Military Review

The arms lobby in the US Congress did not allow the implementation of the legislative initiative to limit the sale of "gunshot" in the United States

41
Against the background of the terrorist attack that took place the other day in Orlando, which killed 50 people, the American parliamentarians decided to consider limiting the free sale of firearms. weapons in USA. Representatives of the Congress gathered to discuss the possibility of amending the law on the free sale of "firearms", but congressmen finally refused to take restrictive measures. The members of the Senate Armaments Committee (the upper house of the US parliament) “persuaded” their colleagues not to restrict arms sales in the country.


From the message of the newspaper USA Today:
Senators, as expected, on Monday rejected four party restrictive amendments regarding the ban on weapons. The ban was launched after the shooting in Orlando. It was proposed, including the seizure of weapons from persons who are among those suspected of involvement in terrorism.


The arms lobby in the US Congress did not allow the implementation of the legislative initiative to limit the sale of "gunshot" in the United States


Surprisingly, according to American “democratic” laws, even a person suspected of involvement in the terrorist underground can afford to have firearms before special sanctions from the court. This is a word about how the United States is fighting terrorism ...

Representatives of the Senate made a proposal to conduct special comprehensive inspections related to the detection of the presence of weapons from suspects in involvement in the implementation of terrorist activities.

After a brief discussion, it turned out that such measures "can strike at democratic principles, according to which every US citizen has the right to self-defense." It turns out that a terrorist also has such a right ...

Voting against amending the law, the American parliamentarians made it clear that the interests of the weapons lobby in the country receiving the super-profits from the sale of weapons are much higher than the interests of American citizens in terms of their security. Representatives of this lobby who are in the Senate obviously do not intend to lose billions of dollars in profits.
Photos used:
Evan Vucci, AP
41 comment
Information
Dear reader, to leave comments on the publication, you must sign in.
  1. avvg
    avvg 21 June 2016 07: 05
    -2
    Probably, these are the democratic principles of America - "Kill each other with firearms even at school." And there will be American kids killing each other at school!
    1. razmik72
      razmik72 21 June 2016 07: 18
      +7
      Quote: avvg
      And American children will kill each other at school!

      I believe that the right to arms is the most important right of a free person. The totalitarian and criminal authorities are afraid of the armed citizens of their country, which is why a law was passed in parliament giving residents of the border areas with Azerbaijan the right to buy and carry weapons. that the unarmed population is dying from shelling and cannot protect themselves if something happens, they are simply afraid that the people will definitely turn these weapons against them.
      1. Dembel77
        Dembel77 21 June 2016 08: 51
        +6
        surprisingly, but according to American "democratic" laws, even a person suspected of involvement in the terrorist underground can afford the availability of firearms before special sanctions by the court.
        To whom does this seem surprising? For example, I do not. It's just that the fact is that in Russia and the USA there are different concepts about democracy and about the rights of citizens, in particular the right to arms. In America, apparently, premium citizens, but we have not yet ripened yet ...
      2. Lord of the Sith
        Lord of the Sith 21 June 2016 10: 22
        +2
        Quote: razmik72
        I believe that the right to arms is the most important right of a free person. The totalitarian and criminal authorities are afraid of the armed citizens of their country, which is why a law was passed in parliament giving residents of the border areas with Azerbaijan the right to buy and carry weapons. that the unarmed population is dying from shelling and cannot protect themselves if something happens, they are simply afraid that the people will definitely turn these weapons against them.

        Well, they will allow you, for example, to carry personal firearms in Donbass, how will this save you from shelling?
        How to save American citizens from armed attacks at school, university, cinema, club keeping 2-3 trunks at home?
        1. Krasniy_lis
          Krasniy_lis 21 June 2016 13: 28
          +2
          Quote: Sith Lord
          how it will save from shelling

          so I’m wondering how the pistol \ machine gun will save from 120th.

