

What saddens me is that it is no longer shocking, ( as someone earlier pointed out), not when there are so many incidents a year, many of which go unreported over-here in the main media outlets. 

I agree that given history and culture of the U.S.A it's political suicide, but Obama can't run for election again, so should take the chance to implement some real change.  

Fair enough, there have been less fundamental changes, in particular following Dunblane the complete outlawing of handguns. But this country's tradition and law has always been very different in relation to firearms as a whole and there has never been a constitutional right to bear arms. 

I find it hard to believe that when these horrific acts happen nothing seems to be addressed or changes sort after. If they continue to debate and do nothing.... nothing will change.

I would like to know what would happen if a terrorist did such an act of atrocity. Woundn't they be on the verge of going to  war with someone . But when it's their own nothing !.

I just don't understand the mentality of it and i'm very much an advocate that it's the man that pulls the trigger. Stricter access control for fire arms would be at least a start.

Even one live saved from tighter controls would be worth it.

I think you have to get into the (gang) mentality of, "If everyone else has a gun, I need one too in order to be safe!!"

I have heard the same (gang) argument put with regard to knives.......it's the road to hell (imo) !

Just read a BBC report about gun control in America.A study conducted last year concluded that the vast majority of gun crime was comited with ''illegal''weapons,as opposed to those that are purchased from a store.

Senetors are now pushing to have auto/semi auto guns banned at a federal leval....the support of the presidant is expected.

Even now there is no talk of a blanket ban on weapons,just tighter controls. 

I think you have to get into the (gang) mentality of, "If everyone else has a gun, I need one too in order to be safe!!"

I have heard the same (gang) argument put with regard to knives.......it's the road to hell (imo) !

[/quote]

Yes i can see that but a gun is specifically designed for one purpose therefore it's needs to be treated with greater respect to safety and avaliability IMO.

I don't think a respectable gorverning body could support a "gang mentality" to justify a continued arms status quo in light of relevant statistics and frequency of events.

Or indeed a written constitution (I appreciate the reality is a little more complicated than this, since we have countless written laws).

.....but four uses  ie. Attack / Threaten; Self Defense; Hunting and Competition

I'm not disagreeing with you though!

I dont think that I ever implied there had been a constitutional right to bear arms in this country.

It pains me to provide a Wikipedia link, but this table makes useful reading:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_...

Gun licensing and control has done little to reduce the frighteningly high Jamaican shooting rate (again mostly with illegally owned firearms), while Switzerland is further down the list, despite mandatory gun ownership (of sorts).

Cultural factors seem at least as important as a legal right to bear arms; not that I'm suggesting prohibition is a bad idea.