Wide Spread Availability of Guns is Awful: New Amendment Needed!

[dutch508]

Star Member Stuart G (31,394 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215824328

Wide Spread Availability of Guns is Awful: New Amendment Needed!

We need a new Amendment to the Constitution of some sort..

At link is a horrific story about someone shooting a group of people.. Not new situation, but repeated often in the
U.S.A. (almost every day) Passing an Amendment dealing with guns, nationwide, seems to be the only solution...Read the story if you
desire...Proves we need an Amendment to the Constitution to change the Constitution regarding guns & firearms

Warning: proves we need an new amendment for the discussion. Yes, it will be difficult to pass, but it is what is
needed now..

 

Star Member TreasonousBastard (38,847 posts)

3. Various things have been proposed, but get knocked down every time....

It just ain't easy. My Senator Gillibrand had to be pretty much pro gun to get into the House in the beginning, but evolved into less gunny attitudes since becoming Senator of the whole state. Note the amount of voting power in downstate NY.

Same with Governor Hochul-- she had to bow to the gun lobbies to get into politics upstate, but now bows to a little more the downstate power.

Star Member Stuart G (31,394 posts)

6. Well written proposal.....somehow limits the reason to purchase a gun..

....I don't know...It must be clear and understandable to all.. Also, something that most would agree on..
.....This is just a proposal...The discussion would be very important.

LiberatedUSA (519 posts)

5. I am sure this court will go alone with that.

And the red states that have passed bills saying they will refuse to follow new gun control laws in the same manner blue states ignore federal drug laws, will be happy to go along with your ideas.

And this new attack on rights with this work around. I am sure this won’t change how both sides approach rights they like or dislike and whether or not they intend in any manner of following the other sides laws.

Or to put it another way: I think we are getting very close to the point where both sides start just flat ignoring the other side’s laws and court opinions. This move in Texas is an extremely dangerous precedent to set in getting around the constitution.

Star Member Stuart G (31,394 posts)

7. Will the "proposed amendment" however written..if enacted, save lives?...Think about that one..

...I think it would...Would it?

Star Member Hoyt (50,272 posts)

14. If only gunners would change their attitude about their love for lethal weapons, body armor, etc.

Dial H For Hero (1,560 posts)

15. The vast majority of gun owners aren't "gunners", if I understand your use of that odd term

correctly; Even if every "gunner" were to become a more typical gun owner, getting rid of the 2A would remain a practical impossibility.

Star Member Hoyt (50,272 posts)

16. If they are against reasonable gun legislation, "gunners" is pretty mild, Hero.

Star Member Hoyt (50,272 posts)

19. Owning a bunch of guns and body armor ought to be grounds for investigation, IMO.

Star Member Hoyt (50,272 posts)

21. Yeah, but gun-humpers are most likely to be GOPers, racists, rubes, etc.

Dial H For Hero (1,560 posts)

34. I own multiple firearms and body armor, and yet I have no plans to attempt an insurrection

or civil war.

How can this be?

Star Member Hoyt (50,272 posts)

35. I've heard that from other gunners. Sorry, I don't buy it. Even if you are the most

sanctimonious gunner alive, your support of more gunz in more places directly leads to lots of gun violence.

Recently, you posted something in the Gungeon about some Hero who shot an armed robber. Hell, if gunz weren't so readily available -- because of gunners -- there might not have been the need to shoot someone in the first place.

 

Star Member Hoyt (50,272 posts)

56. Hero, I get you profit off gunz, feel the need for body armor, your

user name reflects someone who would likely carry gunz, etc., but where did I say Randy Weaver, etc., should carry a gun.

Star Member Demsrule86 (54,671 posts)

43. I think body armor should be outlawed except for law enforcement and no one needs

a tear gas launcher...if the proud boys had one, they would use it...I have friends who are gun collectors..one is into guns from WWII...that doesn't bother me. He has a permit and is not a danger to anyone.

Star Member Demsrule86 (54,671 posts)

37. I had a pistol, rifle and a shotgun.

Pistols are not that accurate. Lucky for the guys trying to break in. I grabbed the shotgun… it bucked and while I think one of them was slightly injured, they ran off. I had a baby upstairs. I truly meant to kill them. But I am glad scaring them off was enough. The rifle and shotgun were for hunting. The handgun was for protection. But I was never that good with it.

 

Star Member hunter (33,592 posts)

50. Good Lord, if I shot every stranger I've ever met in my house...

... or the house I grew up in I'd be a mass murderer.

Especially when my kids were teens. They've always had a very diverse and cosmopolitan population of friends.

My parents are artists. You never knew what sort of people they'd be bringing home.

I do have a knife scar on my arm but that was a different sort of sort social interaction, one I'm not especially proud of.

I've had armed hostile intruders invade my personal space.

Twice it's been the police.

I usually figure if the dogs are good with some stranger it's probably okay. That's how it worked in my parent's house as well.

But I don't trust the husky. He likes everyone.

And then there's Spot who lives under the stairs. I think he eats the worst home invaders but I don't ask.

Personally I don't let anyone I'd care to shoot live in my head.

I'm not mocking your experience, just the idea that guns are any good solution to this problem.

Where I live guns make you a target for break-ins. The bad guys buy their home electronics at Best Buy like everyone else and they don't need your drugs.

NickB79 (15,959 posts)

47. Then pass federal red flag laws

Much more effective than trying to investigate tens of millions of Americans.