          Z.Y. Greetings, Lord.
  2. Winnie76
    Winnie76 21 June 2016 07: 11
    +14
    The terrorist will find weapons so-so, even if their sale is prohibited. They have no such problems. Not adopted populist law - well done
    1. Mik13
      Mik13 21 June 2016 07: 29
      +10
      Quote: Winnie76
      The terrorist will find weapons so-so, even if their sale is prohibited. They have no such problems. Not adopted populist law - well done

      I agree.
      To be honest, I did not understand what caused such an emotional moaning of the author:
      Surprisingly, according to American "democratic" laws, even a person suspect in involvement in the terrorist underground, he can afford the availability of firearms before special sanctions by the court. This is by the way how the United States is fighting terrorism ...

      In the Russian Federation, too, there are any restrictions on the rights of a citizen, who in some way is suspected, is possible only after special sanctions from the court. So the word "democratic" is quite in vain quoted in this context.

      You need to be afraid not of weapons, but of people. Unfortunately. In China, too, periodically mass killings happen. With kitchen knives and hatchets. Let's ban them too. To avoid. By the way, statistics say that in Russia, a kitchen knife is the main instrument of murder, EMNIP ...

      But according to Russian "democratic" laws, take away an ax and a kitchen knife from a suspect in violation of the law "possible only after special sanctions by the court"...

      An ambiguous article, to put it mildly ...
      1. Penzuck
        Penzuck 21 June 2016 09: 31
        0
        Quote: Mik13
        In China, too, periodically mass killings happen. With kitchen knives and hatchets. Let's ban them too. To avoid. By the way, statistics say that in Russia, a kitchen knife is the main instrument of murder, EMNIP ...

        And the motive of crime is mostly purely domestic. V.h. on booze ... Here it is better to make a selection specifically: 1. on deaths from a gunshot
        2. by the number of crimes with the use of firearms. Then there will be a more or less correct comparison.
        Quote: Mik13
        But according to Russian "democratic" laws, it is possible to take away an ax and a kitchen knife from a suspect in violation of the law "only after special sanctions from the court" ...

        An ambiguous article, to put it mildly ...

        Sorry your comment too.
    2. Penzuck
      Penzuck 21 June 2016 07: 46
      -1
      Quote: Winnie76
      The terrorist will find weapons so-so

      There are statistics: how many barrels are "lost", how many attempts to steal weapons, MVD.RU website - All statistics are there. There are also statistics on the number of legal barrels in circulation. We are in the Russian Federation. There are statistics on both terrorist crimes and statistics of murders and robberies with the use of firearms (we will keep silent about explosives, BOV and other things). For 1 offender, 2 corpses and 5 wounded per year. You can safely Linear extrapolate the data increase the number of barrels - increase the number of attempts on illegal acquisition of weapons - increase the number of "always armed terrorists" (bandits are better suited here, otherwise they will start smearing bullets with cyanite so that the mortality rate is 100% wassat ) Which in turn will increase the number of random victims.

      Quote: Winnie76
      They have no such problems.
      “Wi-fi in this sovereign?”
      But in the states of your beloved America with its ultra-liberal arms paradise, there are statistics too, but it’s more difficult to get it. What can not be said about weapons ... And the fact that weapons are in the hands of people with psi-disorders is not uncommon. And I deeply hope that you are not among them ... and I hope that you do not sympathize with the poor idiots + there in their quest to get weapons.
      Quote: Winnie76
      Not adopted populist law - well done

      I am deeply convinced that: 1. you have not read this law.
      2. You have not read the US Constitution and all other legislative frameworks.
      Conclusion: since there is no hint of objectivity in your comment? If he was populist, I would have the support of the people ... And according to your cattle, which cannot distinguish a "populist" law from a "non-populist" (well, stupid Americans fool ?). And the wise chosen ones of the people "won" this ochlocratic law. laughing
  3. Siberian
    Siberian 21 June 2016 07: 12
    +3
    This state will sooner or later gobble up itself. And it will be a logical end.
  4. inkass_98
    inkass_98 21 June 2016 07: 13
    +4
    Nobody will allow such a market and such money to dry out without a fight. So many firms have made a name for themselves on this, such capital has earned that Obama can bleat as much as he wants, his opinion no longer decides anything. And with the next locum tenens they will somehow agree, until the next loud and mass murder.
  5. Professor
    Professor 21 June 2016 07: 19
    +7
    Voting against amending the law, the American parliamentarians made it clear that the interests of the weapons lobby in the country receiving the super-profits from the sale of weapons are much higher than the interests of American citizens in terms of their security. Representatives of this lobby who are in the Senate obviously do not intend to lose billions of dollars in profits.

