Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Originally Posted by Cheesesteak Cravings To have effective gun control the 2nd amendment needs to be repealed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by kelly237
Congress can't repeal a part of the constitution.
Oh my, and thank for such a fine introduction.
It's a pleasure to be here tonight, but you've all been at it for hours, so I'll withhold the snark and get right to the point. Let me see, I had some prepared notes, where the heck are they. . . AHA!
Turns out you are both right. Congress cannot repeal an amendment, nor can they pass a new one.
The 2nd Amendment cannot be changed without another Constitutional Amendment which takes 2/3 of Congress to pass a resolution and then 3/4 of the State Legislatures must agree and that also requires those States to amend their own Constitutions because 45 of them have something like the Federal 2nd Amendment. That takes a revolution and a new Constitution, so don't waste your time. Any effort to limit guns comes up against that. Repeal is impossible as long as the Constitutions of United States and the 50 States are in place.
Here, in case you've forgotten, is the text of the Federal: A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
So where do we go from here?
We cannot have gun control with the 2nd Amendment. We must interpret it.
The emphasis since 1789 has been on*"Arms"*and*"Infringed". That does not help with this issue at all.
What must change is to emphasise*"Regulated Militia".
We need a Regulated Militia. Only they could have unlimited weaponry.If you want an AR-15, join up. Bring your own and get a sign up bonus. Hold off and we'll buy yours for an exorbitant fee. If you don't join you are limited to six shooters and bolt action rifles. You are eligible to join at 21, men and women welcome. Big ceremony. Junior auxiliary 14 and up gets single shot 22, pistol or rifle.
A regulated militia is NOT the National Guard. That is a whole different thing. Basically State armies.
I would propose something like the Boy Scouts, with uniforms, a code of conduct, training in safe operation of weapons, close observation of behavior, and levels of achievement and rank. There are several organizations that serve as inspiration for this.
These would be organized under a Federal Charter by States with Federal oversight and Inspector Generals of Great Integrity, State and Federal. Checks and balances. The Local groups would vet the membership. That gets rid of the crazies. If you still need guards for schools or public events, here's the team.
The States have to go along with this, too.
There's more but it is past my bedtime. "Discuss amongst yourselves"
Of course they can. The far-right acts like this is some sort of rocket science and "impossible" to define. It's a joke. I can just imagine them arguing "how far above the speed limit should still be legal?," and since there's not a perfect answer in all cases, I guess speeding should be legal... Ugh!
Go out to a car lot and try to buy a big-rig / 18-wheeler. Oh, fancy that - you can't! Not without the appropriate license and paperwork. Do we have endless debates on what constitutes a "big truck?" Do we pretend that because cars can kill, anyone should be allowed to own and drive big-rig trucks, too? Do we have right-wingers screaming at us for using the incorrect "18-wheeler" term (since not all of them have 18-wheels) as they do with "assault weapons" and pretending that wins the debate? Of course not!
Yeah, I believe the 2nd amendment would be "an obstacle". Driving started off as a right, not a privilege. Then they realized that that doesn't work. So.. licenses, registration, etc., were required. Guns should be a privilege. Not a right. And no, "we're not here to take people's guns". Driving is a privilege, but plenty of people get to do it. Hell, someone told me a blind person wouldn't be able to drive, but he could still own and operate a gun since... "it's a right"!
.
That said why wouldn't gun laws be useful? I get that people can find ways around them, but then could we not argue that why have driving laws when there's nothing to actually stop me from getting drunk and running your whole family over?
Driving started off as a right, not a privilege. Then they realized that that doesn't work. So.. licenses, registration, etc., were required. Guns should be a privilege. Not a right.
So driving was a constitutionally guaranteed right at one point ??
And you want to magically pretend the right to bear arms isn't in our constitution.
When you start your own country, write your constitution however you want.
Ours is already written.
Of course they can. The far-right acts like this is some sort of rocket science and "impossible" to define. It's a joke. I can just imagine them arguing "how far above the speed limit should still be legal?," and since there's not a perfect answer in all cases, I guess speeding should be legal... Ugh!
Go out to a car lot and try to buy a big-rig / 18-wheeler. Oh, fancy that - you can't! Not without the appropriate license and paperwork. Do we have endless debates on what constitutes a "big truck?" Do we pretend that because cars can kill, anyone should be allowed to own and drive big-rig trucks, too? Do we have right-wingers screaming at us for using the incorrect "18-wheeler" term (since not all of them have 18-wheels) as they do with "assault weapons" and pretending that wins the debate? Of course not!
If nation can generally properly regulate the sale and ownership of commercial vehicles, it can do the same with guns - devices that are comparable lethal when in the wrong hands. But the reality is that there is no political will to do this.
You could get a bunch of gun experts and military people in a room together, look over what defines common guns, and set some clear limits on simple things, such as rate of fire, magazine capacity, range, etc. Then, ban the military or SWAT team level crap from private citizens. If you want to a tool to kill a room full of people, earn it - join the military and learn that a gun doesn't make you a hero, a patriot, or a big man. Until then, no - you're not qualified. We don't need man-children with Rambo fantasies owning such weapons.
But this will never happen in this nation. Instead, we'll just have years continue to pass with the far-right feigning concern over the bloodshed while wringing their hands and pretending "nothing can be done" - despite nearly every other civilized nation on the planet HAVING done something, and reaping the vastly lower gun crime as a result. But here? No. The bodies will keep piling up because hunting, playing sheriff, and "killing the gubermint for taking mah tax money!" is more important than the lives of others.
