http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/at-least-2-dead-several-hurt-in-shooting-at-ups-building-in-sf/ar-BBCG0Wx?OCID=ansmsnnews11
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lawmaker-steve-scalise-injured-in-gop-baseball-shooting-gunman-james-t-hodgkinson-dies-in-custody/ar-BBCFi8H?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp
Are we safe yet?
Before you tune me out as another person who wants to take your guns, understand! It would be nearly impossible!
To get the 2nd amendment amended, in anyway, would take a miracle. And, aren't you the people who believe in miracles anyway? so... I'm thinking, since miracles are on your side... well.. it won't happen?
This was the most interesting thing I found which illustrates my point.
"Understand that repealing the 2nd Amendment makes it an unenumerated right. It doesn't disappear. It falls into the same status as abortion. Gun rights can still be defended and argued as an unenumerated right. It just gets a different level of Constitutional scrutiny." This comes from a site where the author attempts to detail the hurdles to repealing or even amending the 2nd Amendment.
In other words, any serious effort to repeal the 2nd amendment would probably take long enough for guns to become obsolete as weapons, apart from hugely unexpected shifts in culture. Culture takes generations to change. Granted, this is probably less true today and will be even less so in the future as a result of the internet.
In my opinion, its better to talk with people than to shoot at them. So my fantasy is that we all talk about what is actually possible, with what we'd like to have happen in the background. For instance, I'd ask someone what kind of guns they have and why, and work from there. I hope that we could mutually consider one another's experience, convictions, and creativity in coming to mutually agreed upon legislation, in light of the fact that no one is going to take their guns. I think a Grandfather clause would be essential and appropriate for any gun owner.
Australia's gun legislation has empirically demonstrated that lethal altercations have plummeted since the nation wide, and may I say, very neighborly, effort to reduce the amount of guns in the country. Watch the news coverage, its interesting to see the Australian gun owner's mentality after the last mass shooting took place.
Slate has this paragraph of statistical findings after Australia's 1996 government led gun buyback.
"...What happened next has been the subject of several academic studies. Violent crime and gun-related deaths did not come to an end in Australia, of course. But as the Washington Post’s Wonkblog pointed out in August, homicides by firearm plunged 59 percent between 1995 and 2006, with no corresponding increase in non-firearm-related homicides. The drop in suicides by gun was even steeper: 65 percent. Studies found a close correlation between the sharp declines and the gun buybacks. Robberies involving a firearm also dropped significantly. Meanwhile, home invasions did not increase, contrary to fears that firearm ownership is needed to deter such crimes. But here’s the most stunning statistic. In the decade before the Port Arthur massacre, there had been 11 mass shootings in the country. There hasn’t been a single one in Australia since."
So..
No one is coming to take your guns. No one wants to. We don't like guns, so why would we take them? If the power behind the phrase 'they're comin' to take our guns' can be removed through the revelation of how impossible that is within the next 100 years, given our processes, the intensity can hopefully come down for us all.
Hopefully I've persuaded you of the near impossibility that it is to legally 'take your guns' or your children's guns, or your children's children's guns....
Since nearly every State constitution has equal or greater gun protections than that of the 2nd amendment, even a federal law would create some kind of grey area similar in nature to what we're seeing with marijuana. Though similar in nature, the degree of intensity would be far greater seeing as how you can't blow smoke at people and kill them, well.. you can, but not as thoughtlessly as you can with a gun.
'Taking your guns' is off the table. Completely. Like seriously, don't listen to people or politicians when they say liberals are coming to take your guns. Personally, I don't think I could do so and remain liberal as far as my liberalism goes.
Or.. you could just kill all of us... I interacted with a person online with the screen name 'rightwingdeathsquads' a few days ago. But, if you get rid of us, you'd have less padding against foreign invasion. Then there's the fact that killing is the destruction of flourishing for as many humans as it touches, especially the killer. Your democracy would be a sham, and you'd have violated the very ideals that the document containing the 2nd amendment upholds.
Gain confidence in the fact that, legally, no one can take your guns. Next time this comes up in conversation with an ignorant liberal (like I often am), bring this up and ask for a more realistic conversation!
NO ONE CAN LEGALLY TRY TO TAKE YOUR GUNS FROM YOUR WARM HUMAN HANDS, at least apart from 100 years of movement in that one direction... which isn't at all likely!!!!
