HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Main » General Discussion (Forum) » Americans Don't Have the ...

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 06:51 AM

 

Americans Don't Have the Right to Bear Just Any Arms

[center][/center]

Let’s start with an undeniable truth: In the United States, the people have the right to keep and bear arms. And let’s then acknowledge that the childish interpretation of that constitutional amendment—that Americans have the right to whatever accessory they can put on, in or over a gun for the sole purpose of making it more deadly—is a dangerous falsehood.

Therein lies the chasm between those seeking constitutionally impossible forms of gun control and their political opponents, who view every proposal regulating weaponry as the first step toward dictatorship. Caught in the middle are the majority of Americans who think people should be allowed to keep guns but seesaw over tougher laws regarding those weapons.

http://www.newsweek.com/2015/07/24/bullet-initiative-354203.html

99 replies, 6404 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 99 replies Author Time Post
Reply Americans Don't Have the Right to Bear Just Any Arms (Original post)
SecularMotion Jul 2015 OP
hobbit709 Jul 2015 #1
SecularMotion Jul 2015 #2
Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #4
imthevicar Jul 2015 #21
Hangingon Jul 2015 #60
951-Riverside Jul 2015 #3
Eleanors38 Jul 2015 #92
onehandle Jul 2015 #5
tecelote Jul 2015 #6
Emelina Jul 2015 #7
blackspade Jul 2015 #15
Dustlawyer Jul 2015 #16
Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #24
russ1943 Jul 2015 #67
Eleanors38 Jul 2015 #87
petronius Jul 2015 #95
gollygee Jul 2015 #47
lancer78 Jul 2015 #99
aikoaiko Jul 2015 #8
SecularMotion Jul 2015 #10
aikoaiko Jul 2015 #11
Indydem Jul 2015 #9
Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jul 2015 #12
Indydem Jul 2015 #13
Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jul 2015 #14
TeddyR Jul 2015 #20
AtheistCrusader Jul 2015 #62
Erich Bloodaxe BSN Jul 2015 #73
AtheistCrusader Jul 2015 #75
friendly_iconoclast Jul 2015 #78
Indydem Jul 2015 #83
NutmegYankee Jul 2015 #88
Hangingon Jul 2015 #61
AtheistCrusader Jul 2015 #63
ileus Jul 2015 #17
Hoyt Jul 2015 #18
Lizzie Poppet Jul 2015 #86
malaise Jul 2015 #19
Duckhunter935 Jul 2015 #22
Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #28
malaise Jul 2015 #29
Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #31
malaise Jul 2015 #32
Telcontar Jul 2015 #33
sir pball Jul 2015 #35
Paladin Jul 2015 #23
Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #27
Historic NY Jul 2015 #38
Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #39
ileus Jul 2015 #70
friendly_iconoclast Jul 2015 #76
Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #77
friendly_iconoclast Jul 2015 #79
Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #84
malaise Jul 2015 #30
Paladin Jul 2015 #37
malaise Jul 2015 #46
Paladin Jul 2015 #52
malaise Jul 2015 #55
libodem Jul 2015 #41
Paladin Jul 2015 #43
malaise Jul 2015 #44
libodem Jul 2015 #48
malaise Jul 2015 #54
Adrahil Jul 2015 #25
WinkyDink Jul 2015 #82
Adrahil Jul 2015 #97
libodem Jul 2015 #26
happyslug Jul 2015 #34
libodem Jul 2015 #40
happyslug Jul 2015 #53
jalan48 Jul 2015 #36
Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #42
hack89 Jul 2015 #49
PowerToThePeople Jul 2015 #45
hack89 Jul 2015 #50
libodem Jul 2015 #51
Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #57
ileus Jul 2015 #72
Eleanors38 Jul 2015 #94
Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #56
PowerToThePeople Jul 2015 #58
Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #59
Darb Jul 2015 #65
former9thward Jul 2015 #68
TheKentuckian Jul 2015 #89
Nuclear Unicorn Jul 2015 #74
PowerToThePeople Jul 2015 #91
Darb Jul 2015 #64
petronius Jul 2015 #66
KamaAina Jul 2015 #69
ileus Jul 2015 #71
friendly_iconoclast Jul 2015 #81
WinkyDink Jul 2015 #80
AtheistCrusader Jul 2015 #85
WinkyDink Jul 2015 #98
Eleanors38 Jul 2015 #90
Hoyt Jul 2015 #93
Eleanors38 Jul 2015 #96

Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 06:53 AM

1. IBTL

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hobbit709 (Reply #1)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 06:57 AM

2. This shouldn't be locked

 

News stories (and related content) from reputable mainstream sources about efforts to strengthen or weaken gun control legislation in any jurisdiction in the United States, national news stories (and related content) from reputable mainstream sources about high-profile gun crimes, and viral political content from social media or blogs that would likely be of interest to a large majority of DU members are permitted under normal circumstances.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10025307978

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Reply #2)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 07:03 AM

4. The OP isn't a news story, it's an opinion piece. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #4)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 08:49 AM

21. A whiney one at best.

 

if you have a ship in American waters you can arm that as well. why do you think they put ARMS in the constitution instead of Guns!? and the other lie involves Well regulated confused with Government regulated. Google it.
First we must bring the house up to a constitutional level, then we can have a national conversation about The right to bare arms. We can even vote on an amendment on them as well

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to imthevicar (Reply #21)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 11:32 AM

60. Have to agree with the article comments.

This is a poorly written opinion piece.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to hobbit709 (Reply #1)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 07:03 AM

3. Its a legit news article

 

Locking this would be like locking every thread about mass shootings because its about guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to 951-Riverside (Reply #3)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 05:45 PM

92. Looks like a big op-ed to me, explaining why an historically anti-gun publication...

 

feels compelled to acknowledge its failed prohibition strategy, and to propose the look of moderation. Okay, but this ain't big news. News about itself, maybe, but not of events around us.

This is also in the "Gungeon" where most of the pro-2A posters at least try to follow the TOS in GD. But special dispensations, and all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 07:13 AM

5. Very pertinent to the mass killing we had just yesterday.

'I consider (guns) a threat to national security.' - President Andrew Shepherd from 'The American President.'



Clearly guns have been proven to be Weapons Of Mass Destruction.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 07:15 AM

6. Barring the obvious, here's what scares me about gun control.

In each election, a huge number of people I know vote Republican because "the Dems are going to take our guns away".

When I argue that no one needs an AK, they usually agree. But the general view is that your guns are safe with a Repugnant President. And, so many are willing to vote on that one tenet.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 07:19 AM

7. Pro Choice activists and the NRA have something in common

Each sees any regulation whatsoever as chipping away at their particular right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Emelina (Reply #7)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 08:08 AM

15. What?

That is a fucked up comparison.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Emelina (Reply #7)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 08:15 AM

16. They are brainwashed into thinking that ANY new gun law leads to taking away guns!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Dustlawyer (Reply #16)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:16 AM

24. We're still waiting for the Controllers to actually enforce the laws already on the books.

Virtually all of the rampage killers and around 70% of killers perpetrating singular gun homicides have disqualifying histories.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #24)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 12:57 PM

67. Many would disagree with those unsubstantiated claims.


There have been at least 71 in the last three decades—and most of the killers got their guns legally. Weapons: Of the 143 guns possessed by the killers, more than three quarters were obtained legally. http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2012/07/mass-shootings-map

Role of prohibited possessors: Certain categories of people, including felons, certain domestic abusers, and people adjudicated mentally ill are prohibited by federal law from possessing guns.5 We had sufficient evidence to judge whether the shooter was a prohibited gun possessor in 29 of the 43 incidents (67%). Of those 29 incidents, 11 (38%) involved a prohibited possessor, and 16 (62%) did not. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/files/2013/02/mass_shootings_2009-13_-_jan_29_12pm1.pdf


The known percentage of murder defendants with a disqualifying prior felony conviction is 40%. According to statistics published by U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics. http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fdluc09.pdf Table 10 Page 13

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #24)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 05:29 PM

87. Hell, they don't enforce the TOS in Guns Discussion.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #87)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 05:54 PM

95. Hosts try to be guided by the SoP as well as the stickied thread at the top of GD

Currently, there's a consensus that the following exception applies:

"Open discussion of guns is permitted during very high-profile news events which are heavily covered across all newsmedia."

