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

[MidwestGuy]

I hear this, and don’t question their sincerity, but cannot see it as credible. No doubt it’s claimed that the mere presence of all these guns has prevented great atrocities that the state would have perpetrated or allowed? Or perhaps another civil war is envisaged? One can’t deny the huge numbers of guns has impeded changes to gun laws.

I think maybe the second amendment had more to do with this than anything. Take a look at some of the gun laws that were reversed in Illinois.

 

[Rau]

I think maybe the second amendment had more to do with this than anything.

Absolutely. That clause may indeed need amendment if Americans want to see more control over the gun population. The wide attachment to guns of many adds to the challenge of securing that amendment.

 

[JonNC]

By this obviously broken reasoning, private individuals should be allowed to own nuclear weapons since the government has them.

This is obvious broken reasoning. Nuclear weapons are not firearms.

An AR-15 is an M16/M4 with full-auto capability removed. Designed by Eugene Stoner for war. Period.

It is semi-automatic, and therefore not a military weapon. But semiautomatic pistols are are used in the military.

That’s vapid hand-waving, Jon.

Nope. Simple facts.

It’s also nonsensical to demand high-output weaponry to prepare yourself for a home invasion that has about the same statistical odds of occurring as being attacked by a shark at the beach.

No one has high output weaopnry. An AR-15 is essentially the same as other semiautomatic rifles, other than appearances.
No one is asking for automatic rifles.

Revolvers and bolt actions are sufficient for the imagined task as well…

Theyre great, too.

Only the tools that are demonstrably shown to be used more in the slaughter of children than the demise of criminals and “bad guys” in the US. Yes. Progressives want to remove those tools because they’re doing more harm than good.

So, the criminals get to determine what the law abiding get to have.

Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone (Published 2005)

Supreme Court rules that police do not have constitutional duty to protect person from harm, even woman who obtained court-issued protective order against violent husband which made arrest mandatory for violation; decision overturns ruling by federal appeals court in Colorado; it had permitted...

www.nytimes.com

 

[Road-Worrier]

To the preppers who think they still need to be able to kill the mailman when the revolution breaks out, a bolt gun or single action pistol will do just fine.

As I observed in another thread, gun control is about attacking political enemies, not about stopping gun violence. “Preppers”, “Red Necks”, “Hillbillies”…“Republicans”. If you really want to target gun violence, you need to get guns out of the hands of young Black and Hispanic gangbangers in major cities. That could be done without any additional laws, but you won’t do that because they’re Democrat voters. It’s not about violence, it’s all politics.

 

[Luke6_37]

Luke6_37:

Nobody has a right to own the kind of gun that killed those children at Sandy Hook or Parkland.

26 people have been killed in chiraq just in the first 21 days of february.
86 have been shot and wounded.
112 total shot.
32 total homicides

why don’t we see the families of these citizens on cnn? don’t they count?

it is disgusting to use this tragedy for political gain. how many ar-15’s were used to kill these people. are their deaths less significant

go ahead ban the ar as the citizens of chiraq continue to die.

what will you ban with the next mass shooting

Save your Pro-Gun Culture of Death NRA talking points. I saw their spokeswoman throw out this line on TV. Do you think it didn’t get noticed?

Before those brave kids spoke out and started a movement that I hope will result in a ban your killing toys, you didn’t give a about the people being killed in Chicago. If you did, you’d know Chris Hayes on MSNBC already did a Town Hall with the people of Chicago.

 

[Road-Worrier]

Before those brave kids spoke out and started a movement that I hope will result in a ban your killing toys, you didn’t give a about the people being killed in Chicago. If you did, you’d know Chris Hayes on MSNBC already did a Town Hall with the people of Chicago.

Town Halls are nice, I guess, it gives everybody a nice chance to vent their spleen against their political enemies; Republicans and NRA members, mostly. Enforcing the laws already on the books against straw purchases, and illegal firearm ownership would actually do something to curb gun violence, but Democrats would have to pay a political price to do that, something they’re not willing to do, because it’s not about taking any serious steps against violence, it’s about demonizing political opponents, and if a few thousand black and brown eggs need to be broken every year to make those tasty omelets, that’s a price you’re willing to see paid. The simple fact is, it’s not NRA members that have blood on their hands. They’re about the only group that advocates enforcing existing gun laws, it’s liberals in the media and the Democrat party who are willing, in fact, probably eager, to accept a significant amount of collateral damage in the form of dead kids, to attack their political opponents.

 

[Rau]

Supreme Court rules that police do not have constitutional duty to protect person from harm,

Why is this of interest to anyone? The duties of the police are established in places other than the Constitution.

 

[Vonsalza]

This is obvious broken reasoning. Nuclear weapons are not firearms.

The constitution, on which you claim to predicate your view, simply identifies “arms”, of which they certainly are. Ergo your logic here is confronted with a contradiction.

Glad to be of assistance here.

It is semi-automatic, and therefore not a military weapon. But semiautomatic pistols are are used in the military.

The military generally advises infantry to keep their rifles on semi-auto except in particular situations.

