Another 2nd Amendment/gun control thread.

[Twilight Hue]

I agree that it is the foundation. But I believe it should be subject to period review and updated. Not rashly, but through a careful process with checks and balances. The framers were no less and no more wiser than anybody else, and they were necessary constrained by the time they lived. The current method where judges etc. "read in" modern necessities and needs into the words of the 300 year old document is looking increasingly like rabbinical midrash to me.

They also allowed for revision. I don't disagree on any constutional update as long as it doesn't interfear with rights outlined in the documents.

I'm just concerned with knee jerk legislation that oftentimes occurs whenever tragedy occurs without studying the why's and how's properly.

 

[9-10ths_Penguin]

It would be a similarly bad idea if I speculated about anti-gunners,
& their fears, lust for security, faith in government, & head in the sand approach to
self defense. Oh, such fun can be had!

It's not so much faith in government as it is lack of faith in gun nuts.

 

[Buddha Dharma]

That there were other inspirations doesn't preclude Judaism as being one of them. That is all I claimed.

Alright. Fair enough...

 

[dfnj]

Lol, ty I guess.

A little nuance. It is not that I think these types of guns should be legal, it is that I think the process that was used was unconstitutional.

I know most people think the ends justifies the means. I don't . It is really that simple. Come up with a constitutional way to regulate guns, or change the constitution. Those are your only options. Trying to get Congress to pass laws that push the limits of constitutionality, because it makes you feel safe is not okay.

It wouldn't be right with free speech, it is not right with the right to bear arms.

It is really that simple.

If that makes me one sick individual, so be it. I can endure ad hominems.

Yes, making guns illegal that are capable of firing 30 rounds per minute does make me feel safer. I see no reason to allow people to be able to buy stinger missiles. I see no reason to allow people to own rapid fire weaponry. I'm sorry you can't see that this is not a rights issue but a safety regulation issue.

Why should some mental nutcase have access to rapid fire weaponry? There are 340 million people in this country. Rapid fire weaponry is just too dangerous not to be regulated.

 

[dfnj]

My hunting/defense rifle is nearly $2,000 dollars when I originally bought and came with 1 5 round magazine and 1 10 round magazine. $650 is dirt cheap when they come generally come with 2 30 round magazines.

Is 30 rounds enough to take down a deer?

 

[Revoltingest]

Yes, making guns illegal that are capable of firing 30 rounds per minute does make me feel safer. I see no reason to allow people to be able to buy stinger missiles. I see no reason to allow people to own rapid fire weaponry. I'm sorry you can't see that this is not a rights issue but a safety regulation issue.

Why should some mental nutcase have access to rapid fire weaponry? There are 340 million people in this country. Rapid fire weaponry is just too dangerous not to be regulated.

Lets suppose that the Constitution allows ownership of such guns,
& that the 2nd Amendment isn't going away in our lifetime.
What do you think could be done to improve things?

 

[dfnj]

Lets suppose that the Constitution allows ownership of such guns,
& that the 2nd Amendment isn't going away in our lifetime.
What do you think could be done to improve things?

Guns can be regulated. Regulating guns is not unconstitutional as far as I know.

Make any rapid fire weapon capable of shooting 30 or more rounds per minute illegal. Maybe regulate bullet size and muzzle velocity too. And certainly limit magazine size to no more than 6. Time for dramatic public policy changes are needed now.

The people in this country are just way too insane to be trusted:

Mass Shooting Tracker

I don't think the majority of us living in this country have to live in fear because a very small segment of the population enjoys a hobby.

 

[Shad]

I don't think the majority of us living in this country have to live in fear because a very small segment of the population enjoys a hobby.

If you live with such a fear you should seek medical help instead demanding everyone else act in a way so you can cope with your issues.

 

[Curious George]

Yes, making guns illegal that are capable of firing 30 rounds per minute does make me feel safer. I see no reason to allow people to be able to buy stinger missiles. I see no reason to allow people to own rapid fire weaponry. I'm sorry you can't see that this is not a rights issue but a safety regulation issue.

Why should some mental nutcase have access to rapid fire weaponry? There are 340 million people in this country. Rapid fire weaponry is just too dangerous not to be regulated.

And the reasons why stinger missiles and automatic weapons are illegal to own without special licenses are different. Extending restrictions to anything you consider rapid fire might make you feel safe in a similar way but the reasoning for such restrictions would need to be more.

 

[dfnj]

If you live with such a fear you should seek medical help instead demanding everyone else act in a way so you can cope with your issues.

There are 320 million people in this country. Why should psychopaths has such easy access to guns capable of shooting 30 rounds per minute. It makes no sense and has nothing to do with me. I have no control over psychopaths. But I do know stinger missiles are illegal so they are much harder for psychopaths to get. And there hasn't been any commercial jets shot down by stinger missiles in a while. So making dangerous weapons illegal works.

So why can't you cope with the idea of regulating dangerous weapons? Why must you be able to have a gun capable of shooting 30 rounds per minute? What purpose or need does it satisfy for you?

 

[dfnj]

And the reasons why stinger missiles and automatic weapons are illegal to own without special licenses are different. Extending restrictions to anything you consider rapid fire might make you feel safe in a similar way but the reasoning for such restrictions would need to be more.

You have the right to your opinion on "need to be more". But Sandy Hook and Florida is enough for me. There are just too many dangerous psychopaths running around in this country to allow rapid fire weaponry to be legal. There is absolutely no reason for anyone to own an AR-15. It serves no purpose other than for mass shootings. Six shot clips and magazines are plenty enough for deer hunting and home protection. There's no reason to be able to shoot 30 rounds per minute other than to kill school children at a rapid rate.

 

[Shad]

There are 320 million people in this country. Why should psychopaths has such easy access to guns capable of shooting 30 rounds per minute.

Better question. Why is the psychopath free to begin with? Bring back involuntary institutionalization perhaps.

But I do know stinger missiles are illegal so they are much harder for psychopaths to get. And there hasn't been any commercial jets shot down by stinger missiles in a while. So making dangerous weapons illegal works.

Stinger missiles? Your government seems to have no issues handing Stingers out to religious psychopaths in the Middle-East for the last 3 decades. Cant have

So why can't you cope with the idea of regulating dangerous weapons?

All weapons are dangerous in the wrong hands. Will your argument change if psychopaths use handguns instead? Shotguns?

Why must you be able to have a gun capable of shooting 30 rounds per minute?

A handgun can shoot 30 rounds/min. See how your points are so generalized to sweep up most guns.

What purpose or need does it satisfy for you?

For me? None. It is just your points are horrible arguments for restriction due to generalizations.

 

[dfnj]

Better question. Why is the psychopath free to begin with? Bring back involuntary institutionalization perhaps.

You can't stop the psychopaths unless you take away everyone's freedoms. Is your 2nd amendment rights above every other?

 

[dfnj]

A handgun can shoot 30 rounds/min. See how your points are so generalized to sweep up most guns.

Yes, and that is a good thing! Magazine or clips should have limitations.

 

[Shad]

You can't stop the psychopaths unless you take away everyone's freedoms.

How so?

And how is that different than restricting weapons thus freedoms?

Is your 2nd amendment rights above every other?

Yes.

 

[dfnj]

How so?
And how is that different than restricting weapons thus freedoms?

The only way you can properly identify and control who is a psychopath is be taking away every other Amendment right. That is the point. There are too many people for the government to manage and prevent from getting an AR-15.

Guns capable of rapid firing whether manual or automatic should be outlawed. Why have machine guns illegal if someone can squeeze their finger on the trigger getting more rounds off than a machine gun. We need laws that make sense that protect people by not allowing such weapons to be legal.

Yes.

That is a dumb position. Guns are too dangerous not to be regulated.

 

[Shad]

Yes, and that is a good thing! Magazine or clips should have limitations.

So I was right your points are generalizations which merely mask a far wider point of view.

One can just bring more mags to off-set capacity limitations especially with weapons are designed for easy mag reload.

 

[dfnj]

So I was right your points are generalizations which merely mask a far wider point of view.

One can just bring more mags to off-set capacity limitations especially with weapons are designed for easy mag reload.

Sure, they can bring more mags. That is exactly the point. To slow down the rate of fire. Require regulations to make magazines or clips not easy to load but require several steps.

I think you are missing the point of the whole conversation. It's about not allowing weapons capable of killing the most amount of people in the smallest amount of time. If that requires finger loading bullets then so be it!

 

[dfnj]

The gun nuts are insane!

 

[Shad]

The only way you can properly identify and control who is a psychopath is be taking away every other Amendment right.

Name said rights.

So if one Amendment is targeted it is fine. Targeting more than 1 is where you say that is crossing the line. Convenient

That is the point. There are too many people for the government to manage and prevent from getting an AR-15.

That is applicable to any weapon including the more used handgun in homicide. Government incompetence is not an argument for banning something.

Guns capable of rapid firing whether manual or automatic should be outlawed.

So back to bolt-action weapons....

See I knew if I dug deeper you would play your hand as anti-gun.

Why have machine guns illegal if someone can squeeze their finger on the trigger getting more rounds off than a machine gun.

Nonsensical point. Semi-autos do not have the same rate of fire as machine guns which have up to 500/min....

We need laws that make sense that protect people by not allowing such weapons to be legal.

Your net is wide that most weapons would be banned. That isn't a solution that is tossing out an Amendment

That is a dumb position.

No it is called the 2A.

Guns are too dangerous not to be regulated.

Your type of regulation is over the top.