Eventually, there will be a consensus that the "open discussion" period has expired, and locking will resume...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Emelina (Reply #7)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:27 AM

47. What regulations of abortion do you see as warranted and not an attempt to

chip away at overall abortion rights?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Emelina (Reply #7)

Sat Jul 18, 2015, 03:44 AM

99. sensible gun control

 

Died the day di-fi uttered the phrase "if I had the power, I would make every American turn in their guns", or something like that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 07:26 AM

8. Interesting middle ground piece more fitting for GCRA or GC&RKBA aka the Castle and Gungeon


Just as an aside, the author talks about how the NRA fights Background check improvements and then cites the improvements made after the Virginia Yech shooting, but the NRA were instrumentally in rewriting those policies.


http://www.cbsnews.com/news/nra-democrats-team-up-to-pass-gun-bill/


After 52 years in Congress, John Dingell knows it sometimes takes a "rather curious alliance," such as between the National Rifle Association and the House's most fervent gun control advocate, to move legislation.

That's what took place Wednesday when the House, by voice vote, passed a gun control bill that Rep. Dingell, D-Mich., helped broker between the NRA and Rep. Carolyn McCarthy, D-N.Y.

With the NRA on board, the bill, which fixes flaws in the national gun background check system that allowed the Virginia Tech shooter to buy guns despite his mental health problems, has a good chance of becoming the first major gun control law in more than a decade.

"We'll work with anyone, if you protect the rights of law-abiding people under the second amendment and you target people that shouldn't have guns," NRA chief Wayne LaPierre told CBS News Correspondent Sharyl Atkisson

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to aikoaiko (Reply #8)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 07:41 AM

10. From the article

 

The NRA did win concessions.

The bill would automatically restore the purchasing rights of veterans who were diagnosed with mental problems as part of the process of obtaining disability benefits. LaPierre said the Clinton administration put about 80,000 such veterans into the background check system.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Reply #10)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 07:46 AM

11. Rightfully so. We should NOT discriminate against vets with mental health issues unless dangerous ...


...due to that mental illness.

The initial law was too inclusive of no dangerous vets.


And quid pro quo is a good political strategy when it improves the laws overall. That's something the Antigun crowd should really learn.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 07:40 AM

9. Unfortunately, the gun control crowd cannot be trusted.

 

I'd be more than happy to acquiesce to this deal that the author is suggesting:

-Ban accessories that serve no purpose other than to transform guns into weapons of mass slaughter, such as attachable drums that carry 100 rounds.
-Adopt rules that make it harder for criminals and the mentally ill to obtain firearms.
-Outlaw the public display of weapons.
-Allow the concealed carry of guns using the “shall issue” standard.
-Stop trying to ban scary-looking add-ons that primarily protect the shooter, but don’t make the gun more dangerous to others.
-Forget attacks on the “armor-piercing bullets.”
-Abandon efforts to outlaw “assault weapons”—a politically loaded phrase with a mishmash of meanings that pretty much amount to nothing.


With an exception for transfers of firearms between family members and heirs, and a reasonable magazine restriction size, I don't see any problems with a compromise like this.

The problem is that the gun grabbers won't follow the deal. As soon as this grand compromise goes into effect, they will be back out trying to ban "assault weapons" or take away sa handguns.

Too many will not be happy until guns are collected door to door. Until those people let that foolish dream die and accept the interpretation of 2A that the vast majority of Americans believe in, there can be no compromise.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Indydem (Reply #9)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 07:53 AM

12. I'd be happy enough to take your guns out of your cold, dead hands.

Let you have them while you're alive, but ban the inheritance of guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Erich Bloodaxe BSN (Reply #12)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 07:55 AM

13. Thank you.

 

I appreciate it when you folks come around and prove, without a doubt, why you cannot be negotiated with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Indydem (Reply #13)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 07:57 AM

14. They can give your heirs the value of the gun.

They'll be free to go buy their own if they want - or to do something better with that money.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Erich Bloodaxe BSN (Reply #14)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 08:39 AM

20. So

 

In short, you want to confiscate guns, but instead of doing it in one fell swoop you would be ok with doing it over time. No thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Erich Bloodaxe BSN (Reply #14)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 11:55 AM

62. Because no gun carries historical value.

So, can the potential heirs actually get an opportunity to purchase THOSE specific guns back (assuring they go through the background check, which I presume fills your requirement) with the 'fair value' they were offered?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #62)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 01:53 PM

73. If they're rendered unfireable, sure.

If you're worried about 'historical value', you obviously aren't going to be firing the gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Erich Bloodaxe BSN (Reply #73)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 02:09 PM

75. Um, why?

I have a savage 1889 (model denotes year of manufacture), I still use it.

