Week 2 discussion - shootings / guns

[Admin]

Another mass shooting in the U.S. last week. What can America do about its gun problem? Is it just the sign of a sick society? What is the difference in other countries? How far should constitutional rights go? Should even the police be armed? anything you want concerning this and other shootings and gun laws.

[Emmanuel THOMAS]

Obviously the gun problem of the US is mainly because of its politics. The second amendment of the American Constitution guaranties the right to carry a firearm. As a consequence that's easier for sick people to have a weapon and to use it. As long as this amendment exists those terrible shooting could happen.

But I want to talk about another part of the problem : american mentality. Indeed I think the 2nd amendment illustrates what americans think and want : to be allowed to defend by themselves. Of course that's not right for every citizen of America. But a part of the american society keeps this mentality alive. Last presidential elections in US are a perfect proof of it. Firearms lobbies are very strong and powerful, and with a president as Donald Trump that won't change soon in my opinion.

[Charlotte Vergnaud]

Hi

The United States holds the record for the highest number of shootings.
Shootings are more frequent and more and more deadly, especially since the more murderous in Florida, with at least 20 deaths in a gay night club.

The reasons in my view is that:
First of all, there is a link between the number of shootings and the possession of guns. In the USA, the number of people with a gun in his home is alarming and more importantly, they must not even justify whyt they possess a gun.
There is also a link between the number of shootings and permissive laws to have the weapon without proving why they have.
Finally, in the USA, the fame is sought. Thus, some seek fame through murder.

On the political front, the governement  has failed completely to reduce these shootings.
Barack Obama has fought for the toughening of legislation about guns. The problem is that guns have always been part of the American landscape, and their free detention is even part of the United States Constitution.

Trump met with a powerful gun lobby in the United States. He suggested that we don’t sell guns to the people under anti-terrorist surveillance. But it won't change anything.

[Jeremy ROGEON]

Hello,
Shootings in the United States systematically debate the right to own and carry a firearm, and raise the issue of its legitimacy.

For me the weapon for individuals should not even exist, the problem is that carrying weapons is rooted in the American culture and mindset. Indeed the right to detain a weapon goes back to the time of the cowboys and for the Americans this right is a constitutional right and they are proud of it.

The conditions for holding a weapon are increasingly strict but differences persist between the different states which does not always make things easier.

Removing the right to possess a weapon could limit the number of shootings but most Americans do not agree; they point to the fact that most killings are perpetuated by imbalances holding weapons illegally.

Jérémy ROGEON

[Vian Pierre-marie L3]

Hello everybody

Las Vegas's shooting is the latest nowadays. Stephen Paddock it's author killed 59 person before killing himself. He bought 33 assault shotgun this past 11 month and he could enter his hotel's room with one of them and without any security control.

This awful crime revived the debate on the right to carry weapons in United States.
The pro-weapons who adduce the second amendment are support by the NRA (the National Riffles Association) a powerful lobby which finance some of the politician including Donald Trump.
However the weaponry industry represent In US 34 Billion dollars. Moreover it employs (both directly an indirectly) more than 1 million person. Stopping the production would be a great shortfall for the US income and a social disaster.

But according to me the problem is the second amendment. Indeed this is in contradiction with the role of policemen consequently no one should have the right to defense themselves. I understand that in the cowboy era it was a necessity to have a gun but nowadays with all the institution which protect our right it not the case anymore.

Non-lethal weapons should only be carried by policemen and the lethal one by elite unit like the SWAT or the GIGN.

[Admin]

Are any of you concerned with the arming of municpal police in France?

[Guillaume Scrofani]

Are any of you concerned with the arming of municpal police in France?

Personally I am against municipal police. In my opinion, it belongs to the State to ensure safety and security.
But, due to the terrorist threat I prefer that all the police forces, both national and municipal, being armed.

[Charles roger]

Hi everybody,

It is always difficult to discuss about the right or not to carry a gun. Is that a law that allows to protect himself or is that a law that encourage to kill somebody because you have the gun in your pant?
The united states have always been a violent country, people lives with guns all year long. I think that this is impossible to cancel that law and to ask every american citizen to gently give his gun. For most of them, having a gun represents a security, guns is a culture and it would be very difficult to change their minds.
Now about France, I am concerned about the arming of the municipal police. I think that every personn with "police" in the back should be able to defend himself and the others. Today, we all know that being a police officer makes you a target for terrorist. I'm not a police officer, but i would not like to be an unarmed target.

