MartinC Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 2 minutes ago, Destino said: And if you respond to a school shooting with legislation that would have done absolutely nothing to change anything that happened there you'll get laughed at and fail. A thousand mile journey starts with a single step. Or something ... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bearrock Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 The problem with amending the 2nd amendment is that it is a political impossibility. Now if that was the only way to ensure that we can protect innocent lives, that it is a necessary battle. But the fact that countries can allow private ownership of guns and not have frequency of mass shootings like US shows to me that we need not toss the baby with the bathwater. Freedom of speech to the degree we enjoy in US can look stupid and dangerous too. But if we can curb the idiocy while keeping the right intact to a large degree, that would be preferable to abolishing the right together. With respect to state right vs individual right dimension to the 2nd amendment, I believe state right is the more honest reading of the 2nd amendment and in keeping with the founder's intent. But it could be read to represent both state and individual rights. Founding fathers could have been concerned with both the central government abridging state's right to operate a well regulated militia but also those states essentially becoming a stooge for the central gov't and joining in on the oppression of the people. What if the King's regional governors sided with the King to take away the people's arms? (Now the fact that we regulate the type of arms that people can have might show how antiquated the 2nd amendment is at this point, but I digress). It is not entirely intellectually dishonest (I guess) to read the well regulated militia as akin to the preamble to the constitution. It may describe the purpose of the amendment, but the actual language gives people the right to bear arms. Possibly against both the central and state government. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar78 Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 Wrote to my Congressman and asked specifically, APART from gun control what can we do to stop the school shootings? I got a form letter back about how gun control isn't the problem and that the Second Amendment protects our rights to have guns, in a nutshell. Well, thanks for not reading my communications with you. 2 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 1 minute ago, MartinC said: A thousand mile journey starts with a single step. Or something ... And a crucial misstep can end it. Right now people are outraged about mass murderers killing kids. Show up with laws that do nothing to address that and it will look like the worst kind of opportunism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr. Sinister Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 (edited) 5 minutes ago, MartinC said: A thousand mile journey starts with a single step. Or something ... It's a lot easier to yap about what can't be done, than to actually try doing something of note, to work towards something greater. No one will ever be saved, 100%. Same is true for every life saving measure on this planet. But that's better than playing with your dick and pointing at everyone else about how what they're actually trying to do won't work, mean while, good, innocent hardworking people with their whole lives ahead of them keep dying, while pieces of worthless **** keep living. Edited February 16, 2018 by Mr. Sinister 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 1 hour ago, Destino said: And a crucial misstep can end it. Right now people are outraged about mass murderers killing kids. Show up with laws that do nothing to address that and it will look like the worst kind of opportunism. Right now? I’m pretty ****ing outraged about that all the time tbh. We were outraged about Vegas at the start of this thread. We will be outraged about the next massacre pretty soon. When is good time not to be seen as opportunist on this? 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 56 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said: You're not going to get a comprehensive plan. All we can do is pass legislation incrementally to fix problems as we identify them. The gun violence and mass shooting epidemic in America is a complex problem and there aren't going to be one shot panaceas for it. Comprehensive doesn't need to be a massive overhaul all at once, or even pass all at once. Show people something concrete to work towards, a vision of a better future, and you have a chance of getting there one battle at a time. This is politics, radical changes aren't going to happen without energy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 11 minutes ago, stevemcqueen1 said: This is an honest question: Do you think the majority of conservatives share your views on gun control and your proposed legislative solutions? Why do you think the GoP is out of step with your views on the issue? Absolutely not. If I was a member of the Republican Party, I imagine I would be jettisoned quickfast lol. I think a lot of what we see in politics today, is a sad reflection of society. You have to toe the party line or you are the enemy. Civility is gone, and here we are with the most unqualified President in history. If Donald Trump had been elected President of a third world country, The U.S. would be howling about how ludicrous it was. And yet, we persisted. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 5 minutes ago, MartinC said: Right now? I’m pretty ****ing outraged about that all the time tbh. We were outraged about Vegas at the start of this thread. We will be outraged about the next massacre pretty soon. When is good time not be seen as opportunist on this? You're outraged all the time about gun violence in general or mass murders? Seems like it's the latter since you're referred exclusively to mass murders. I'm guessing most of the country is thinking the same thing, about mass murders and not "gun violence in general." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 19 minutes ago, MartinC said: Your not answering the question. Why are you reticent to eliminating it (and I actually don’t think it needs to be eliminated just clarified and interpreted far more narrowly). My question stands though - why not? I have faith in our Founding Fathers. My personal belief is that private gun ownership should be protected. And if there isn't a right, it won't be guaranteed. People disagree with me, and that's OK. I want to restrict the 2nd much more narrowly than the NRA, and most conservatives. I do not think I will ever get to the point where I think private ownership is a privilege. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 2 minutes ago, Destino said: You're outraged all the time about gun violence in general or mass murders? Seems like it's the latter since you're referred exclusively to mass murders. I'm guessing most of the country is thinking the same thing, about mass murders and not "gun violence in general." Both. One begets the other. 11,000 people a year illegally killed with firearms in this Country. Whether they get killed individually or in a group does not change the body count. That said i do I do think mass shootings are a different phenomenon and require different responses to a wife/ husband shooting their spouse during an argument. 3 minutes ago, Popeman38 said: I do not think I will ever get to the point where I think private ownership is a privilege. I umderstand I’m poking you with a stick here - and I do appreciate you responding. I don’t want to make assumptions. Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Elessar78 Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 6 minutes ago, Popeman38 said: I have faith in our Founding Fathers. My personal belief is that private gun ownership should be protected. And if there isn't a right, it won't be guaranteed. People disagree with me, and that's OK. I want to restrict the 2nd much more narrowly than the NRA, and most conservatives. I do not think I will ever get to the point where I think private ownership is a privilege. Great. What's your alternative to stop our kids from getting massacred in schools? Go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 Just now, Elessar78 said: Great. What's your alternative to stop our kids from getting massacred in schools? Go. Read my posts in this thread. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 9 minutes ago, Mr. Sinister said: It's a lot easier to yap about what can't be done, than to actually try doing something of note, to work towards something greater. No one will ever be saved, 100%. Same is true for every life saving measure on this planet. But that's better than playing with your dick and pointing at everyone else about how what they're actually trying to do won't work, mean while, good, innocent hardworking people with their whole lives ahead of them keep dying, while pieces of worthless **** keep living. Working towards something greater requires that it be defined at least partially. It can't just be passing any worthless half measure and calling it a victory. Politicians working to appear like they're trying shouldn't be confused with offering an actual vision people can get behind. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tshile Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 crafting legislation to address mass shootings sounds great but i think that's a loser. you're asking for something I don't think can be done so long as guns exist on any significant scale, and mental issues remain what they are (not diagnosed, little to no recourse, etc) i think we'd be better off passing laws that aim to curb gun violence in general, and hope a nice side effect is less mass shootings. not that it matters cause i don't see that happening either. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
twa Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 2 hours ago, EBoz said: Why not ban AR’s completely, regardless of age? They have one purpose and only one purpose, to kill Because too many folk disagree with you(and ARs are just one branch of similarly capable guns) , personally I could care less. I think ya might sell my limit, but it would be tough Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Destino Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 10 minutes ago, MartinC said: Both. One begets the other. 11,000 people a year illegally killed with firearms in this Country. Whether they get killed individually or in a group does not change the body count. That said i do I do think mass shootings are a different phenomenon and require different responses to a wife/ husband shooting their spouse during an argument. I agree with everything you're saying, but I can't ignore the politics. Trotting out legislation in the wake of a mass murder of children at school that does not address that particular scenario makes things incredibly easy for the NRA are their republicans. They'll immediately say "democrats are using the bodies of children to push the same tired agenda the American people have rejected year after year. Their proposal doesn't even addressed what happened in that school!" Not only would that fail to pass, but the opposite would happen (again) and gun control will be reduced even further. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 4 minutes ago, MartinC said: I understand I’m poking you with a stick here - and I do appreciate you responding. I don’t want to make assumptions. Why? I don't mind answering questions. I firmly believe that the people had the right to privately own firearms as a means of forming the state militia. Doesn't mean every person has to be in the state militia to own a firearm. And just like the 4th Amendment has expanded to include modern technology that wasn't around when it was originally written, the 2nd expands to include modern firearms and not just muskets. It might not be what lawyers believe, or most of the posters on this board. But it is an opinion formed with thought, and I understand that there are limits, and those limits have changed as I have aged and gained wisdom (at least in my own mind lol). I support major restriction to the 2nd, some of which I have listed in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan T. Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 Popeman, thank you for your honest, thoughtful posts in this thread. ~~~~~ I just think it's time to rethink our relationship with a tool that, at the flick of a finger - can take a person's life. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Popeman38 Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 Just now, Dan T. said: Popeman, thank you for your honest, thoughtful posts in this thread. ~~~~~ I just think it's time to rethink our relationship with a tool that, at the flick of a finger - can take a person's life. And trust me, I understand where you are coming from. We will disagree on the endgame, but we can still work towards finding ways to limit these horrible national tragedies. These are really emotional subjects, especially when children are involved. I have a 7 year old daughter that goes to public school. Trust me, Sandy Hook and Parkland hit very close to home. We need to restrict access, and stop making these people infamous. Unfortunately, it is now better to be infamous after death than to be forgotten. And that is a sad reflection of our society. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 41 minutes ago, Popeman38 said: I don't mind answering questions. I firmly believe that the people had the right to privately own firearms as a means of forming the state militia. Doesn't mean every person has to be in the state militia to own a firearm. And just like the 4th Amendment has expanded to include modern technology that wasn't around when it was originally written, the 2nd expands to include modern firearms and not just muskets. It might not be what lawyers believe, or most of the posters on this board. But it is an opinion formed with thought, and I understand that there are limits, and those limits have changed as I have aged and gained wisdom (at least in my own mind lol). I support major restriction to the 2nd, some of which I have listed in this thread. Your explaining what you believe in, not why. Its difficult sometimes to peel away the layers of why we believe in something or have formed an opinion. On some level it’s emotional not logical. On this issue I believe many of the supporters of 2A do so on an emotional level because it’s tied to their own self image of what it is to be an American (or a conservative?) and what makes them different from people who are not. i may be wrong. I was trying to test my assumption. I echo the thanks for your constructive engagement in this thread though. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bozo the kKklown Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 1 hour ago, Popeman38 said: You would be repealing the 2nd Amendment. If you want to quibble with the use of stripping, I'll concede the technical definition is amending. In essence, you will be stripping the 2nd Amendment from the Bill of Rights. Is there not a way we can remove constitutional amendments or something? I thought it was a living and breathing document that could be amended? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Springfield Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 Nothing is going to happen. I can’t believe it. I mean I can, I just... can’t. These kids don’t matter to some people. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AsburySkinsFan Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 3 minutes ago, Springfield said: Nothing is going to happen. I can’t believe it. I mean I can, I just... can’t. These kids don’t matter to some people. How can you not believe it? What evidence were you working with that indicated that ANYTHING would be different after this school shooting? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MartinC Posted February 16, 2018 Share Posted February 16, 2018 1 hour ago, bearrock said: The problem with amending the 2nd amendment is that it is a political impossibility. Not if enough people vote into office enough politicians prepared to do it its not. Quote Now if that was the only way to ensure that we can protect innocent lives, that it is a necessary battle. What if it is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now