Why do we need to destroy these guns again?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #75)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 02:38 PM

78. "Why do we need to destroy these guns again?" To assuage a moral panic, apparently...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #75)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 02:43 PM

83. See? It's not worth the time it takes to type a response.

 

Too many "progressives" are all or nothing gun control fanatics. They will never rest until everything that can fire a projectile is banned and confiscated.

This is why the NRA, to their detriment, seems so extreme. They've tried to offer compromises in the past and this is the kind of response they've gotten.

So, it was an interesting proposal from a person trying to make a reasonable proposition to unreasonable people on both extremes. No dice for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Erich Bloodaxe BSN (Reply #73)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 05:34 PM

88. Just like people never drive Historical or collectors cars.

Hell, it's not like states even provide plates to operate...oh wait!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Indydem (Reply #9)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 11:54 AM

61. The list you quoted from the op-Ed piece contain contradictions.

"Ban accessories that serve no purpose other than to transform guns into weapons of mass slaughter, such as attachable drums that carry 100 rounds"

Will be difficult to separate from

"Stop trying to ban scary looking add-on that primarily protect the shooter, but do not make the gun more dangerous to others"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hangingon (Reply #61)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 11:57 AM

63. In this case, that could be something like a flash suppressor.

It protects the shooter from being blinded by the fireball of hot gasses at the end of he barrel. It doesn't actually conceal the shooter really, so it's not more dangerous to other than a gun without it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 08:25 AM

17. Who come up with the stupid "artwork" for the cover.

How can you take anything in the article seriously when the cover is just plain stupid.


Another snoozeweek fail.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ileus (Reply #17)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 08:34 AM

18. I think the "stupid" is the point, and an apt one.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ileus (Reply #17)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 03:06 PM

86. Aw, c'mon! You're not jonesin' for a dual magazine CZ-75?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 08:37 AM

19. I heard them saying on CNN a short while qgo

that it's not hard to buy an AK47 as the latest alleged murderer did with ease.

What society allows citizens access to weapons of war?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #19)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:09 AM

22. Probably was not an AK-47

 

But the non-military semi-automatic rifle that is patterned a fictions similar it does not have fully automatic capability as the military version. You can buy the full auto version for 10's of thousands of dollars and federal background checks plus a tax stamp from the ATF.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #19)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:30 AM

28. "What society allows citizens access to weapons of war?"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #28)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:37 AM

29. That's BS - have a look at the empirical evidence

Clearly you're of the view that yours is the only free society on earth - there is nothing free about the freedom to slaughter innocent people because of the power of a gun lobby.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #29)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:38 AM

31. I take it you didn't click the provided link.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #31)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:40 AM

32. You're right

My bad

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #29)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:43 AM

33. People in Srebrenica gave up their guns in exchange for guarantee of safety

 

How'd that work out for them?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #19)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:47 AM

35. Germany, Austria, France, the Czech Republic, Italy, Russia, Sweden, Finland..

They seem to understand that controls on ownership (e.g. licensing, background checks, reasonable "good cause", so forth) are a hell of a lot more effective than squabbling over petty details like the shape of the grip, adjustability of the stock, or whether or not there's a flash hider. For God's sake, the Germans love their "weapons of war" so much they make them themselves, "to the very highest Teutonic quality standards".

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AR-15#Legal_status_of_civilian_ownership

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:13 AM

23. "Your dead marines don't trump our right to guns and badass-looking accessories."

That's an updating of one of the pro-gun militants' favorite sayings. No surprise that the Newsweek cover story has them roiled up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Paladin (Reply #23)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:27 AM

27. What "badass-looking accessories" did Abdulazeez employ?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #27)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:01 AM

38. 30 round magazines aren't exactly used for hunting...

anything else except humans. So I'd say its an accessory.

