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Has the time come for the U.S Second Amendment to be repealed or amended?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Should it be repealed on the grounds that when originally written it was for a smaller population to defend the "State" and meant for Muskets and flintlocks not semi automatics and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.

  • thumb
    Jan 3 2013: It's amusing to read all the comments from non Americans on the values of the US Constitution. They are all so righteous and noble. With all due respect, as a non British citizen, I will not debate the value of the monarchy on the English subcultures or something to that effect. The problem of most of these commentators is that their knowledge of the subject is based on what they have read in the Times or heard on BBC. What they haven't addressed for example is that the worse case of murder of school children in the USA happened nearly a century ago when a irate farmer used explosives to demolish a school full of children. And it is not just in American, a few years ago there was a tragic incident in Scotland.
    The debate is: guns are tools and people use tools. Historians tell us that the most murderous weapon ever devised was not the gun or even the atom bomb... it was the Roman short sword that caused the highest rate of deaths.
    The point is that people kill people and they will use the best tools available; Guns, ANFO mixtures, atom bombs or Roman short swords. If the best isn't available, they will use the next available. I would be willing to state that in the case of the school shooter, the theater shooter, etc., none of these individuals spent a moment considering the 2nd amendment of the constitution. The premise of this debate is based on faulty logic unless it can be shown the shooters did in fact consider the 2nd amendment.
    • thumb
      Jan 3 2013: Good point Mike, that People sometimes kill people, and they will use the best tools available. That is exactly why we need to make fewer killing tools available.

      I totally agree with you that the people who end other people's lives with guns, probably do not think for a minute about the 2nd amendment of the constitution. Neither did they think or feel anything about ending the lives of innocent human beings. For you to be seeking "logic" in the minds and hearts of the shooters, who killed innocent people, is rather foolish...don't you think?
    • thumb
      Jan 3 2013: Mike, while I agree that as a non-American I may not be as familiar with the US constitution, my nationality should not make a difference to any opinion I express and your ability to counter that opinion with a rational response if what I am saying is incorrect. Similarly to you I would expect, I have not experienced any mass shootings first-hand, and therefore can only create my opinions on what I hear in the news, as you would on anything that does not occur directly in your neighbourhood, city, or state.

      While I have never experience gun crime of any sort, I have been robbed at knife point before, and while it was a thoroughly unpleasant experience, in no way did I feel that the situation could have been improved though me also having a weapon myself.

      Classifying weapons as tools is misleading, as they are tools with a solitary purpose that is to cause harm, with the only redeeming characteristic being that the threat of that harm may in some circumstances deter others from perpetrating harm with their weapons. Regardless of the most lethal weapon, whatever that may be (gun, nuke, sward), I agree that “people kill people and they will use the best tools available”, so why allow any weapon to be easily available?
      • thumb
        Jan 4 2013: Mark, I am sorry that I came off so strong. It just that comments from outside not that helpful in the resolution of a serious problem we have here. Consider me making the statement that some overwhelming problem in Great Britain could be resolved if you just eliminated the monarchy.
        I would be chastised I am sure and deservedly so.
        There is an old expression here that says if you continue to repeat the same activity and keep expecting differing results, it is a sign of insanity. We have controlled guns for years with laws that bordered on the cusp of violating our most sacred law and there still is the problem. We as a nation refuse to face the real problem and that is the real issue. Not the second amendment. But, it is easier to raise the hue and cry about guns.
        By the way, you will have a much much lessor problem buying a fine fowling piece in London then I can in New York. On the other hand, I have never been accosted by a knife welding hoodlum. Of course, I do carry.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.