So ... can we talk magazine size? and seeking to make it more difficult for someone in a fit of unthinking rage to be able to buy and/or even just gain access to a gun?
http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/us/lawmaker-steve-scalise-injured-in-gop-baseball-shooting-gunman-james-t-hodgkinson-dies-in-custody/ar-BBCFi8H?li=BBmkt5R&ocid=spartanntp
Are we safe yet?
Before you tune me out as another person who wants to take your guns, understand! It would be nearly impossible!
To get the 2nd amendment amended, in anyway, would take a miracle. And, aren't you the people who believe in miracles anyway? so... I'm thinking, since miracles are on your side... well.. it won't happen?
This was the most interesting thing I found which illustrates my point.
"Understand that repealing the 2nd Amendment makes it an unenumerated right. It doesn't disappear. It falls into the same status as abortion. Gun rights can still be defended and argued as an unenumerated right. It just gets a different level of Constitutional scrutiny." This comes from a site where the author attempts to detail the hurdles to repealing or even amending the 2nd Amendment.
In other words, any serious effort to repeal the 2nd amendment would probably take long enough for guns to become obsolete as weapons, apart from hugely unexpected shifts in culture. Culture takes generations to change. Granted, this is probably less true today and will be even less so in the future as a result of the internet.
In my opinion, its better to talk with people than to shoot at them. So my fantasy is that we all talk about what is actually possible, with what we'd like to have happen in the background. For instance, I'd ask someone what kind of guns they have and why, and work from there. I hope that we could mutually consider one another's experience, convictions, and creativity in coming to mutually agreed upon legislation, in light of the fact that no one is going to take their guns. I think a Grandfather clause would be essential and appropriate for any gun owner.
Australia's gun legislation has empirically demonstrated that lethal altercations have plummeted since the nation wide, and may I say, very neighborly, effort to reduce the amount of guns in the country. Watch the news coverage, its interesting to see the Australian gun owner's mentality after the last mass shooting took place.
Slate has this paragraph of statistical findings after Australia's 1996 government led gun buyback.
"...What happened next has been the subject of several academic studies. Violent crime and gun-related deaths did not come to an end in Australia, of course. But as the Washington Post’s Wonkblog pointed out in August, homicides by firearm plunged 59 percent between 1995 and 2006, with no corresponding increase in non-firearm-related homicides. The drop in suicides by gun was even steeper: 65 percent. Studies found a close correlation between the sharp declines and the gun buybacks. Robberies involving a firearm also dropped significantly. Meanwhile, home invasions did not increase, contrary to fears that firearm ownership is needed to deter such crimes. But here’s the most stunning statistic. In the decade before the Port Arthur massacre, there had been 11 mass shootings in the country. There hasn’t been a single one in Australia since."
So..
No one is coming to take your guns. No one wants to. We don't like guns, so why would we take them? If the power behind the phrase 'they're comin' to take our guns' can be removed through the revelation of how impossible that is within the next 100 years, given our processes, the intensity can hopefully come down for us all.
Hopefully I've persuaded you of the near impossibility that it is to legally 'take your guns' or your children's guns, or your children's children's guns....
Since nearly every State constitution has equal or greater gun protections than that of the 2nd amendment, even a federal law would create some kind of grey area similar in nature to what we're seeing with marijuana. Though similar in nature, the degree of intensity would be far greater seeing as how you can't blow smoke at people and kill them, well.. you can, but not as thoughtlessly as you can with a gun.
'Taking your guns' is off the table. Completely. Like seriously, don't listen to people or politicians when they say liberals are coming to take your guns. Personally, I don't think I could do so and remain liberal as far as my liberalism goes.
Or.. you could just kill all of us... I interacted with a person online with the screen name 'rightwingdeathsquads' a few days ago. But, if you get rid of us, you'd have less padding against foreign invasion. Then there's the fact that killing is the destruction of flourishing for as many humans as it touches, especially the killer. Your democracy would be a sham, and you'd have violated the very ideals that the document containing the 2nd amendment upholds.
Gain confidence in the fact that, legally, no one can take your guns. Next time this comes up in conversation with an ignorant liberal (like I often am), bring this up and ask for a more realistic conversation!
NO ONE CAN LEGALLY TRY TO TAKE YOUR GUNS FROM YOUR WARM HUMAN HANDS, at least apart from 100 years of movement in that one direction... which isn't at all likely!!!!
So ... can we talk magazine size? and seeking to make it more difficult for someone in a fit of unthinking rage to be able to buy and/or even just gain access to a gun?
Comments
Post a Comment