You floated the 2nd amendment to provoke a debate and got it in spades, and the same debate will rage over the coming days and I will become numb as the words wash over me repetitiously, monotonously, ad nausea, constitution reform, civil rights, NRA, God. The important faces will merge into a late night flickering distraction on Sky or Fox. I'm tempted to say that it's their problem (regardless of the Irish children caught up in the tragedy), that they've known about it too long and done nothing tangible to sort it out, but I also know that this would be insensitive. But I see a simple solution, one for which there is no sentiment state-side, and I acknowledge that it's a million times easier for me to state an opinion, then it is for a father to pick up his child's broken body at a morgue.

So, forget the claptrap, the analysis, the handy talk, the agendas, the lobbyists, let the American mothers rise up and tell their politician sons to stop licensing new guns now, stop gun sales now and hand back all guns now . Why not, what conceivable harm will it do ? Only good could ever come of it.

The Da worked on the railway for too long and I remember him often telling us that you couldn't design a railway carriage or engine to withstand a collision. No such construction could exist, and all safety activities were directed at operational procedure and discipline. It is the same with guns, you can't design a safe society when they're present, just get rid of the fucking things.

Every country has a foundation for their system of government. Every country has a historical context. But most grow up.

A written constitution is more than a snapshot of the time it was framed; it has a mechanism for change built into it so that it doesn't become frozen in the wrong time. Changing it within that framework upholds what was founded.

Why does the US pharmaceutical industry have more legislative control for the safety of drugs in the presence of children than of guns in their presence? Is it because there is not a right to take medicine enshrined in stone, sorry I mean the constitution?

Bock, you're missing the historical context, here. Devin got it right; the guns were necessary to prevent the government from fucking us over. That is what the framers of the Constitution had in mind. It gives us the right bear arms (an important point, if you look at the history leading up to the American Revolution, especially in Scotland and Ireland, countries defeated by the English, and where the indigenous population was specifically banned from having weapons of any kind, even knives and swords, and where do you think those pissed off rebels ended up?), and anything else is reading into it. The interesting point, which nobody ever seems to argue about, is the "well regualted militia" clause. So, who's going to regulate the militia? What constitutes a "militia," exactly? The Federal and State governments have used this to require various regualtions and permits on weapon-owning, but does that not defeat the purpose of having arms to protect yourself against the government, since the government knows who has what, and might short-list you if the country has another armed revolution? See? Interesting points, huh?

BrianF — You're a nutter. If you officially joined the Libertarian Party, you had to sign a statement saying that you don't advocate overthrowing the Government by force, which just goes to show you how hypocritical the Libertarian Party actually is, as where would this country be if we hadn't overthrown the English? Think about it.

Sassy, those Founding Fathers certainly did believe in God. Tom Jefferson was a Deist. Even Benjamin Franklin went to a Christian Church. If it walks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it probably believes in God, and at least goes to church to appease the crazed villagers and get elected. Some of them didn't believe in slavery, either, but they had slaves. You have to look at what people do, not what they say, or what they write. I can call myself Salma Hayek and pretend that half the world is hot for me, but it ain't true, and the historical evidence will show otherwise.

Sniffle & Cry said…. "Guns are wrong, they hurt people." Your logic is faulty. People are wrong, they hurt people. Try that one on for size. If there were no more people, then people wouldn't get hurt by people, would they?

Talk amongst yourselves, I'm all verklempt. I'll give you a topic…. I have a theory that America is a violent, religiously fanatical country because we ended up with the crazed, violent, religiously fanatical people from all the other countries. Nature and nurture, and all that, and here we are today. All responses may be completely plagiarized for a dissertation. Thank you.

I'm with the libertarians on a number of things but the gun thing isn't one of them. I think there is just a fundamental difference in attitude on either side of The Pond. I could spout statistics as could you, but at the end of the day, it just feels all wrong to me and all right to you.

Thanks for fielding us all so gamely though!

Charlton Heston thinks he's God, but he's just a crackpot with a booming voice.