"Mohammad Youssuf Abdulazeez was carrying 30-round magazines when he opened fire, according to a source briefed by law enforcement. Abdulazeez kept police at bay for some time with the amount of ammunition he had, according to the source.

The shooting suspect was armed with an AK-47 style weapon‎ at the time of the attack according to two law enforcement officials briefed on the investigation."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Historic NY (Reply #38)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:05 AM

39. The RKBA is not about game hunting.

30-rounds is what is most practical, ergo --


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Historic NY (Reply #38)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 01:30 PM

70. I actually will coyote hunt with 30s.

Especially to and from the stand however, Most of my 30's only see duty when the kids and I go to the range for family fun time.

I really like 20's the best; not too long for shooting off bipods yet still providing enough rounds for hunting purposes. Of course it's only 30's for my home defense firearm.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #27)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 02:34 PM

76. I doubt your awkward question will be answered

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #76)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 02:37 PM

77. I get that a lot.

I ask a guy a question and all I get is silence. If I was still a dating girl I'd be getting really self-conscious.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #77)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 02:39 PM

79. You do a fine job of countering 'poisoning the well' posts like that one

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to friendly_iconoclast (Reply #79)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 02:46 PM

84. Yet, I'm not the technical expert like some of you guys. I just know when

a statement has been poorly constructed and sift for subtexts.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Paladin (Reply #23)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:38 AM

30. Dead Marines, dead African-Americans praying in their church

dead little kids in their schools, dead, dead, dead but they are free to buy any gun of their choice.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #30)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:59 AM

37. Full autos are a pain in the ass to acquire, currently.

So that's their next goal: over-the-counter machine guns. And no, I'm not exaggerating or making that up---they've got the 1934 federal gun law in their crosshairs, wailing that it desecrates their sacred 2nd Amendment rights.....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Paladin (Reply #37)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:24 AM

46. Shakes head

This is madness. You know yesterday was special in a strange way:
Roof arraigned; Holmes verdicts in and at the same time there was another live mass slaughter - this time of Marines.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #46)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:41 AM

52. And shootings reported in Maine, this morning.

You know, we're just short a year of the 50th anniversary of the Charles Whitman shootings (August 1, 1966). I lived in Austin at the time, and one of many things I remember about that horror show is how profoundly it affected the whole country. All the news magazines had it as a cover story, and the TV networks had all sorts of news and analysis of the incident---because back then, it was genuine news. And now? Mass shootings are so common that they barely survive a single news cycle. Such are the times we live in. It won't always be this way; one of these days, people will look back on our era and wonder how such a small portion of the populace could provide cover for so much mayhem and destruction, all in the name of a right they deemed more important than the lives of so many. What a tragedy our gun policies are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Paladin (Reply #52)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:47 AM

55. Hadn't heard of that one

Damn!!

You are so right - mass shootings are now the norm - that's very troubling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #30)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:12 AM

41. Too bad we were not guaranteed

Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness instead of the right to be dead because anyone else's right to kill you is the fucking National priority. So effed up.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libodem (Reply #41)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:20 AM

43. +1.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libodem (Reply #41)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:21 AM

44. And not just in America

The vast majority of murders in Jamaica (a murder center of the world) are gun related and we don't make a single one of them. We are forced to provide resources to prevent illegal drugs from entering the US but no one protects us from US guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to malaise (Reply #44)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:29 AM

48. I despise guns

And the whole wild west mentality that supports it. That's why our law enforcement has gone into full combat mode against the citizenry.

Love ya, Malaise. You are one of the good ones. You get it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libodem (Reply #48)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:45 AM

54. Back at yah

You are one of the good ones.

I hate all guns. We don't even allow friends to enter our home with legal weapons although very few of our friends or family own weapons.

The more citizens acquire war weapons, the more the police join the full combat mode. It is madness.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:20 AM

25. More people die of second-hand smoke than guns every year. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Adrahil (Reply #25)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 02:41 PM

82. Link to that claim? P.S. Smoking is BANNED in many places.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #82)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:29 PM

97. Right on the cdc website

 

Look up tobacco related deaths and firearms related deaths

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:25 AM

26. And who says

These individuals are a 'militia'?