Fact is Jon, if I lay out a Colt M16/M4 and a Colt LE model and covered up where the little selector switch would be with a one-inch square piece of fabric, you’d be utterly incapable of discerning which rifle is the military version and which is the civilian version. 99% identical, they are. Born from the mind of Eugene Stoner for warfare.

Nope. Simple facts.

Uncited and over-vague. So hand-waving.

No one has high output weaopnry. An AR-15 is essentially the same as other semiautomatic rifles, other than appearances.

An AR15 is certainly very high output, given the body counts in Vegas and Flordia and the very small amounts of time in which they were amassed.

And no, it isn’t the same. Other semi-autos frequently use mags you have to rock in, which slows the reload speed. AR mags are drop’n’swap. Push button, really.

Most of your non-military semi-autos have wood stocks that don’t readily accommodate attachments intended to increase the lethality of the weapon.

And sporter-type semi-autos are generally substantially heavier and more cumbersome than the light Ars with their collapsing stocks.

So yes. They’re all similar. Like lions and house cats are similar…

Theyre great, too.

Excellent. Then lets limit easy ownership to those.

So, the criminals get to determine what the law abiding get to have.

No. Murphy’s Law does.

Same reason you don’t get nukes. Or your semi-auto’s fully automatic twin.

 

[Ridgerunner]

Before those brave kids spoke out and started a movement that I hope will result in a ban your killing toys, you didn’t give a about the people being killed in Chicago. If you did, you’d know Chris Hayes on MSNBC already did a Town Hall with the people of Chicago.

Big deal. Even Rahm Emanuel complained that gun laws are not being enforced in Chicago by the judges. And he’s right about that. But the laws against murder are most assuredly going to be enforced upon Mr. Nikolas Cruz.

 

[LeafByNiggle]

… Enforcing the laws already on the books against straw purchases, and illegal firearm ownership would actually do something to curb gun violence,…

It is very hard to enforce laws against straw purchases without gun registration, but gun rights supporters won’t allow that because they think having no registry is essential in preventing confiscation. The chance of mass confiscation in the US is nearly zero, but even if confiscation were attempted, it would not need registration to proceed. So how do you suggest that we crack down on straw purchases with no registry?

 

[upant]

To the preppers who think they still need to be able to kill the mailman when the revolution breaks out, a bolt gun or single action pistol will do just fine.

does anyone really believe this?

But as a percentage of drugs estimated to have been imported versus what gets captured, it’s been a raging success.

estimated???

As he would have needed to reload several times in order to achieve the same casualty count, there would have been much more opportunity for student to flee or engage the shooter.

supposedly he walked thru 3 buildings. he had ample time to reload and could have used a caliber that caused more damage

but we will agree to disagree.

but they all mean making these firearms less available

this isn’t the stated intent of the original groups and more people today falling in line with them. they will not be happy until the only ones with guns are the 1% and the government.

Why do you believe this?

the original push for gun control after the civil war was to keep the newly freed slaves defenseless. why did crazyfornia start pushing gun control in 1967? do the black panthers ring a bell? the confiscation after hurricane katrina is a recent example. when people needed to defend their homes the most the government blundered.

I hope will result in a ban your killing toys,

how do you know i own one?

Before those brave kids spoke out and started a movement that I hope will result in a ban your killing toys, you didn’t give a about the people being killed in Chicago. If you did, you’d know Chris Hayes on MSNBC already did a Town Hall with the people of Chicago.

chiraq has been a killing field for years. one town hall? what gun control law will they introduce to stop it. why is an ar ban only newsworthy after a crisis?

Save your Pro-Gun Culture of Death NRA talking points

truth hurt?

Why is this of interest to anyone?

because many people believe the cops have a duty to protect from harm.

 

[Vonsalza]

As I observed in another thread, gun control is about attacking political enemies, not about stopping gun violence.

No. It’s just that a lot of different conflicts tend to fall along the same ideological lines.

“Preppers”, “Red Necks”, “Hillbillies”…“Republicans”.

“Gun-Grabbers”, “Liberals”, “Progressives”… “Democrats”

If you really want to target gun violence, you need to get guns out of the hands of young Black and Hispanic gangbangers in major cities.

Wow. Just wow. :crazy_face:

Check the race of the last several shooters. Plenty of white folks, pal.

 

[Ridgerunner]

So yes. They’re all similar. Like lions and house cats are similar…

Awfully, awfully incorrect. More like 4 year old lions and 8 year old lions are similar.

And remember, the Aurora Colo shooter didn’t use an AR at all and came very close to this same number killed.

But okay, Democrats don’t want to guard children, which is not surprising given their love of abortion. Their interest is in taking guns away from people who obey the law.

 

[Vonsalza]

Vonsalza:

So yes. They’re all similar. Like lions and house cats are similar…

Awfully, awfully incorrect. More like 4 year old lions and 8 year old lions are similar.

And remember, the Aurora Colo shooter didn’t use an AR at all and came very close to this same number killed.

Sure. And none of them killed as many people as a guy that used a bus.

But buses have a vital societal function, thus we don’t ban them.

What is the vital societal function being carried out by semiautomatic firearms that we have concrete proof of? So far, it just seems really good at killing innocents in public…

But okay, Democrats don’t want to guard children, which is not surprising given their love of abortion. Their interest is in taking guns away from people who obey the law.

