Parkland FL HS shooting, shooter arrested, 17 dead
- Thread starter Obelisk
- 675 comments
- 32,152 views
- 28,470
- Windsor, Ontario, Canada
- Johnnypenso
Read the Constitution. Quite simple to understand really.
Danoff
Premium
- 34,021
- Mile High City
Depends on where it's being carried.
Regardless of whether you think it's a right, the US codifies it as a right. So if you actually want to be persuasive, you need to understand that the people you're talking to think it is. It would be a better tactic to explain why you think it's not a right than it would be to use something like "need" which should be completely ignored by someone who thinks it is a right.
- 2,360
- Ventura, California
- 31,700
- Buckwheat City
- Dennisch
It's time for the USA to take a good hard look at the 2nd amendment and perhaps write a new amendment that alters certain parts of the 2nd.
You don't need to worry about an oppressive government anymore. Your army is big enough to protect your rights. This new amendment should be written with current times in mind and not something that was written because of scary red coats.
You don't need to worry about an oppressive government anymore. Your army is big enough to protect your rights. This new amendment should be written with current times in mind and not something that was written because of scary red coats.
- 19,680
- Alabamamania
Danoff
Premium
- 34,021
- Mile High City
The US took a hard look at the 2nd amendment very recently in a few landmark supreme court cases. DC vs. Heller was a very thorough investigation of just that, and the conclusion was that the 2nd amendment does codify a basic human right. Did you guys want to argue that it's not a human right?
Human rights don't change over time. For example, the fact that black people are afforded rights today does not mean that black people didn't have them when they were enslaved in the US. It means that those who were enslaved had their rights violated. The fact that women can vote for representation in their government does not mean they had no right to vote in the past, it means women who were denied the right to vote had their rights infringed at the time.
It's our understanding that is changing, not human rights.
- 2,360
- Ventura, California
- 23,998
- It/It
- GTP_TheCracker
It doesn't mean that it's above being amended though, if it's deemed to be out of touch with modern thinking. That's not to say it will be, just that it's not impossible to do so.
- 31,700
- Buckwheat City
- Dennisch
Keeping guns away from irresponsible morons. Actually enforce the laws and regulations that are already in place and toughen them up for current times. They can always be relaxed when people show that they can be responsible.
And stop inventing ridiculous ideas like arming teachers. It's almost as if the glue eating kid got a job as a representative. A country that is as mentally unstable as the USA doesn't need more guns. Or more people with guns. That's for when the rules and regulations actually work.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
Banning drugs hasn't exactly curbed the killing of people via drug usage...so not sure how that quantifies the logic you're trying to use yourself.
War on drugs has only made the problem a bigger cluster of issues. Background checks have not been done away with and never were done away with, so cite where they don't exist in a legal method of gun purchasing and perhaps I can see the justification for your emotional tirade. If you want to make the argument and third party purchasing or buying from the guy you found in the newspaper basically, then I can understand that issue. However, others would argue even that criteria isn't the issue.
The last line seems to be the best sum of your entire post by you really, I don't think you're trying to understand and like most see an issue want to jump in and rather give your thoughts without much hinging on the background knowledge of the topics.
- 2,360
- Ventura, California
The 2A does not grant you the right to take a life without recognized justifications. The same way freedom of travel doesn't give you the right to take a life with a car. The 2A does provide a mechanism whereby a person has ultimate and final control of their own liberty interest in life - which is the right to self defense, which is a natural right.
Joey D
Premium
- 47,470
- Lakes of the North, MI
- GTP_Joey
- GTP Joey
I don't think the second amendment needs changing, but like you said, existing laws need to be enforced better. If anything needs changing, it's the background check process. It's far to simple and too many things fall through the cracks. It won't stop all gun related violence, but it will make it tougher for someone who's known to be dangerous or mentally incapable to buy a gun in the first place.
And yes, I will agree there are many government officials still chugging the Elmer's daily.