I hurt my brachial plexus and I can't even bear my own arm. Seriously.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libodem (Reply #26)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:47 AM

34. The US Government, see 10 US Code Section 301

 

(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are—

(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to happyslug (Reply #34)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:06 AM

40. I still think is more akin

To individual ownership for the fearful. None of them seem to be organized into any actual militia groups until you get to those survivalist skinheads in armed encampments protecting their wimins and two year food supply. Jackbooted thugs.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libodem (Reply #40)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:44 AM

53. If you read the article, assult Weapons/rifles are NOT a problem

 

According to FBI statistics 69% of all murders are done with pistols. In fact knives and clubs EACH kill more people then rifles AND shotguns combined (and that includes AK-47 and AR-15/M16 clones). Thus if someone wants such a weapon, the chances of it being used illegally is way less then someone using a baseball bat.

As to this type of "Militia" Hamilton in the Federalist Papers advocated that the reserve militia (a term he did NOT use, but is the present name for such unorganized parts of the Militia) be called up no more then once a year to see if they have the necessary equipment and then sent home. The purpose of the call up is to make sure the reserve militia is equipped if and when it is called up to duty. In the Militia Act of 1792, this concept was REJECTED in favor of the States during similar call up of its Militia on a monthly basis, something that fell out of favor after about 1820 when the Native American Threat all but disappeared from most of the US.

When the present Militia act was passed in 1905 (It has been changed several times since 1905 for example to include women in the National Guard), it was decided that the reserve militia would only be used in emergency situations and thus best formed up to face such emergencies. The last time the reserve militia showed up was during the massive flooding of the upper Mississippi in the 1990s. They were called "Volunteers" and both the Federal Government and State Government refused to call them Militia (more to avoid having to pay for any medical injuries then anything else), but it was the people as a whole going to the levees building them up to reduce the extent of the flooding.

Now, back to weapons. Pistols are the problems NOT Rifles. We could abolish all regulations on rifles, and that will have no affect on the crime rate. On the other hand, regulation of pistols in another thing all together, These are the weapons of choice when it comes to crimes including mass murder. The Article makes a good argument to banning large capacity magazine (Something I agree with when it comes to pistols, but I believe violates the Second amendment when it comes to rifles) but then points out it is large capacity pistols that are the problem NOT rifles (Rifle with large capacity have been used in mass murders, but no where near the level of pistols and to a lesser degree then bombs).

Thus these people having rifles fit only for combat has no affect on crime rates or murder rates. These people are insane in spending they money on such weapons, but such insanity is perfectly legal in the US and does NOT lead to any social or criminal problems.

Remember, till the 1960s, only 10% of all firearms being purchased were pistols, pistols sales are now 40% of all firearms sales. This massive increase in fire power in the form of pistols makes no sense, except if you remember people will embrace what they are exposed to (Pistols and hand grenades look much more effective on Movie and TV screens then they do in real life, thus that most people get their entertainment via such screens increases the demand for pistols). We need to regulate pistols, and I have long supported that anyone with a license to carry be required to carry only a revolver, for it restricts then to six shots AND if they concern in "Protection" six shots are sufficient AND given the nature of a Revolver, if a round does not fire, the revolver will go to the next round, in an automatic the weapons just jams, this is the primary reason police carried revolvers for decades in the US, till they started to watch to much TV and all wanted automatics.

Such a requirement will reduce the demand for Automatics to a level that most criminals will end up with revolvers not automatics. This will also reduce the numbers of mass murders by the simple fact that the pistol of choice would be incapacity of high rates of fire.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 09:53 AM

36. Do gun advocates seriously think they are going to stop a dictatorship from happening?

Too many Rambo movies I think.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #36)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:19 AM

42. Modern militaries are too expensive and too lethal to effectively field large number of forces.

And large numbers are exactly what would be needed to occupy a population that did not want to be occupied. Consider: Vietnam, the Cuban revolution, Iraq, Syria, Azerbaijan, etc.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to jalan48 (Reply #36)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:30 AM

49. That is not the reason I own guns.

there are many reasons to own guns, some better than others.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:24 AM

45. Ban all guns! n/t

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PowerToThePeople (Reply #45)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:32 AM

