Guns and kids

[Kress]

it is illegal for a person under the age of 18 to acquire a rifle (21 for handgun) without being it being gifted by a parent or legal guardian.

[memimemi]

"of the people by the people for the people"
With this quote in mind, do you really think the term the people was used at the time to mean the state governments? Or do you interpret it to mean the citizens of the states

Those are the only two options?  What of 'autonomous freeholders residing within arbitrary lines of state jurisdiction' vs 'those granted coercive power over said freeholders?'  The militia would be comprised of the first; the superstructure of the USA would be of the latter.

If you consider the state militia as a direct opposition to the forces commanded by the federal government then you need to start complaining about federal abuses of power. The federal government has taken command of the state militias before.

Were I a US citizen, this is one of the issues on which I'd certainly be speaking up.

Fun fact: Did you know the initially 10 amendments were not edits but rather a list of rights that one side did not think needed to be explicitly mentioned but the other side thought needed to be explicitly mentioned? In the framers' minds these rights did not change the rest of the document.

However you are correct that the constitution was made editable. If the zeitgeist wants it edited then the zeitgeist should edit it rather than pretend it is already edited.

No, I did not.  I respectfully request evidence of what was in the framers' minds at the time of the drafting of the constitution.  Then, I request that you split some of the money you make from the James Randi Million-Dollar challenge, upon proving your mind-reading skills.  Forgive the snark, for which I'll apologize upon the posting of/linking to/provision of said evidence.

The very fluidity of the US Constitution is why so many of us outside your borders both admire the functioning of your government, and swear quietly to ourselves about your populace's engagement therewith.  Would that more constitutions were written with the intent that change come to them in an unspecified future.

[OldTrees]

"of the people by the people for the people"
With this quote in mind, do you really think the term the people was used at the time to mean the state governments? Or do you interpret it to mean the citizens of the states

Those are the only two options?  What of 'autonomous freeholders residing within arbitrary lines of state jurisdiction' vs 'those granted coercive power over said freeholders?'  The militia would be comprised of the first; the superstructure of the USA would be of the latter.

If you consider the state militia as a direct opposition to the forces commanded by the federal government then you need to start complaining about federal abuses of power. The federal government has taken command of the state militias before.

Were I a US citizen, this is one of the issues on which I'd certainly be speaking up.

Pardon my confusion but 'autonomous freeholders residing within arbitrary lines of state jurisdiction' sounds like 'citizens'. We don't have that type of militia in the USA anymore. The state militias are small armies. Thus it sounds like you support the right to bare arms for the old meaning of militia. If a militia were formed it would already need access to guns. Since a well regulated militia is necessary to maintaining the securing of a free state, the members of the militia need access to guns before the militia is required. In order for the members of the militia to have guns before the militia is required, the right of citizens to keep and bear arms will not be infringed.

Fun fact: Did you know the initially 10 amendments were not edits but rather a list of rights that one side did not think needed to be explicitly mentioned but the other side thought needed to be explicitly mentioned? In the framers' minds these rights did not change the rest of the document.

However you are correct that the constitution was made editable. If the zeitgeist wants it edited then the zeitgeist should edit it rather than pretend it is already edited.

No, I did not.  I respectfully request evidence of what was in the framers' minds at the time of the drafting of the constitution.  Then, I request that you split some of the money you make from the James Randi Million-Dollar challenge, upon proving your mind-reading skills.  Forgive the snark, for which I'll apologize upon the posting of/linking to/provision of said evidence.

The very fluidity of the US Constitution is why so many of us outside your borders both admire the functioning of your government, and swear quietly to ourselves about your populace's engagement therewith.  Would that more constitutions were written with the intent that change come to them in an unspecified future.

I find it hard to cite high school US history classes. However this link(Campaign for a Bill of Rights) has all the information I was trying to convey. Though I admit I summarized. (PS: I did not claim to be a mind reader. I apologize if it sounded that arrogant.)

I agree with your sentiment.

[memimemi]

Pardon my confusion but 'autonomous freeholders residing within arbitrary lines of state jurisdiction' sounds like 'citizens'. We don't have that type of militia in the USA anymore. The state militias are small armies. Thus it sounds like you support the right to bare arms for the old meaning of militia. If a militia were formed it would already need access to guns. Since a well regulated militia is necessary to maintaining the securing of a free state, the members of the militia need access to guns before the militia is required. In order for the members of the militia to have guns before the militia is required, the right of citizens to keep and bear arms will not be infringed.

If anything, 'Citizens' sounds sort of like 'autonomous freeholders,' except that 'citizens' agree, either explicitly or implicitly, to surrender some of that autonomy to the functions of the State (as in gov't, not as in the 58 or so US subdivisions known as States).  /nitpick

I find it hard to cite high school US history classes. However this link(Campaign for a Bill of Rights) has all the information I was trying to convey. Though I admit I summarized. (PS: I did not claim to be a mind reader. I apologize if it sounded that arrogant.)

I agree with your sentiment.

Please accept my apologies - that link was a decent summation of the explicit testaments of the writers of the American Constitution and Bill of Rights.

[OldTrees]

Apology accepted. My wording and tone bear the majority of the fault anyways.

[MartyMo]

guns kill people and people kill people

[Silux]

i'm from a different country, and guns here are not sold, but they are given only to veteran policeman or older security guards.
What felt more strange about USA is that shotguns are cheaper than a pc, and are easily purchasable online.

I have taken a shooting class just for curiosity and found out that handguns have a really poor accuracy, so that you must shoot within 4-6 meters to hit a person sized target without training.

But what seems more strange is that guns in USA means more suicides, which is estimated 3 of 1million is unintentional.
So a gun is more a danger for self than others o.o
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_firearm-related_death_rate