Spare us all the ideological spew.

 

[JonNC]

Why is this of interest to anyone? The duties of the police are established in places other than the Constitution.

Because it does not follow that the existence of law enforcement, as good as they often are, is not a promise or implication that they will protect you from criminals. Defense of yourself, your family, your property first and foremost falls on you.

 

[Theo520]

Depends.

But I’ll say this. If I had one 9mm round and a couple of pounds of tannerite placed strategically, I could kill a lot more than 17 with one shot.

Or cans of regular gasoline placed at the school exits.

 

[Ridgerunner]

What is the vital societal function being carried out by semiautomatic firearms that we have concrete proof of? So far, it just seems really good at killing innocents in public…

That’s not why my adult son or I use an AR for. We use them to kill varmints of various kinds. Around here we have serious problems with coyotes, armadillos (yes, they dig holes and you can kill yourself on a tractor if a wheel falls into one) feral hogs, feral dogs, groundhogs.

The reason why an AR is good for those things (though some others are inherently more accurate) is that they’re easy to carry, easy to steady and, like any semi-automatic, quick to fire.

Ideological spew is it? Why not guard children, then? Most schools, including those around here, have personnel for every function imaginable. Why not security? Why don’t Dems care about that? And your Dem party does stand for abortion on demand and you can’t deny it. It was even in your platform.

 

[Vonsalza]

That’s not why my adult son or I use an AR for. We use them to kill varmints of various kinds. Around here we have serious problems with coyotes, armadillos (yes, they dig holes and you can kill yourself on a tractor if a wheel falls into one) feral hogs, feral dogs, groundhogs.

For your purposes, here are some rifles that will perform as well and may be more accurate - all without the ability to mow-down 30 people in a few seconds.
Cheaper than Dirt - .223 Bolt Action Rifles

quick to fire.

I grew up rural too. Practice your marksmanship. Making quality shots over quantity of shots is why the NRA was originally founded.

 

[JonNC]

The constitution, on which you claim to predicate your view, simply identifies “arms”, of which they certainly are. Ergo your logic here is confronted with a contradiction.

Arms. Not nuclear weapons. Your sustain for the constitution is showing.

The military generally advises infantry to keep their rifles on semi-auto except in particular situations.

It is selectable, and my understanding is that burst is the preferred position, depending on the situation

Fact is Jon, if I lay out a Colt M16/M4 and a Colt LE model and covered up where the little selector switch would be with a one-inch square piece of fabric, you’d be utterly incapable of discerning which rifle is the military version and which is the civilian version. 99% identical, they are. Born from the mind of Eugene Stoner for warfare.

And revolvers were used in warfare. The AR-15 is a civilian weapon. To claim otherwise is a distortion.

Uncited and over-vague. So hand-waving.

Check The NY Times article. There is nothing vague, and it is cited. I linked it. And it is from the leftist NYT.

An AR15 is certainly very high output, given the body counts in Vegas and Flordia and the very small amounts of time in which they were amassed.

Oh, so that’s the measure. Well, since over 99.9999% of AR-15s have killed no one,having been on the market for decades, clearly that makes it low powered.

And no, it isn’t the same. Other semi-autos frequently use mags you have to rock in, which slows the reload speed. AR mags are drop’n’swap. Push button, really.

Most of your non-military semi-autos have wood stocks that don’t readily accommodate attachments intended to increase the lethality of the weapon.

The rounds determine the power. And there are AR-15s that are small caliber. It is a platform.

Most of your non-military semi-autos have wood stocks that don’t readily accommodate attachments intended to increase the lethality of the weapon.

What evidence do you have that a barrel shroud adds to its lethality, particularly since 99.9999% of them have never killed a human?

Excellent. Then lets limit easy ownership to those.

As soon as we have a guarantee that no one else has the others: not criminals, not law enforcement, not foreigners.

No. Murphy’s Law does.

lol. Murphy’s is not in the constitution.
Let me know when you are calling for the ban of the most often stolen cars.

 

[Ridgerunner]

That’s not why my adult son or I use an AR for. We use them to kill varmints of various kinds. Around here we have serious problems with coyotes, armadillos (yes, they dig holes and you can kill yourself on a tractor if a wheel falls into one) feral hogs, feral dogs, groundhogs.

For your purposes, here are some rifles that will perform as well any may be more accurate - all without the ability to mow-down 30 people in a few seconds.

Cheaper than Dirt - .223 Bolt Action Rifles

quick to fire.

I grew up rural too. Practice your marksmanship. Making quality shots over quantity of shots is why the NRA was originally founded.

I also have single shot bolt action rifles. They’re not much good for varmint shooting. Ever try to hit a feral hog on the run with a bolt action single shot rifle? I’m confident you never have, but you can tell us now if you want. I’ll grant armadillos are so stupid they might remain still while you reload a bolt action single shot. But coyotes sure won’t. For the most part they’re on the move when you first see them.

Practice my marksmanship indeed. I can tell if you “grew up rural” you didn’t have much experience with varmint shooting.