Is the time right for a repeal of the 2nd amendment?

[Suudy]

They won’t be shooting “US citizens exercising their Constitutional rights”, they’ll be shooting “insurgents” or “enemy combatants”.

I’m not sure you understood the entirety of the post, especially since you left out key contextual information. I said:

What he says he would refuse to do is take an offensive stance against US citizens exercising their Constitutional rights.

Note the key modifier: “offensive stance.” That qualifier completely changes the meaning with respect to what you posted.

So, insofar as the US military fights defensively, I agree. If an armed resistance were to attack US government institutions, including the US military, they would be insurgents.

But that wasn’t the point with respect to Constitutional rights. The point is that I think–and several officers I know agree–that the US military will not fire upon US citizens that refuse to hand over their weapons. If an armed resistance were to form to defend the Constitutional right to bear arms, insofar as that resistance does not advance on US institutions, I’m quite certain the US military will not fire upon them. Indeed, were the military ordered to do so, they would refuse the order, and if further pressed would resign their commissions.

 

[Vonsalza]

Another fine idea I’ve encountered is that “sporting” firearms should be defined as firearms where discharging and cycling the firearm require separate mechanical actions on the part of the shooter (like with bolt action rifles and single-action revolvers). These should be readily available to the masses.

Weapons that are not “sporting” should require a lengthy and expensive permit process.

Ever since the advent of the Abrams tank and the Apache attack copter, personal firearm ownership no longer materially contributes to your ability to keep government tyranny in check. You simply do not have access to the same firepower as the government (like “you” did in 1776), so any objection on this basis is completely unsound.

 

[tomarin]

A society that has to arm its teachers is a sick society. God help us.

I guess we are a sick society, or at least there are definitely sick individuals among us (the Las Vegas shooter, et al).

 

[Ridgerunner]

In other words, do away with the Constitution and let everything be run by an elected body, as with the English parliament. Saying this as regards the second amendment can be applied to any other right, e.g., “Well, we ought to have freedom of speech, all right, unless it hurts others’ feelings, so let’s make it illegal to…” and so on.

There’s potentially no end to what absolute legislative supremacy can do, which is exactly why we have a constitution.

 

[JonNC]

What’s dishonest about it? Americans’ unfettered access to guns results in about 30,000 deaths annually, many of them children.

First, this statement is dishonest on a couple of points:

1. our access to firearms is not unfettered. There are numerous requirements and restrictions. You know this, so this is dishonest.
2. ownership of firearms does not result in 30,000 deaths, anymore than unfettered car ownership is the cause of drunk driving deaths.
   In both cases, actions by individuals who abuse the rights of others. The objects are not the cause. If access was the cause, each firearm would be responsible for deaths, there would be millions.
3. the 30,000 number is deceptive, if not dishonest. The majority of those are suicides. That is an entirely different category that murder.

You may be shocked to learn that I believe police officers should not carry guns.

How about the US military?

 

[Ridgerunner]

You’re assuming that the media is incapable of self-restraint. I do not accept that. It is presently unlawful for the media (at least in my state) to publish the name of a rape victim or a minor defendant or victim. So why is it impossible for the media to refrain from going on about a shooting about which, until then, nobody but locals knew anything about? Who ever heard of, say, Columbine before that shooting? Nobody really. Had it not been for the media coverage, nobody, including psychotic copycats, would know anything about it.

And if schools were, at the same time, well guarded, we would not have these shootings or calls to change the constitution.

 

[upant]

Americans’ unfettered access to guns

how is it unfettered? there are thousands of gun laws on the books. every sale at a store requires a background check. it is already illegal to sell a gun to someone not lawfully allowed a gun: private or commercial.

privates sales cannot be monitored unless the people involved want it to be.

I’m more likely to be shot dead by a toddler than die in a terrorist attack

only through your own fault. the gun should not be left unattended. the toddler should not be left unattended to find a gun. we can’t legislate out stupidity.

You simply do not have access to the same firepower as the government (like “you” did in 1776), so any objection on this basis is completely unsound.

have we forgotten the lesson we learned from the business owners who took to their roofs in the 1992 LA riots? it is not only the government we need protection from. civil unrest seems to be increasing (baltimore, ferguson, etc). the authorities let the people down. a more recent example was in a town ravaged by one of the past years hurricanes. the authorities were too involved in search and rescue to protect local business from looters. the people took it upon themselves. what do you want to defend yourself with against a mass of looters that turn violent?

imho, the mere presence of a man with an American Rifle will deter rioters.

You may be shocked to learn that I believe police officers should not carry guns.

how do the cops defend themselves in our violent cities and rural areas? would you go into these zones without arms? or do we just create no-go zones as europe has?

 

[Vonsalza]

imho, the mere presence of a man with an American Rifle will deter rioters.

Sure. To that end I think pretty much any rifle would do - including slower rifles like a bolt action.

And upon a further reflection, a man that would stand his ground to defend his shop from rioters should probably leave anyway and file an insurance claim later. Some crazies may not be deterred even if he was holding a portable nuclear weapon!