50. Thanks for your support. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PowerToThePeople (Reply #45)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:33 AM

51. I'll drive the collection vehicle

It will be a cement mixer. Just toss 'em in. We'll pour and smooth the highway to peace and tranquility.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libodem (Reply #51)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:52 AM

57. And when people decline to comply? Then what? Mere registration has < 5% compliancy.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #57)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 01:32 PM

72. Last time I replied to a "they won't comply" thread my post was hidden.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to libodem (Reply #51)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 05:54 PM

94. But will you do the collecting?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PowerToThePeople (Reply #45)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:51 AM

56. Powerlessness To The People!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #56)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:55 AM

58. Only in your nra deluded mind.

 

Eom

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to PowerToThePeople (Reply #58)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:56 AM

59. Well, cops seem to be having a field day killing and injurying unarmed citizens.

So how, exactly, will providing the cops an exclusive monopoly on force empower the people?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #59)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 12:03 PM

65. Ummm, FYI,

 

the main reason the cops are so trigger happy is because there are soooo many guns out there. Fucking duh. We cannot limit the little boys' toys dontcha know.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Darb (Reply #65)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 01:20 PM

68. Oh blaming the 2nd amendment for cop brutality.

That's a justification I had not heard before...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to former9thward (Reply #68)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 05:36 PM

89. Happens all the time. Some like to pretend that citizens just got guns recently

when the reality is through most of our history people have had parity in fire power or better with the military the whole time and only with the machine gun ban did security forces jump ahead of the public.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Darb (Reply #65)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 02:00 PM

74. Eric Garner & Freddy Grey weren't killed because the cops feared for their lives.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #74)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 05:42 PM

91. Truth.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 12:01 PM

64. It is so obvious, the solution is more guns.

 

Get with the program.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 12:38 PM

66. It starts off with a bit of a strawman, but the specific suggestions are rather good:

  • Ban accessories that serve no purpose other than to transform guns into weapons of mass slaughter, such as attachable drums that carry 100 rounds. An overstated issue, but I don't care about it one way or another. Unless the author means magazine capacity limits, e.g. banning magazines > 10 rounds? That I'm not in favor of.

  • Adopt rules that make it harder for criminals and the mentally ill to obtain firearms. Needs specifics, but yes. Universal background checks would be a good thing.

  • Outlaw the public display of weapons. Meaning a ban on open carry? I'm OK with that, provided the next item comes with it, there are exceptions for incidental exposure, and it doesn't apply to wilderness or rural areas.

  • Allow the concealed carry of guns using the “shall issue” standard. Yes.

  • Stop trying to ban scary-looking add-ons that primarily protect the shooter, but don’t make the gun more dangerous to others. Yes.

  • Forget attacks on the “armor-piercing bullets.” Yes.

  • Abandon efforts to outlaw “assault weapons”—a politically loaded phrase with a mishmash of meanings that pretty much amount to nothing. Yes.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 01:25 PM

69. I live near an alternate flight path.

 

I'm tired of being awakened by planes, especially on weekends. So I think I'll go down to Walmart and pick up a surface-to-air missile.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 01:30 PM

71. Why won't guns stop killing people...hateful things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to ileus (Reply #71)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 02:41 PM

81. Strange that a lot of otherwise rational folks believe in animism...

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 02:39 PM

80. Perhaps the "Strict Constructionists" would limit "arms" to those extant in 1776.

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to WinkyDink (Reply #80)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 02:54 PM

85. Only if they issue their opinion on moveable-type press.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to AtheistCrusader (Reply #85)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 10:17 PM

98. Works for me!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to SecularMotion (Original post)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 05:39 PM

90. So, it's Gunz Discussion time again?

 

Based on a Newspeek op ed rehashing old arguments heard for years, here in DU? Had drift down the line of posts to find something about the shooting of Marines, you know, to make the TOS legit.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Eleanors38 (Reply #90)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 05:46 PM

93. Time for you to complain, again, because people are criticizing your need for gunz.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Hoyt (Reply #93)

Fri Jul 17, 2015, 05:59 PM

96. Actuaaly, it seems like your usual suspects. Got two groups, still can't build a movement

 

...even when special dispensation gives you a third forum.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread