TED Conversations

Morgan Barnes

Law Enforcement Officer, government agency

This conversation is closed. Start a new conversation
or join one »

Has the time come for the U.S Second Amendment to be repealed or amended?

After yesterdays tragic shooting in Newtown CT and the worst year ever for firearm related deaths and mass killings , has the time for the US Government to tell the Gun Lobby it is over and repeal or amend "the right of the people to bear arms".

Should it be repealed on the grounds that when originally written it was for a smaller population to defend the "State" and meant for Muskets and flintlocks not semi automatics and military hardware, which makes it no longer viable on account of relevance to this day and age.

That Militia should be held to Law Enforcement agencies, Military and government controlled Para military agencies, with a show need, clause for people such as certain Primary producers etc.

Is it time to tell the NRA and the Gun Lobby there will be no more "collateral" damage no matter how much you donate to the "Party"

What would be the best way for the government to enforce such a law???

And please no Guns do not kill people, people kill people debates it was people who invented firearms in the first place.

The time has come to realise it is mainly our children who pay the ultimate price for lack of diligence in monitoring a problem that has been there for far too many years.

+26
Share:

Closing Statement from Morgan Barnes

Firstly I would like to say I did not flag or delete anyone's comments I am perfectly capable of speaking for myelf however I did get frustrated and had some comments deleted myself.
As I write this President Obama has signed 23 executive orders inline with Colleen's post from yesterday from New York.

I have to admit I am a little disappointed that we could not of just discussed the issue in a more calm, critical and logical manner and be able to offer solutions as well as recognised the underling causes, as this is a forum for open ideas and thinking, Then again we are dealing with human nature.
To those of you from the International community thank you for your imput and allowing people to see the different views helds in different parts of the world on this subject.
I will not deny that the Constitution and The Bill Of Rights are the backbone of America, but remember it was written by man not given by god and man can take it away or amend it, if he really wants too.
I am a believer that in the 21st Century we should use it to advance humankind to address the problems of the world and improve it for all. It won't be easy but we have to start somewhere or we risk implementing our own destruction.
I hope that this be a positive start and and an even more positive step in which the US can show the way.
Once again I thank you all for your contributions

"In a progressive country change in constant : change is inevitable "Benjamen Disraeli

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • Dec 24 2012: No, and hopefully it never will be.

    I'd like to know why citizens have such an unrelenting or blind trust in their government. With the passage of the NDAA and the relatively recent admittance that the Gulf of Tonkin incident was fabricated, it seems the paranoia is not only warranted but necessary. If things did continue to spiral downward and all the talk about the wealthy being in complete control of you and your life was true, what would stop them from coercing or controlling you? They make laws, you obey them or you go to prison. Turtledove wrote a story that is interesting in this regard, which I believe was titled, "The Last Article." The wikipedia will serve to summarize it, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Last_Article. Because we'd all like to believe that we live in a world where non-violence perpetually solves any and everything, but I don't believe we're even remotely close to that ultimate destination. It seems to me that we're light years from obtaining it.
    • thumb
      Dec 24 2012: If the government is relying on non-violence, why are they arming for urban warfare against a population, which is largely law abiding? There is a good reason why the government schools don't teach history.
      • thumb
        Dec 25 2012: Because it has been allowed to get so out of hand that the bad guys have better weapons than Law enforcement agencies and has been shown thee is no telling which way thing will roll.

        A Law Enforcement Officer lives with constant fear of "if I go to work today will I come home tonight"
        you talk of mental health issues have a thought for those "Government Officials who are there to protect you if you need them and what they have to go through mentally everyday"

        We do not go to work thinking oh goody I might get to shoot some-one to day we go into try and help and gets harder and harder each day.
        You see we don't only have to go and try and stop the crims we have to fight bureaucracy (budget cuts don't only mean a decrease in the number of law enforcement officers on the street , it also means that those that are left have to deal with the aftermath that it causes such as cuts in the mental health budget) as much as you do.

        When you go to protests who is there to make sure when you are speaking you are kept safe.


        Remember that next time you speak at an open meeting and there is law enforcement officials there.
        • Dec 26 2012: That's a bit like the fences of the interment camps isn't it? If the machine gun nests are there to protect us, why are they pointing in instead of outward?
        • thumb
          Dec 27 2012: What has "gotten out of hand"? Americans are by and large a law abiding people.

          Are we so vacuous that we need to raise a generation of people, who need to have all sharp objects kept out their reach?
      • Dec 27 2012: Hi Marianne. I am not sure why some of your replies are available for comment and some are not, but there seems to be some common threads that run throughout your posts.

        You sound very angry about an intractable government that is bent on depriving us of our rights to pursue individual happiness as long as it doesn't hurt others, and the responsibility to promote our general welfare.

        You mention the NDAA (I don't understand why you write about a govt' of men rather than law - sounds like a talking point), martial law (forgetting that Lincoln used it without authorization but, while seeming satisfied that it is some type of safeguard you also seem doubtful about the government's ability to control its military). You mention "dues process" instead of habeas corpus, and there is no mention of "enemy combatants, whether they are foreign or domestic. I don't understand why I interpret you as replying as if you are unintentionally agreeing with some points being made.

        Our government is not a Tyrany and is not likely to become one because we, as an eclectic society, live in an information age. If something, such as our grid being knocked out, or some other similar catastrophic act takes place, our government as it is, our society, and our cultures become vulnerable. Then it might be time to think about the viability of owning guns as the 2nd Amendment is currently, and I believe incorrectly, interpreted by the Court. By that time, however, TED will not matter and we are back to the stone age anyway. Relax a little about our government's insipid acts. They don't seem to be able to do much to help about anything anyway. Large blocks of citizenry, however, can do something about gun ownership and ensuring safety for others NOW because the momentum is there. And it will happen.
        • thumb
          Dec 27 2012: Hi Todd,
          You sound very naive Todd. That you don't understand the concept of a "Government of Man vs A Government of Laws" it may be that the gap between our understandings can not be
          breached. We don't use language the same way.
          Sadly, too many people who have been educated in the American Public School System were taught a "pop" version of history and were never provided a reading list that included John Locke or other great minds who wrangled with the brutal. unvarnished realities of history.
          Just a short catch up...
          1. For the majority of history, most men have lived in a form of slavery to stronger men.
          2. The freedom that American's & other Western nations have enjoyed is a fly speck in history and was brought about by the implementation of certain principles.
          3. The actions of the United States & Britain, to end human slavery, first on the high seas and then in America, is probably the high point of all human rights activity in the history of humanity. However, this only became the rule of law in the Western Hemisphere.
          4. The rule of law is actually an exotic tool that can only be maintained if it is appreciated and nurtured and held in pre-eminent regard by the citizens of that society.
          5. You can not go out in the street right now, and get one out of one hundred people to actually profess an understanding of the rule of law.
          6. That being the case, it makes sense to resist this same mob from "deciding" it's time to take your gun.
        • Dec 27 2012: This is exactly what I find so curious about my brothers and sisters, what has convinced you that you have any voice in American society, politics and government? Why are you so faithful in our system? I suspect for the majority of people in that cohort, they have no experience in working for government or no experience as a dissenting opinion.

          For me, as a veteran with a dissenting opinion, I often feel like I'm one man against 300 million. Next year, I hope to sway 2 people next year instead of 1 into a middle ground, based around our best guesses and certifiable science when it comes to social issues and politics, instead of 1 person this year.

          New to TED myself, the reply system seems to max out at the third, so you may need to reply to your own post to keep this going...
    • thumb
      Dec 26 2012: That is what elections are for. If you are unhappy with your government vote for someone else.

      When in recent american history has gun ownership reduced the governments power or stopped the government from asserting its power?

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.