 

[Vonsalza]

…or do we just create no-go zones as europe has?

It might be worth pointing out that these supposed “no-go zones” don’t stand up to fact checking very well. And the ones that are dangerous are not demonstrably any more dangerous than our own American ghettos.

 

[Road-Worrier]

Tell that to the bunch of Pashtun goatherds who’ve done a pretty good job of holding the full force of the US military at bay for almost 2 decades.

 

[Vonsalza]

Tell that to the bunch of Pashtun goatherds who’ve done a pretty good job of holding the full force of the US military at bay for almost 2 decades.

Make no mistake; when we show up, they leave. They don’t survive because they put up a fire-fight.

The problem we’re encountering with Iraq and The Stan is that we can’t occupy a nation forever. If they won’t fight for their own freedom, the Tali deserves to win.

 

[upant]

It might be worth pointing out that these supposed “no-go zones” don’t stand up to fact checking very well

a matter of semantics. the neighborhoods are identified as “problem areas” by the police.

And the ones that are dangerous are not demonstrably any more dangerous than our own American ghettos

you don’t think we have neighborhoods that are identified as “problem areas” by the police?

 

[Road-Worrier]

Make no mistake; when we show up, they leave.

The problem we’re encountering with Iran and The Stan is that we can’t occupy a nation forever. If they won’t fight for their own freedom, the Tali deserves to win.

Do you think potential US “insurgents” aren’t smart enough to adopt similar tactics? Or do you think the US government will be more willing to go nuclear on Texas than it has been to on Afghanistan or North Korea?

 

[Vonsalza]

Vonsalza:

It might be worth pointing out that these supposed “no-go zones” don’t stand up to fact checking very well

a matter of semantics. the neighborhoods are identified as “problem areas” by the police.

And the ones that are dangerous are not demonstrably any more dangerous than our own American ghettos

you don’t think we have neighborhoods that are identified as “problem areas” by the police?

Oh, ok. So if you’re saying that these scary European “no-go zones” aren’t materially any different from our own ghettos, then I don’t have a problem.

Your post just made it sound like there’s something horrible going on in Europe that may not occur in the US. As long as that wasn’t what you were saying, then

 

[Vonsalza]

Vonsalza:

Make no mistake; when we show up, they leave.

The problem we’re encountering with Iran and The Stan is that we can’t occupy a nation forever. If they won’t fight for their own freedom, the Tali deserves to win.

Do you think potential US “insurgents” aren’t smart enough to adopt similar tactics?

By and large? No, no and no.

Rebellion breaks out? Just stop the trucks from going to Wal-Mart, Kroger or any other big-box store that Americans depend on for the logistics of the economy. The popular support for the rebellion would dry up in mere days.

Americans, by and large, haven’t lived off the land for a couple generations now. Their ability to self-sustain is thus highly, HIGHLY compromised.

Or do you think the US government will be more willing to go nuclear on Texas than it has been to on Afghanistan or North Korea?

The opposite. Less nuclear. Just close the main distribution centers.

With the modern population boom, you MUST MUST have them to sustain all these people. Hunger breaks alliances pretty quickly.

---

Circling around to the original point, the ability to own a civilian version of an assault rifle will prevent roughly none of this.

 

[Road-Worrier]

Rebellion breaks out? Just stop the trucks from going to Wal-Mart, Kroger or any other big-box store that Americans depend on for the logistics of the economy. The popular support for the rebellion would dry up in mere days.

Like Stalin did in the Ukraine, just starve a couple million and the rest will get in line? And you wonder why there are 2nd amendment supporters.

 

[Vonsalza]

Vonsalza:

Rebellion breaks out? Just stop the trucks from going to Wal-Mart, Kroger or any other big-box store that Americans depend on for the logistics of the economy. The popular support for the rebellion would dry up in mere days.

Like Stalin did in the Ukraine, just starve a couple million and the rest will get in line? And you wonder why there are 2nd amendment supporters.

They ultimately did exactly what he wanted, as history shows. And there are many known and many yet-to-be-discovered mass graves full of those who tried armed resistance.

It didn’t work. Just like it won’t work if tried again.

Your vote is your best (and only, really) weapon against tyranny now. You simply do not have access to anything remotely resembling the same destructive potential as what the government has access to.

Sorry man. It’s hard to accept, but it’s also indubitably true.

 

[Road-Worrier]

Amazes me how many liberals would be accepting of a Soviet style extermination of their fellow citizens over a political disagreement. Just goes to show “scratch a liberal, find a fascist”.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

I’m not a huge fan of policing in this country but “We need guns so we can shoot cops and soldiers” is, to me at least, a strange argument.

This, and many other quotes here, show the lack of knowledge of how civil wars/revolutions (same thing, the name just depends on who wins) happen. George Washington was a British Officer., and R.E.Lee was US military.

 

[Boatswain2PA]

Just goes to show “scratch a liberal, find a fascist”.

This is true of those in America today who call themselves a liberal. They are generally illiberal leftists just using the term liberal.