Second Amendment Repeal / Gun Control

[The Empire of Pretantia]

What you proposed was more specific than that, which are whag I was saying was bullcrap.

What you actually said was "I don't see either of those bwing the probable routes." (sic).

Like I say, I don't think they are 'probable' in and of themselves. I think that they are possible, and once we accept a theoretical construct where the end result has become probably, those are the two most likely mechanisms.

By all means, suggest another. Assume that the second amendment is repealed, and suggest a more likely mechanism by which is has happened.

When I said neither were the probable routes, I meant they weren't the probable routes if it would happen at all.

More likely, it would be something like the road leading to prohibition, except instead of dry counties popping up we have people no longer caring about guns, then states repealing their gun amendments, then Congress repealing 2A.

Then un-repealing it.

[Grave_n_idle]

What you actually said was "I don't see either of those bwing the probable routes." (sic).

Like I say, I don't think they are 'probable' in and of themselves. I think that they are possible, and once we accept a theoretical construct where the end result has become probably, those are the two most likely mechanisms.

By all means, suggest another. Assume that the second amendment is repealed, and suggest a more likely mechanism by which is has happened.

When I said neither were the probable routes, I meant they weren't the probable routes if it would happen at all.

More likely, it would be something like the road leading to prohibition, except instead of dry counties popping up we have people no longer caring about guns, then states repealing their gun amendments, then Congress repealing 2A.

I find it unlikely that a 'temperance movement for guns' would gain that much support without some kind of catalyst.

You're basically saying that you agree with the fundamental assertion I made about a ground-swell of support, but you think it would be gradual while I think it couldn't happen slowly, or without some cataclysmic event.

[Big Jim P]

I highly doubt that there has ever been enough support for a repeal to pass. I doubt that there ever will be (at least in my lifetime).

It could happen, and probably through one of two routes.

First - the one most people would think is most likely - would be a response to a horrible massacre, and a massive hysterical reaction to it. That might cause a change - but the American political system is so unweildy, I wouldn't bank on it - it would be hard for anyone to maintain enough anti-gun rage for long enough, in a large enough proportion of the populace.

The other route would be the extremists in a group like the NRA basically getting everything they wanted... and the previously-silent majority rebelling against it. An absolute right to bear arms, a complete lack of personal accountability, etc. The slightly lunatic politics of the NRA only really works now because the status quo is still fairly central (by American standards). Swing far enough, and substantially stronger control might be imposed, all the way up to rewriting, replacing - or even repealing - the second amendment.

First, it would have to be extreme to overcome the obstacles to repealing an amendment.

Second, latest polls show a slight majority of people support gun rights.

[Kernen]

Seriously? You expect a person to just lay there and take a beating / being stabbed / shot / etc. and not even put up a fight, because said victim isn't law enforcement / soldier /govt douchebag?

They can defend themselves or others if their lives are being threatened. Just not with guns (they could use knives,. baseball bats, swords, etc.).

However they can't go around murdering people, like how a long time ago the KKK use to do it (they claimed it was self defence too).

Firearms equalize the attacker and attacked, whereas swords and knives and bats do not. Your standard of acceptable self defense will lead to a situation of the physically strong holding a monopoly of force over the weak where there's no cop in the immediate vicinity.

And self defense is no more categorically murder than a gynecologist is categorically a rapist.

[Grave_n_idle]

It could happen, and probably through one of two routes.

First - the one most people would think is most likely - would be a response to a horrible massacre, and a massive hysterical reaction to it. That might cause a change - but the American political system is so unweildy, I wouldn't bank on it - it would be hard for anyone to maintain enough anti-gun rage for long enough, in a large enough proportion of the populace.

The other route would be the extremists in a group like the NRA basically getting everything they wanted... and the previously-silent majority rebelling against it. An absolute right to bear arms, a complete lack of personal accountability, etc. The slightly lunatic politics of the NRA only really works now because the status quo is still fairly central (by American standards). Swing far enough, and substantially stronger control might be imposed, all the way up to rewriting, replacing - or even repealing - the second amendment.

First, it would have to be extreme to overcome the obstacles to repealing an amendment.

Second, latest polls show a slight majority of people support gun rights.

First, yes - I think I said that.

Second, 'gun rights' is a term so nebulous as to be meaningless. Also, something I addressed.

[Shaggtopia]

Mexico has one gun store. They get guns from America illegally because our gun culture is incredibly permissive of such things. I say either let everyone get whatever gun they want and turn the whole country into something out of mad max or the purge, OR try and take the almost innumerable amount of guns from the citizens.
I'm sure some people will willingly turn over their firearms, hell maybe even most people, but not the ones you really need the guns from. The people who don't care about the law in the first place, the homesteaders that would rather be gunned down that willingly turn over their guns to our increasingly militarized police force and would be tickled pink to take a few government agents with them into the arms of death.

[Spirit of Hope]

Mexico has one gun store. They get guns from America illegally because our gun culture is incredibly permissive of such things. I say either let everyone get whatever gun they want and turn the whole country into something out of mad max or the purge, OR try and take the almost innumerable amount of guns from the citizens.
I'm sure some people will willingly turn over their firearms, hell maybe even most people, but not the ones you really need the guns from. The people who don't care about the law in the first place, the homesteaders that would rather be gunned down that willingly turn over their guns to our increasingly militarized police force and would be tickled pink to take a few government agents with them into the arms of death.

Can you provide some proof that guns from the united states are the main cause of gun violence in Mexico? Because the gangs and cartels have been using fully automatic weapons and even armored vehicles and helicopters there.

Also Mexico's problem isn't the existence of guns but a huge social/political issue. They have gangs/cartels that are as heavily armed as the police and army, that have large numbers, there is a huge problem with corruption in Mexico, which leads to local support for gangs/cartels and/or paramilitary organizations fighting everyone. Even if you sealed off the Mexican boarder so nothing got in they would have major issues.

[United Prefectures of Appia]

Blaming an inanimate object is scraping the bottom of a barrel, agreed.

I suppose you might have a point. Then perhaps, I should lay the blame on the NRA and the gun maker, how about that? Happy?

[New Tsavon]

Blaming an inanimate object is scraping the bottom of a barrel, agreed.

I suppose you might have a point. Then perhaps, I should lay the blame on the NRA and the gun maker, how about that? Happy?

Or, you could do the logical thing and blame the criminal operating the weapon.

Or is that too much effort?

[Scomagia]

Blaming an inanimate object is scraping the bottom of a barrel, agreed.

I suppose you might have a point. Then perhaps, I should lay the blame on the NRA and the gun maker, how about that? Happy?

Would you blame a cutlery manufacturer for a person stabbing their neighbor?

[Washington Resistance Army]

Blaming an inanimate object is scraping the bottom of a barrel, agreed.

I suppose you might have a point. Then perhaps, I should lay the blame on the NRA and the gun maker, how about that? Happy?

Or you could blame the person using the gun in a crime

Something tells me you wouldn't blame a car or it's manufacturer if someone did a hit and run.

[United Prefectures of Appia]

Or is that too much effort?

Nope, it's called being inefficient. It's better if you cut off the snake's head, then the body dies.

[New Tsavon]

Or is that too much effort?

Nope, it's called being inefficient. It's better if you cut off the snake's head, then the body dies.

That solves nothing.

In fact, it probably worsens the problem at hand. Now law-abiding citizens are left defenseless, while criminals are still able to obtain firearms.

[The Empire of Pretantia]

Or is that too much effort?

Nope, it's called being inefficient. It's better if you cut off the snake's head, then the body dies.

*Blaming criminals is more inefficient than using a scapegoat*

[United Prefectures of Appia]

Nope, it's called being inefficient. It's better if you cut off the snake's head, then the body dies.

That solves nothing.

In fact, it probably worsens the problem at hand. Now law-abiding citizens are left defenseless, while criminals are still able to obtain firearms.

Nope, opening the flood gates of unregulated guns is by far the worst idea ever. It's simple common sense, but I doubt Americans have any left. More unregulated guns means more gun deaths, period!

Nope, it's called being inefficient. It's better if you cut off the snake's head, then the body dies.

*Blaming criminals is more inefficient than using a scapegoat*

You're right, gun makers and the NRA will always use others as scapegoats so long as people will never address the issue that the problem resulting from the flow of unregulated guns never pop up ever.

[Washington Resistance Army]

Or is that too much effort?

Nope, it's called being inefficient. It's better if you cut off the snake's head, then the body dies.

So, uh, do you blame Toyota for hit and runs?

[United Prefectures of Appia]

Nope, it's called being inefficient. It's better if you cut off the snake's head, then the body dies.

So, uh, do you blame Toyota for hit and runs?

Toyota isn't in the business of making weapons, gun makers are.

[Scomagia]

So, uh, do you blame Toyota for hit and runs?

Toyota isn't in the business of making weapons, gun makers are.

They are in the business of making cars. Cars kill people. According to your own logic, Toyota should be blamed for deaths involving their cars.

[Washington Resistance Army]

So, uh, do you blame Toyota for hit and runs?

Toyota isn't in the business of making weapons, gun makers are.

I'll take that as a no, gotta love those double standards.

[Sevvania]

It's simple common sense, but I doubt Americans have any left.

Sweeping generalizations are cool.

More unregulated guns means more gun deaths, period!

It's a good thing America has regulations on guns, then. o:

[United Prefectures of Appia]

Toyota isn't in the business of making weapons, gun makers are.

They are in the business of making cars. Cars kill people. According to your own logic, Toyota should be blamed for deaths involving their cars.

Toyota isn't in the business of making weapons, gun makers are.

I'll take that as a no, gotta love those double standards.

You can scrape the bottom of the barrels all you like, but you won't ever find a single straw in there.

[Scomagia]

They are in the business of making cars. Cars kill people. According to your own logic, Toyota should be blamed for deaths involving their cars.

I'll take that as a no, gotta love those double standards.

You can scrape the bottom of the barrels all you like, but you won't ever find a single straw in there.

So you can't defend your double standard?

I thought as much.

[New Tsavon]

That solves nothing.

In fact, it probably worsens the problem at hand. Now law-abiding citizens are left defenseless, while criminals are still able to obtain firearms.

Nope, opening the flood gates of unregulated guns is by far the worst idea ever. It's simple common sense, but I doubt Americans have any left. More unregulated guns means more gun deaths, period!

Because, as we all know, background checks and waiting periods don't exist.

Also, could you point out where I said anything about unregulated guns?

[Sevvania]

Or is that too much effort?

Nope, it's called being inefficient. It's better if you cut off the snake's head, then the body dies.

https://homemadeguns.wordpress.com/

[United Prefectures of Appia]

You can scrape the bottom of the barrels all you like, but you won't ever find a single straw in there.

So you can't defend your double standard?

I thought as much.

Nope, you're trying make apples = oranges when it came to the issue of cars and guns.

It's a good thing America has regulations on guns, then. o:

LOL, you call those regulations? They're half-ass at best. Obama has gotten an F on gun control yet he's demonized for wanting to take their guns.