[aida zalagou]

I never understood how to possess a weapon can be a constitutional right.
thinking that these weapons will only be used for protection is an illusion.
I may be too pessimistic but I think even with good control there will always be shootings, more suicides and other drama with these weapons.
if the person authorized to possess a weapon, after all necessary controls, is declared sane and safe for others today nothing guarantee it will be the case tomorrow.
this amendment also affects nearby countries like mexico where weapons from USA are involved in many crimes.
i think the second amendment has no reason to exist.

[Marjorie VANNIER]

Hello everybody !

I think if the American do not want to ban the port the carrying of weapon, it's because guns is good for business. When Barack Obama tried to propose legislation for tighter control, lobbies have done everything to reject that. In fact, this lobby is one of the most powerful in the world, and they have contact with senators. When an amendment is proposed for a stricter control, the NRA send e-mails, and call senators, to they reject the proposed text.
In my mind, the sale of weapons must be submitted in a tighter control.

About the arming of the municipal police in France I just want to say, "How to stop a nasty guy armed with a gun? With a good guy armed with a gun."

[ZHANG SHUN ZHI]

Hi,
It's a characteristic problem for American, in my opinion, it's so difficult to judge it.

First of all, it's useful when we are faced with the risk. Because we can never know whether we will be the target of a criminal or not one day. And then. the gun would be our powerful tool to protect ourselves. So, it's reasonable to allow people to get defensive ability in American.

Secondly, from the view of the civic right, it's rational for american people to hold guns.

Finally, it's a fact who is supported by the gun interest group. As munitions merchant has formed a strong force in American, who are always the backup force for the politicians to advocate the legally possessing weapons. Because the gun control means cutting down their treasure.

But the problem is that we can't recognize the holder of a gun is a good person or a bad guy. Maybe your neighbor is shooting on you just because you have sang loudly yesterday after drinking.

[YAN Wenyi]

Hi, every one!
Firstly, I am so sad to hear that more than 50 innocent people were killed by a crazy killer.

It is reasonable to think that if the United States imposed restrictions on the possession of gun, the number of death will certainly reduce.

As for me, we can’t directly say that this tragedy is all due to the gun problem. In other word, those people are not the victim of gun’s possession. With the lethal weapons, those people who are dissatisfied with such a sick society can be able to attract the public’s attention by killing others.

So what is more important for the government is to solve the social issues, and that is much better than the implement of gun ban. Not only does the US’s government benefit a lot from gun’s market, but also many people need the weapon for protecting themselves.

When it comes to the arming of municipal police in France, I agree with my classmates who think it is necessary to allow those policemen to have a gun, in order to react rapidly when an attack happens.

[Mike RAMSSAMY]

after the las vegas shootings we can wonder if carrying weapons in usa is necessary. Because what happened in Las vegas was not an isolated occurence. Two years ago a man killed children and teachers in a primary school with a weapon. Although the US population want to conserve the right of carrying weapons they must challenge their current opinion because a lot of people died because of psychopaths who have been able to obtain weapons. If weapons were banned, this type of events could be reduced and it's really worth.

[Audrey Suire]

The guns problem in the United States comes from their Constitution. But above all their state of mind. Americans are proud people who pay special attention to their personal freedoms. That is why the Obama administration has never managed to pass the law on guns control.

Following the events in Las Vegas people will want to keep the right to carry weapons at all costs, as they don't trust the FBI and other organizations to stop terrorism. But what they don't understand is that when they keep their weapons they increase the risk of seeing another tragedy happen (because a person will have been able to obtain a weapon legally for example).

[Guillaume Scrofani]

Hi folks!!

As already said in other posts qbove, owning a gun is a constitutional right in the USA. But the law differs a lot from one state to another. Despite this, I don't think all American people are crazy about guns. I never went in America yet, but i don't beleive in this caricature that spread the idea that all american are stupid at a point to not be able to do a self-critic of their own society. Each time they are mass-shooting they are debates in the American media. If they are debate it means they opposite point of view.

If we want to understand why a part of the population is fascinated by weapon I think we should take a look at the history of the country. It is the only way to understand the custums of a nation.