Star Member Hoyt (50,272 posts)

48. Problem is a bunch of gunz, body armor, etc., are a red flag, Nick.

Star Member Hoyt (50,272 posts)

51. Know what RF laws are, but gun-humpers with body armor are a red flag and they should be surveilled.

Star Member Hoyt (50,272 posts)

28. Yeah, Hero, surveillance of people attracted to lethal weapons, body armor, etc., for urban warfare.

Star Member smirkymonkey (60,848 posts)

26. So we increase the number of SC justices and let Biden appoint them.

Problem solved. I don't know why we are so damned passive. We need to rip a page from the republican playbook and act as ruthlessly as they do while we still have some power or else we are done and so is democracy. **** bipartisanship and **** playing by the rules. They don't and never will no matter what we do, so we might as well pull out all the stops.

Star Member hunter (33,592 posts)

39. A few hundred well placed buckets of fake blood might drive the gun fetishists underground.

It certainly made people wary of wearing real fur in Hollywood.

Personally, I don't think anyone with testicles should be allowed to own or handle a gun. We could have castration clinics next door to every gun shop for those men who can't imagine life without guns.

If I was emperor of the earth I'd outlaw lead bullets as well. Gold bullets or plastic. Your choice.

Okay, maybe that's hyperbole, but I will say that social pressure works and the law follows. I don't see people smoking in grocery stores or on airplanes any more.

When I was a kid people would be smoking in the grocery store, flicking cigarette ashes everywhere, and dropping their cigarette butts on the floor. It was disgusting.

Gun fetishes are disgusting.

Most people don't care enough about guns to bother owning one. Once the ball starts rolling change will come quickly. I think the gun fetishists see it coming and that's why they are hoarding.

Star Member hunter (33,592 posts)

46. I've beat guys with guns.

You can read that any way you like and it's probably true.

I lived through some rough times in my late teens and early twenties but thankfully never believed in the magic gun fairy.

In my personal experience once the guns come out everything is fubar.

As often as not worse for the believers.

I don't have any complaints about ethical hunting, I've done that, but not in the 21st century and not with my children. Hunting for food is more ethical than the factory farm meat anyone can buy in the grocery store, so long as not too many people are doing it. These days there's too many people.

But the whole guns-as-self-defense cult is bullshit. That's the sort of fairy tale thirteen year old gangster wanabees and bad cops believe in.

The second amendment is bullshit as well, just as the 3/5 person rule was.

 

fescuerescue (3,225 posts)

59. Why do you think that cops and soldiers use them?

Why don't they just get a bunch of guys built like you to beat the criminals and other soldiers?

Obviously we are getting off on a tangent.

If guns are a non-factor, why are we wringing our hands about them and debating striking one of the bill of rights?

 

Star Member hunter (33,592 posts)

60. I'm not "wringing my hands."

I'm doing everything I can to end the sickness of U.S.A. gun culture.

Mocking gun fetishists is part of that.

Gun fetishes are disgusting.

Yes, I'm perfectly aware of utilitarian purposes of guns but I don't think most cops have the skills or the temperament to use them wisely.

And, yes, the second amendment is bullshit and there are far too many dangerous and pathetic clowns and posers hiding behind it.

As for soldiering, most of my ancestors were pacifists, even those who served in the military.

Personally, I don't let anyone I'd care to shoot live in my head. Life's a lot more pleasant that way.

My views, of course, do not reflect the platforms of the Democratic Party but I do believe most Democrats support regulations that will make it more difficult for dangerous fools to obtain guns.

 

lagomorph777 (25,472 posts)

61. Much more practical to expand SCROTUS, then accurately interpret the 2nd Amendment.

Gun nuts tend to pretend the first clause of the 2nd Amendmend isn't there. The first clause invalidates most of the bullshit they claim.

EX500rider (7,213 posts)

64. There is no "1st clause"

They is a reason given for citizens to have firearms.
If the 1st Amendment was worded:
"To ensure a free press, the rights of the people to free speech shall not be infringed"
Would only the press have free speech or would the people?

Also the guys who wrote the Bill of Rights knew what they meant, after it passed where was militia service required to own firearms? Nowhere?

 

[DLR Pyro]

Star Member Stuart G (31,394 posts)
https://www.democraticunderground.com/100215824328

Wide Spread Availability of Guns is Awful

I agree. It's criminal how the bidunce mal-administration has made so many lethal guns available to the taliban in Afghanistan.

[ExGeeEye]

"If the 1st Amendment was worded:
'To ensure a free press, the rights of the people to free speech shall not be infringed'
Would only the press have free speech or would the people?

"Also the guys who wrote the Bill of Rights knew what they meant, after it passed where was militia service required to own firearms? Nowhere?"

So close to being One Of Us...

[thundley4]

Just reading their comments above is enough reason to buy more guns. Democrats are evil and want to control people.

[SVPete]

So, DU's Not-A-Genius Star Moron Stuart G just admitted that the Second Amendment protects individuals' rights to own and carry guns? Heresy!    

[Muddling 2]

One can always count on Hoyt to bemoan citizens possession of "Gunz".

It appears he doesn't like his intended victims to be armed when he conducts his robberies.

 

[ADsOutburst]

And this is why dems suck at persuasion vis à vis gun control. When violence happens, where do they direct their ire? Legal gun owners, of course.

[DefiantSix]

Star Member hunter (33,592 posts)

39. A few hundred well placed buckets of fake blood might drive the gun fetishists underground.

It certainly made people wary of wearing real fur in Hollywood.

[SVPete]

Star Moron hunter (33,592 posts)

39. A few hundred well placed buckets of fake blood might drive the gun fetishists underground.

It certainly made people wary of wearing real fur in Hollywood.

Ironic name aside, assaulting people prepared to defend themselves is Brilliant!!! 

[Wineslob]

Lucy's football is getting worn out.

[SSG Snuggle Bunny]

The widespread access to criminality and tyranny is just awful.

Thank God we have guns.

[DefiantSix]

Lucy's football is getting worn out.

How? It's not like they EVER connect with it...