    The point is not the lobby, but the fact that the right to weapons is enshrined there in the constitution, and changing the constitution with the USA is hemorrhoids.

    It turns out that the terrorist also has such a right ...

    As long as the court does not recognize him as a terrorist, he has all rights. And when he admitted, the terrorist is sent from court to prison. Where are the contradictions? request
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 21 June 2016 07: 28
      +3
      Quote: Professor
      The point is not the lobby, but the fact that the right to weapons is enshrined there in the constitution, and changing the constitution with the USA is hemorrhoids.

      The professor will not believe. Therefore, I will give a link to the first nine amendments. Http://www.pseudology.org/state/Cons_usaAM.htm This is an attempt on the Bill of Rights.
      1. Professor
        Professor 21 June 2016 07: 32
        +6
        Quote: Amurets
        The professor will not believe. Therefore, I will give a link to the first nine amendments. // www.pseudology.org/state/Cons_usaAM.htm

        Well yes:
        Amendment II

        Since a well-organized militia is necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and carry weapons should not be violated. (Ratified December 15, 1791)


        Show me someone who has enough strength:
        1. Cancel amendment
        2. Collect Americans with small arms
        1. Amurets
          Amurets 21 June 2016 07: 52
          +3
          Quote: Professor
          Show me someone who has enough strength:
          1. Cancel amendment
          2. Collect Americans with small arms

          Professor, you are a joker. The Bill of Rights is a sacred thing for Americans. I was mistaken in one: not nine amendments, but ten are the Bill of Rights. Otherwise, I will not argue with you. Nobody has the right to take away weapons from the American court.
        2. Altona
          Altona 21 June 2016 08: 05
          +1
          Quote: Professor
          Show me someone who has enough strength:
          1. Cancel amendment
          2. Collect Americans with small arms

          -----------------------
          And where to lay down such a mountain of weapons? A couple of HUNDREDS OF MILLION trunks, not only pistols with guns, but also machine guns with machine guns.
          1. TT-33
            TT-33 21 June 2016 21: 45
            0
            The average owner has 10-12 firearms in his hands.
          2. TT-33
            TT-33 21 June 2016 21: 45
            0
            The average owner has 10-12 firearms in his hands.
  6. dchegrinec
    dchegrinec 21 June 2016 07: 21
    +1
    Well then it means they like it all!
  7. olimpiada15
    olimpiada15 21 June 2016 07: 31
    0
    I see no reason for grief over the events in Orlando: executions of ordinary citizens in the USA are a side of American democracy. They consider it undemocratic to deprive the right to weapons of radicals, this is more important than the danger to which these elements expose other citizens.
    And here's what is interesting: citizens belong to radical elements, but until they have committed crimes, they cannot be infringed even on the issue of acquiring weapons. The result is a tragedy.
    The question then becomes, why in the prison of Yaroshenko and Booth? Well, the secret service recorded the conversation, but there was no crime. Yes, any person sometimes pretends to agree, but not the fact that he is going to do at all.
    And what was the judge? The United States neglects the right to life of its citizens in its own country; they generally neglect the lives of citizens of other countries. Killing people in democratized countries for the United States is the absolute norm, they are outraged only by the publication of the facts of the execution, as was the case in Iraq. In early June, in Ukraine, guidance devices were practiced, aiming at firing houses of civilians.
    Well, who else believes in American democracy? They wipe their feet not only about the right to life of people of other countries, but also of their own citizens. All for the sake of money.
    1. Mik13
      Mik13 21 June 2016 07: 47
      +3
      Quote: olimpiada15
      The United States neglects the right to life of its citizens in its own country; they generally neglect the lives of citizens of other countries. The killing of people in democratized countries is the absolute norm for the United States, they are indignant only with the publication of the facts of the execution, as was the case in Iraq. In early June, in Ukraine, guidance devices were practiced, aiming at firing houses of civilians.