But the fact it's they are about 88 guns for every 100 people. USA is the most armed country. But if we look at the third place of the podium we might be surprised to see Switzerland!! They are about 46 guns for 100 people there. And we never heard about mass-shooting happening in Switzerland. It's why I think the problem is not only the easy access to weapon, but the lack of control behind. The law, regarding guns, is more strict in Switzerland than in some State of the USA. Maybe the level of eduction about weapons is a criterion that must be weighed. If Switzerland has so much gun it's because a law allow all the men to keep their service rifle after a mandatory arms training. It means all the men in Switzerland know how to properly use a gun and what a gun is capable of.

But I don't beleive the gun situation in  the US will change while lobby, such as NRA, will interfer in the debate by financing campaign of some politicians. Or by backing associations promoting weapons and spreading the very simplist idea that, the best way to prevent shooting death is to allow the good guy to have access to a gun easy. A complex matter can only be solved by a smart and well thought answer, and certainly not by a simplist catchword.

[KULBAEV ELDAR]

Good evening
It's a disaster. The biggest mass shooting in a history of US (if i'm not wrong) happens in 2017, in the 21th century; when everything is improving and especially different organisations and funds defending the rights of anybody/thing/whatever. There are so many laws and decrees concerning our life. What i want to say: the government have got to recheck its constitution and rethink about gun laws. Everybody knows that because of discrimination in USA majority of people carries any tipe of weapon/gun. Some historical points cause it. Black people were not a part of humans, they had no rights; humiliated by society they started to defend each other in any possible ways. So in the 60s (if i'm not wrong) a policeman had a right to kill/arest/kick/shot black man if the policeman just didn't like him. After years a police faced up the big problem: afro-americans started to do same things with white people. Another disaster; that's why some laws were accepted and "on papers" every problem get solved. Americans were able to carry guns for defence. But nowadays we see that humiliation hasn't stopped and everybody tries guarding them and their family anyway. Maybe this part of text seems like wrong but i want to say that not just one law blame on this catastrophe, no, a sequence of wrong actions get this result. The government should research every possible reaction, consequence of its decree. Now, even the USA interdict using/carrying weapons, people not gonna stop it because of many reasons like fear and violence in poor towns etc. So America got to reduce a quantity of guns and weapons in country but i don't think so, really. The USA has a "cold war" with Russia, a race of weapon, call it whatever you want but it exists. That's why my idea is not possible. First of all it's a problem of society, everybody got to start changing themselves for a bright future and then maybe the gouvernment starts financing poor and criminal towns like Compton, for example. But i'm sure that people of America aren't ready for not using guns because of their mentality. They really like it; guns like toys for them; it's a huge problem. Does police have to be armed? Yes,of course. But a gun got to be used in good ways like defending people. In the end, i really regret that same things have a place in our life but i don't think that #prayforblablabla is all we can do, i do believe we can change the world.

[jinyi zhao]

Hello, everyone.
First, it’s such a sad news.
However, when it comes to the gun problem, it’s un complicated topic. But it’s clear that no gun in America, it’s probably impossible. Imagine, USA the fourth largest country in the world with only 300 million population but in China who has a similar area as USA, there are 1,3 billion population. That means in USA, when we call the police, it takes a long time for them to get to the accident location. Therefore, gun becomes an important article for us to self-defense.
In China, no gun activity began in 1992 and we paid a high price for this activity. Nowadays, politiques about gun are very strict in China, citizens have no chance to buy a gun even a troy gun. If gun dealing becomes legal in China, I can’t imagine what will happen next, because in China, there’s an amount of social issues such as grand gap between the poor and the rich and unevenness of people quality. When people can owe a gun, these problems will be worsened.
What’s more, in China, crime rate is very low, the cost paid to cancel the ban on gun is high that makes the recision become impossible.

[Roshni RAMAMONJY]

Hi
The legality of the ownership of a weapon by any individual puts the inhabitants of this country in the conditions of an everyday acceptance of the violence.

[Zhexun WANG]

Hi everyone

I think the gun control is imminent.

Let’s see what the Josh Abbott Band guitarist writes on his twitter on 2. October

« I have been a proponent of the 2nd amendment my entire life.until the events of last night. I can not express how wrong I was, we actually have members of our crew with CHL licenses, and legal firearms on the bus.
They were useless. »

The biggest organization who against the gun control is the NSR, they say the shooting incident can be successful because the victim can not protect themselves with a gun.