- 87,406
- Rule 12
- GTP_Famine
It is next to impossible though - and if anyone's actually serious about it, not the right target (or at least not yet). It's rather ironic that gun control advocates are aiming at the wrong target
- 2,360
- Ventura, California
I don't even have a problem with having to be 21 to buy a firearm since society pretty much agrees that 21 is the age you are actually an adult. It also falls under the "plausible" of standing up to a 2A challenge in court. I would also support mandatory drug testing for firearm purchases because it's actually illegal for addicts to have firearms on a Federal level and bars ownership. Make it a condition of purchase. Would it stand up to a 2A challenge? Maybe. Maybe not.
- 22,551
- Arizona
- HamiltonMP427
It's nothing, handguns are already 21 years of age, long guns 18, so all you've done is jump up the long gun age limit. Doesn't stop anyone really from obtaining them before that via transference of third party sellers or those in illegal markets. Also I was given my first long gun at 15, and wasn't legally able to carry and use it alone until the required age.
- 19,680
- Alabamamania
The basic right to live without interference goes hand-in-hand with the defense of it. Yet when technology and understanding overcomes this at a greater pace than it can be resolved, something needs to be done.
I think "oppressive" is an excessive and dismissive term; but there are more discrete additions to law and codification which are cumbersome, I'll concede to that.
You're painting with a broad brush; not all of these scenarios are handled in the exacting manner you're describing.
Last edited:
Danoff
Premium
- 34,021
- Mile High City
- 5,051
- Netherlands
Dear sir,
This was just a very rough forumpost. I am from the Netherlands, where mass shootings is far less of a fear in daily life. It was a not tirade and im not emotionally reacting. I just dont find any logic in american (mostly conservative) policy views. The post was not 100% accurate and should be taken in with a little nuance to it. Since the 80's the US also been massively agressive against drugdealing and use (high jailsentences), yet incredibly lax concerning weapon ownership. The freedom to own and use both are treated very differently. (one is in your constitution and one not)
In my opinion the problem is not the 2nd amendment, but lobbying in politics. The NRA actively push and create this culture of gun enthousiast to promote their own financial intrest. And like other wealthy individuals and organisations they can buy influence in the government. Politicians should not be able to be bought, but be representatives of the people. The only reason there are no stricter gun laws on, for example automatic weapons, is because the NRA doesnt want it and therefore bought politicians and created this idea that gun laws is "taking away your freedom", to scare their following to gain support.
the Netherlands just doesnt have a large gun culture. The general people dont have a desire to own or use guns. Why would we?
Hell... people should be pissed that Kinder eggs were banned! Why take away a child's freedom to enjoy delishes chocolate and a wonderful toy! Because a child accidently choked and died? Well "kinder eggs dont kill people! People do!".
Here in the Netherlands having small amounts of drugs is actually "allowed". Law enforcement solely concentrate on the dealers, smugglers and not the user. They even have government funded test labs where you can test your xtc, cocaine etc. If its good or bad quality anomously!
- 2,360
- Ventura, California
Why do you keep going back to this in every mass shooting thread? Are you under the impression that automatic weapons are legal for everyday purchase in the US and are not regulated?
- 13
- United States
Who lives in fear? CNN?
- 29,978
- a baby, candy, it's like taking.
- TexRex72
And it seems to me he's already seeing pushback from a portion of his base. Whether he's willing to alienate that portion remains to be seen.
I think it is absolutely phenomenal that he's made this step, though. Is it a hint that he's becoming the President (a word that I haven't seen fit to capitalize when referring to him) he should be? I don't know. I have to wonder if the cockroach Stephen Miller is home with the flu.
- 1,684
- Houston, TX
- The_TetsuKobura
You don't know anything about US gun laws, do you? Automatic weapons have been BANNED from the US for DECADES. This is not an NRA issue, so quit spreading bs lies.