      Listen, I don't want to criticize your entire comment, but what I have singled out is fierce, senseless nonsense. If this were written somewhere in the "Bulletin of the hysterical uryakaly" - it would be all right, but on "Voennoye Obozreniye" - this is an overkill. Because of your comment, I cried out loud and frightened my neighbors with military-applied vocabulary.

      The Americans brought a radar station for counter-battery warfare. Which set the coordinates of the enemy's firing positions along the trajectories of the shells. They cannot be used to aim their projectiles at "civilian houses". And at home in general - they also cannot. They - at home - stupidly do not see them. Not capable. There was such an evil physicist - they called Doppler - he forbade them. Bewitched. Until now, they cannot disenchant.

      Yes, and these radars are not bad, but you still have to recalculate the data for shooting with pens, because they are not integrated into Ukrainian control systems (like the Zoo, for example) and they do not automatically prepare data for shooting. And to take pens - for a long time. So there is no particular benefit from them. because the main rule of counter-battery fight - fired - eat ... quickly changed position. Very fast. While the shells are flying. Those who have learned survive.

      PS Yes, and by the way, these radars in the Donbass since 2014 year. 2 pieces even managed to trophy. They didn’t cause any particular benefit to anyone.
      1. okunevich_rv
        okunevich_rv 21 June 2016 09: 00
        +1
        He shot at the residential sector, waited for the answer, fixed the radar position of the battery, shot a volley at the location of the DNI battery, everything fits into the logic of provocation.
        1. Mik13
          Mik13 21 June 2016 10: 54
          0
          Quote: okunevich_rv
          He shot at the residential sector, waited for the answer, fixed the radar position of the battery, shot a volley at the location of the DNI battery, everything fits into the logic of provocation.

          No no no...
          Shot in a residential sector - and got cover of his firing position. Because:
          1. In the DPR there is a radar station "Aistenok" similar in purpose, they were even shown to the OSCE specialists. And these products are very much integrated into the control system of the Soviet artillery, and the data for firing is obtained very quickly. Some say that sometimes the outgoing person can see the incoming person in flight. They probably lie ...
          2. The APU has big problems with self-propelled artillery. Her stupid little left. A towed artduel loses. She leaves the position for a long time. Well, here it is. It is impossible to be in time if the opponent is able to at least something.

          So the provocation ends on raking. You can still, for example, place your positions in residential buildings so that the answer arrives there. Here you must either very accurately thank your opponent, or keep silent.
      2. The comment was deleted.
      3. olimpiada15
        olimpiada15 21 June 2016 17: 36
        0
        Mik13 "singled out - this is fierce, senseless nonsense."
        The commentary is based on an article with VO
        "Military correspondent" Mag "about the situation in the DPR"
        The summary states:
        “In the last report I wrote that on the night from 8 to 9, Gorlovka, Makeyevka and the northern districts of Donetsk were heavily shelled. As it turned out later, an attempt to demonstrate the capabilities of the American radar artillery guidance systems, which entered service in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, was the cause of these attacks on peaceful quarters of our cities. Two of them, AN-TPQ-48 and AN-TPQ-36, were deployed on the night of June 9.
        The work of the complexes was observed by a delegation of the military from the United States who arrived in Avdiivka. The delegation was headed by the military attaché Colonel M. Van Delviche and his assistant E. Self. There were also representatives of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, coordinating the shelling. As a result of these attacks, two people were killed and another 24 wounded, incl. child under 3 years old. One of the dead at night is a 22-year-old Donetsk resident, a young platoon commander, who received a shrapnel wound in the neck. "
        1. Mik13
          Mik13 21 June 2016 20: 22
          0
          Quote: olimpiada15
          The commentary is based on an article with VO
          "Military correspondent" Mag "about the situation in the DPR"
          The summary states:
          “In the last report I wrote that on the night from 8 to 9, Gorlovka, Makeyevka and the northern districts of Donetsk were heavily shelled. As it turned out later, an attempt to demonstrate the capabilities of the American radar artillery guidance systems, which entered service in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, was the cause of these attacks on peaceful quarters of our cities. Two of them, AN-TPQ-48 and AN-TPQ-36, were deployed on the night of June 9.
          The work of the complexes was observed by a delegation of the military from the United States who arrived in Avdiivka. The delegation was headed by the military attaché Colonel M. Van Delviche and his assistant E. Self. There were also representatives of the General Staff of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, coordinating the shelling. As a result of these attacks, two people were killed and another 24 wounded, incl. child under 3 years old. One of the dead at night is a 22-year-old Donetsk resident, a young platoon commander, who received a shrapnel wound in the neck. "

          Listen, let’s you not write about what you are incompetent, have agreed? That is, no one can forbid you to do this, of course, but so far you are demonstrating exclusively your incompetence not only in the knowledge of the technical characteristics of certain samples of enemy equipment - after all, you are not in intelligence, but also in the knowledge of physics in the scope of the school curriculum.

          These radars are pulse-Doppler. To find out, google search is enough. They do not detect motionless targets. From the word at all. They are designed for counter battery control. They determine the coordinates of the firing positions on the trajectories of ammunition.

          They can be used to adjust the fire of their artillery - but precisely in the process of conducting counter-battery fire at the identified position. (just a visual adjustment to the observed target - more accurate and more effective). And for this, its integration into the corresponding fire control systems is necessary. In manual mode, controlling your artillery fire using such a radar is pointless.
          By the way - this is an American radar. And she works with American controls and with American artillery. NATO standards and all that. That is, in order to use it in the Armed Forces of Ukraine, at least the coordinates must be recalculated from one coordinate system to another. Otherwise, Ukrainian artillery does not know how. It works by Soviet standards. SK-42 and MGRS are a little different, you know. And this is the smallest difference.

          As for the AN-TPQ-48 itself, firstly, its operating range is up to 10 km. That is, it effectively detects only mortar positions. And secondly, these APU radars have been used since 2014 of the year. And during this time, 2 radars were already squeezed out of them in Debaltseve. So there is nothing new in the appearance of these funds. From drones, the damage is an order of magnitude greater.
          1. olimpiada15
            olimpiada15 21 June 2016 23: 14
            0
            From the above quote follows:
            1) were shelling settlements, because. There are people injured
            2) the APU was the initiator of the shootout - this is my amateurish understanding of the situation that the republics protect the population
            3) at the time of the shelling in the area, American advisers were present, in particular a military attache, who, being not amateurs, could not fail to understand that shelling of settlements was ongoing, because in Ukraine there is no desert and jungle.
            I can’t know what exactly the Americans did, but they certainly didn’t come there to demonstrate a new recipe for making coffee, because they have different tasks, and they have to do with the weapons used during the shelling, otherwise they would not be there.
            From this conclusion: the Americans were involved in the shelling that was taking place at this time in the area.
            This is the meaning of my comment. Nothing more.
            1. Mik13
              Mik13 22 June 2016 02: 05
              0
              Quote: olimpiada15
              From the above quote follows:
              1) were shelling settlements, because. There are people injured
              2) the APU was the initiator of the shootout - this is my amateurish understanding of the situation that the republics protect the population
              3) At the time of the shelling, American advisers were present in the area, in particular a military attache, who, being not amateurs, could not help but realize that shelling of settlements was ongoing, because in Ukraine there is no desert and jungle.

              If shooting is conducted from closed positions (and amateurs with direct and half-direct fire did not somehow heal), then the battery commander and senior battery officer know where the fire is. May be. They may, by the way, not know. They may be given target coordinates for data preparation, but they may not have a map sheet with these coordinates. I do not know if this is a discovery for you, but ...

              As for the shelling of what exactly is being conducted, this is a question for the one who set the task of artillery. He might not have told the Americans. Could mix up the coordinates. Could, by the way, just miss it - this also happens.