The guitarist and his friends have guns, did they protect anyone?

The 2nd amendment is a bad topic, « gun against tyranny » is a outdated concept, In a democratic country, citizens can express their political needs through other non-violent ways.

NSR is proud of the slogan,  « guns don’t kill people, people do »
They talk about the 2016 Nice attack and the 2014 Kunming attack, lorry can kill people, knife can kill people, why don’t we abandon them?

the lorry is a means of transport, the knife is a cooking tool
But the gun is a weapon for killing…

Finally, I hope Las Vegas will get better, this world will get better.
The light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome.

[Valentin Poucineau]

Its difficult to compare the problems related to gunes in the US and in other countries, France for example, because its not the same culture.
Despite many tragedies in the US in recent years, no solution has been found.
There's a lot of weapons in circulation in this country and its a tradition.The right to bear weapons for protection facilitates this phenomenous, therefore, find some solutions is not easy.

[Athénaïs Parisy]

Hello,

Maybe one shouldn’t reduce the debate to guns and look the American society as a whole. Some European countries like Switzerland allow or even encourage their citizens to own firearms, also assault rifles, and yet they have a very low gun-related crime rate.
On the other hand, countries with strong gun control laws as England have to a lot of knife attacks.
 Actually in America, most of the gun violence takes place in a few ghetto cities as Baltimore or Detroit where crime rates are high, and gun control laws can’t solve the problem since most of the guns acquired on the black market. 
Finally, maybe the problem doesn't just come from to guns but more to violent culture, ghettos and drugs.

[Nantian YAN]

HELLO EVERYONE，
In the United States, school shootings, company shootings, family shootings, street shootings often occur. For such a country that attaches great importance to human rights and values of the will of the people, why not take measures to eliminate private ownership of guns? Many people are very much puzzled.

The United States is the only country in the world to allow private gun ownership. Many Americans believe that guns are not a tool, but a right. Once an American girl heard a thing Chinese raid in six and in 70s, she could hardly believe who would have so much courage. Because in the United States, just a few "constitutional amendment" is not a mere scrap of paper, which is composed of the entire judicial system in security, there are numerous cases in support of the. Simply say, whatever happens, according to the law of the "constitution" is shot on one side of the support, but in order to avoid accidental injury, must be warned beforehand, if continue to infringe in warning after the owner has the right to shoot, it does not have to bear the consequences.

However, you can not have it both ways. Everything has its advantages and disadvantages. In more than and 200 years, It is often seen. private gun ownership defects. But Americans would rather choose the risk of private ownership of firearms, rather than choose to put their own security hopes all the state machine. The campus massacre, many Americans again on the private gun ownership system rationality put forward the objection. In the world many countries has aroused controversy and criticism. Every country has its own national conditions, and the people of all countries have their own right to choose. It is believed that the American people will weigh the pros and cons of individual rights and make their own choices.

[Emmanuel THOMAS]

Despite many tragedies in the US in recent years, no solution has been found.

What a pessimistic view you have Valentin. I think the warm gun issue can't be a fatality for american society. But the question to ask is : what do americans want? And how many Americans are okay to leave their weapons in order to have a country safer. From my opinion you're right : the american culture is in favor of bearing guns. But why a national mentality would not change?

[Antonin Rohard]

Hi,
I find incredible the fact that American people don't want to change this second amendment. Indeed, a high number of shootings took place in the last years so the vision of the American people concerning this 2nd amendment should have changed ! The election of Trump in the last election shows that a large part of the population are still in favor of the 2nd amendment. It has to change and several influent people and organisations are struggling in order to bring some changes. For instance the National Basketball Association and some of its most influential stars have taken position against the carrying of firearms.

[Cécile RIMAUDIERE]

Hi everybody,
The situation in France is not comparable, in my view, to that of the United States. The USA have weapons in their culture. Everyone can easily carry a weapon on him daily. And of course, it is difficult to control such a large population. Authorities can not be everywhere. Which means that fools sometimes find themselves with weapons on them. These fools then find themselves responsible for dramas such as the Las Vegas slaughter.
In France the mentality is different. And I think that wearing arms in France by the police is much more controlled than in the USA. And with the terrorist threat that threatens us on a daily basis, I am more reassured to know that soldiers or policemen are in a position to defend us.

[Sponsored content]