What does a big rig have to do with assult rifles or guns in general? And what doea the far right have to do with anything? This isn't a political issue. It's a legal and constitutional issue. What happens when mass shootings go down but mass bombings go up? Why don't we address the motivations and circumstances that lead someone to do this? Because it's the harder problem?
[QUOTE A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The emphasis since 1789 has been on "Arms" and "Infringed". That does not help with this issue at all.
What must change is to emphasise "regulated Militia". We need a Regulated militia. Only they could have unlimited weaponry. If you want an AR-15, join up. A regulated militia is NOT the National Guard. That is a whole different thing. Basically State armies.
[/i][/quote]
In Colonial times, boys 17 and over were required to serve their town by owning a musket and practicing in military parade every week. This has become the National Guard- citizen weekend soldiers protecting their homeland. I believe this is what the second amendment is about.
It's not about rogue associations of vigilantes and private citizens owning weapons of war. (Not that the founding fathers could ever have envisioned such weaponry.) I'm sure they would have seen that as the chaos it is.
It can be reduced. Countries with less government, resources, and technology have done it.
I posted yesterday about action one school took to reduce mass shootings in their school. Of course, people posted why it won't work when it has worked according to the Sheriff's Association.
Cameras with a direct feed to the county sheriff office. Teachers who wear panic buttons. Smoke cannons in hallways.
These pieces of equipment are a big reason Southwestern High School in Shelbyville, Ind., has been referred to as "the safest school in America" since the airing of a segment on NBC's Today in 2015 (the network recently revisited the school). Shelbyville is about 27 miles southeast of Indianapolis.
I also believe we need to look at mental health, social accountability, and gun control. Why? Health mental is a major issue but sometimes it doesn't help when people don't seek treatment. For example, the Vegas mass shooter never sought help. There is no way to track the person if individuals don't seek help.
In many cases, they don't because of the stigma. Most people with mental health issues are not murders. That is where the social accountability comes in. Report, report, report. It should be the same policy as when a teacher or daycare provider suspects abuse of a child. They have an obligation to report it. We should have an obligation to report suspicious and violent people it the same way.
Also, we know that people use other forms of violence to carry out their brutally. They use trucks, knives, swords etc.if they don't have access to guns. Gun control laws need to be changed and re-evaluated. We reevaluate policies when there are threats in the airports.
I was reading an article on "Why school shootings are rare in Israel when guns are common"? They have no metal detector and teachers aren't armed. They keep records of every gun owner that have permits to carry. Half are private citizens and the other half work for security firms.
I think we should consult with other countries where they had a problem in the past. It was resolved and countries where there is gun ownership and mental health issues comparable to the US yet they don't have a mass killing problem.
People resist recommendations with evidence it works for different places should offer better, proven suggestions.
We have to do something and I think it is obvious we need to address everything coming into play with a mass shooting.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
The emphasis since 1789 has been on "Arms" and "Infringed". That does not help with this issue at all.
What must change is to emphasise "regulated Militia". We need a Regulated militia. Only they could have unlimited weaponry. If you want an AR-15, join up. A regulated militia is NOT the National Guard. That is a whole different thing. Basically State armies.
Quote:
In Colonial times, boys 17 and over were required to serve their town by owning a musket and practicing in military parade every week. This has become the National Guard- citizen weekend soldiers protecting their homeland. I believe this is what the second amendment is about.
It's not about rogue associations of vigilantes and private citizens owning weapons of war. (Not that the founding fathers could ever have envisioned such weaponry.) I'm sure they would have seen that as the chaos it is.
I am proposing a new Federally chartered organization closely monitored by State and federal officials for several reasons.
The National Guard has a separate mission dealing with disasters and riots and serving when called up for war. Universal training of all men and women is possible but it is another plan all together.
While potential gun owners would join the well regulated militia they have no desire to spend a couple of months in boot camp to join the guard. They are willing to be regulated in order to have access to semi-automatic style weapons.
It has been proposed to evaluate and treat all the crazies to keep them in hospital away from guns. That is not possible as we do not have the doctors or hospitals to do that. The WRM would evaluate applicants over time before they were qualified to have access to semi automatic rifles and handguns.
This is not vigilantes in a rogue organization.
If you click the Preview Post to check your posts you will avoid the formatting errors. One of the quote markers was deleted when you trimmed. I fixed it.
To have effective gun control the 2nd amendment needs to be repealed. Plain and simple. You can't have effective gun control while guaranteeing the right to bear arms shall not be infringed.
The fact of the matter is that you're not going to have the government's permission to revolt against it anyway, and anybody that takes up arms against the government is going to be targeted as a terrorist/criminal that has no right to a firearm. We already take the privilege to guns from felons.
Thats why usually it takes alot of time for a patriot to be recognized as such, normally at the time when they are doing things they are eventually celebrated for..they are breaking laws or disobeying.
Look at most of the historical patriots that we celebrate...during their 'active times' they were certainly not viewed as patriots or heroes! The same will be true in the future, some of the people today that are viewed as problem makers or terrorists, will eventually be recognized as patriots.
One more thing, history generally does not celebrate those that are totally obedient and subservient.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