              Quote: olimpiada15
              I can’t know what exactly the Americans did, but they certainly didn’t come there to demonstrate a new recipe for making coffee, because they have different tasks, and they have to do with the weapons used during the shelling, otherwise they would not be there.
              Yes? Well then, you will have to explain what the Americans had to do with the ancient, like the traces of the mammoth 120 mm mortar and the same ancient D-30. Or what else was shooting there ...
              Because American shooting weapons are present in the Donbass exclusively in the pornographic products of brainless propagandists. Nothing larger than the M4 has ever appeared. The Americans themselves know what the Americans' tasks are - they hardly told their "colleagues" from the Armed Forces of Ukraine about this.

              As for the radar, it seems to me that we have already dealt with this issue. But if anything, then I remind you that these radars in the Donbass have been used for the 2 of the year, the arrival of the Americans is unlikely to be connected with the radar, and it makes no sense to use them when firing on buildings.

              Quote: olimpiada15
              From this conclusion: the Americans were involved in the shelling that was taking place at this time in the area.
              This is the meaning of my comment. Nothing more.
              Americans are involved in the shelling because the civil war in Ukraine is the desired result of American foreign policy and other means, such as conducting a coup in Ukraine in their own interests and the actual occupation of the state. That, KVM, is more than enough.

              As for the shelling, in "this area" they have recently been taking place with enviable consistency, without any Americans or other representatives of the democratic world. So do not pull the owl over the hedgehog. It hurts the animals, but it hurts me to read it.

              PS - well, the full resource of specialists. Well, you ask a question, and at least in a personal ...
  8. ALEA IACTA EST
    ALEA IACTA EST 21 June 2016 07: 49
    0
    The American bloody mess continues.
  9. Berkut24
    Berkut24 21 June 2016 08: 24
    -2
    Quote: razmik72
    Quote: avvg
    And American children will kill each other at school!

    I believe that the right to arms is the most important right of a free person. The totalitarian and criminal authorities are afraid of the armed citizens of their country, which is why a law was passed in parliament giving residents of the border areas with Azerbaijan the right to buy and carry weapons. that the unarmed population is dying from shelling and cannot protect themselves if something happens, they are simply afraid that the people will definitely turn these weapons against them.

    You know, dear, looking at the number of idiots on our roads, you begin to understand that if you give them weapons to both them and you, then the mortality rate in the country will go far beyond the African one.
    1. okunevich_rv
      okunevich_rv 21 June 2016 09: 20
      +6
      Correctly noticed, it seems that on the roads we are full of inadequate.
      Moreover, in the circulation of hunting weapons, it should be noted that there is a culture of circulation, possibly because of an understanding of responsibility.
      But there is practically no culture for keeping dogs, with the exception of some breeders and official dog breeding.
      Our citizens are dog breeders as terrorists, they are ready to terrorize the living space of other citizens, including children, not only do they consider their socially dangerous actions acceptable and normal, walking of aggressive, large and fighting dogs without a muzzle in playgrounds is the norm.
      Dear Sir or Madam, When discussing Americans with their laws, do not break your spears. Pay better attention to our society.
      Why does a person with a firearm keep it in a safe, it is checked annually, a person does not carry weapons equipped, transports it in a disassembled state, and this is only for the safety of other citizens.
      And a person who has a dog does not have special permission; he is not trained in the methods of raising a dog; he constantly poses a threat to other citizens and especially to children.
      Maybe it's time to equalize citizens in their rights.
      Adopt a law regulating the activity of dog breeders.
    2. The comment was deleted.
  10. Million
    Million 21 June 2016 08: 52
    0
    The free sale of weapons can well replenish the Russian budget, but worsen police statistics
  11. avg-mgn
    avg-mgn 21 June 2016 09: 23
    +1
    In the States, only a foreign citizen is deprived by 100% of the right to acquire weapons (if there is no residence permit), everything else is from the evil one. The lawyer will always justify the illegality of the refusal to purchase and the court will take his side. Because they tried to somehow limit the sale.
    1. NikolaiN
      NikolaiN 21 June 2016 09: 59
      +1
      Each state has its own law on weapons, in a couple of states a foreigner can buy weapons, in some even his citizen will not be able to get permission.
      Here is A. Nikonov's book "Hello Arms" http://www.e-reading.club/bookreader.php/1008818/Nikonov_-_Zdravstvuy%2C_oruzhie
      ._Prezumpciya_zdravogo_smysla.html
      Interesting information, although somewhat verbose, with deviations from the main topic.
      I want to say right away that I am rather negative towards the author of this book, I categorically do not accept many of his views and ideas. But on the issue of the possession of short-barreled weapons by citizens, I completely agree.

      PS Comments please leave only after reading this book.
  12. cth; fyn
    cth; fyn 21 June 2016 09: 37
    +1
    Well, we have the same thing, until the charges have been brought, possess it freely.
  13. atamankko
    atamankko 21 June 2016 09: 40
    -1
    Only business and money, nothing personal,
    killed, kill and will kill.
  14. Galleon
    Galleon 21 June 2016 09: 49
    +4
    Quote: okunevich_rv
    Maybe it's time to equalize citizens in their rights.
    Adopt a law governing dog breeders

    Or giving the right to shoot any dog ​​with a threat to the life and health of his or his loved ones. Then let's allow "bulldog" or "velodog" revolvers, as it was under the tsarist regime.
  15. Hundred
    Hundred 21 June 2016 10: 01
    0
    It is not a matter of laws against weapons — the Americans have a very high culture of arms itself — they are used to living like this — another thing is that people in the states often suffer because of the foreign policy of the authorities — this is the last example. And how many killings amid wars that they wage around the world, due to racial inequality? -Migrants from Mexico, etc., etc. With so many barrels per capita of cases of murders from a gunshot in the USA (except for the last case of course) is relatively maaalo ...
    1. NikolaiN
      NikolaiN 21 June 2016 13: 37
      +2
      As for the weapon ownership culture, do you think this culture is high in the former Soviet Republic of Moldova? And there citizens are allowed to have weapons, and the people are essentially our Soviet people, they were brought up under the USSR.
      As for the mass shootings in schools and student campuses in the United States, the explanation is simple, there is a fashion there to declare these institutions "a zone without weapons." "Naive" liberals think that this is how they will protect the people there. And now guess from 3 times where the crazy or offended to the whole world will go if he wants to take revenge on this "unjust world"? ... right, he will go to the "unarmed" zone, because he knows that there is nothing for him in the "answer" will arrive. And it will be possible to show off in plenty.
      I don’t know how it was in Orlando, but I think there was such a zone there, otherwise this arrow would immediately have flown in response and there would not have been so many victims.
  16. revnagan
    revnagan 21 June 2016 10: 09
    +4
    "It turns out that the terrorist also has such a right ..."
    According to the Law, until it is proved that a man is a terrorist, he is the same citizen as everyone else, and has the same rights as the rest of the citizens. When the Law recognizes that he is a terrorist, then please treat him like to the terrorist with all that it implies.
  17. rotmistr60
    rotmistr60 21 June 2016 11: 26
    0
    Senate Arms Committee Members (Upper House) "Convinced" their colleagues do not limit the sale of weapons in the country.

    I think it would be ridiculous to imagine that the United States will prohibit the free (of course, with the permission of law enforcement agencies, which, unlike Russia, are issued in one or two days against our month or more) the sale of weapons. Samuel Colt equalized the rights of US citizens and for this they will fight, especially the southern states.
    1. Amurets
      Amurets 21 June 2016 13: 51
      +1
      Quote: rotmistr60

      I think it would be ridiculous to imagine that the United States will prohibit the free (of course, with the permission of law enforcement agencies, which, unlike Russia, are issued in one or two days against our month or more) the sale of weapons. Samuel Colt equalized the rights of US citizens and for this they will fight, especially the southern states.

      I already wrote above that the "Bill of Rights" is sacred for Americans. It is the basis of the US Constitution and defines the rights and freedoms of Americans. To remove at least one of the first ten amendments to the US Constitution and the constitution will crumble. Http://dic.academic.ru/ dic.nsf / es / 70793 /% D0% 91% D0% 98% D0% 9B%


      D0% 9B% D0% A
      C. And it seems to me that repealing the Second Amendment to the US Constitution is tantamount to suicide for any US politician. Why the second? Yes, because this is an amendment about weapons, the rest are not even discussed.