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Has the time come for the U.S Second Amendment to be repealed or amended?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Should it be repealed on the grounds that when originally written it was for a smaller population to defend the "State" and meant for Muskets and flintlocks not semi automatics and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.
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.
Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.
steve rains
I am not trying to steer off of the topic, just to provide some food for thought, it is easy (even lazy) to form firm opinions based on media pundits without doing the research.
The assault weapons ban which expired is not the same as the current Feinstein proposal as the media pundits are selling. It would virtually ban all semi auto firearms in the US. Please look at her site for specific info.
Passing the Feinstein proposal is repealing the second amendment and not fixing the problem. The problem is the non- treatment of the mentally unstable, and insane. I stand by my original post.
Colleen Steen 500+
The comment above looks like a continuation of our comment thread. If it is, based on what you have written, it does not seem that we are in agreement, and that is ok.
You are absolutely right...it is easy and even lazy to form firm opinions based on media pundits, which is why I do extensive research. I sincerely hope you do that as well.
Treatment of the mentally unstable and insane is certainly important, and that is not the topic of this discussion.
Gary Taylor
Look, if people are so hell bent on regulations, why not push for no concealed carry permit for assault rifles. Maybe, X- military guys, n gals, can have jobs teaching the proper use and responsibility for owning these firearms and find a way to make sure the class stays legit; not turn into a money racket. To me this would be meeting half way.
Is a ban the only option?
Colleen Steen 500+
The proper use of an assault weapon is "protection from any form of harm at the hands of another person"?
If assault weapons are readily available in our society, don't you think the person who wants to harm a person who owns an assault weapon, will simply get his/her own assault weapon?
Peace of mind....
Having an assault weapon may create a false sense of peace, or feeling safe for the person who owns the weapon. What about all the people who are living, moving, and trying to carry on with a really peaceful life, knowing that assault weapons are all around us and easily available to anyone?
Enjoyment...
I have enjoyed shooting skeet in the past, and can understand this a little bit. However, part of the enjoyment of the sport for me was accuracy. It takes practice and skill to be able to hit a flying piece of clay with a single bullet. No accuracy required when discharging 12,000 - 15,000 RPM. So, what is the enjoyment?
I don't actually think people are so "hell bent on regulations".....I'm not anyway! The thing is, that most regulations are constructed because of a need, and often revolve around health and safety.
Perhaps a ban is not the only option, and it is the option that seems to be on the table at this time.
Gary Taylor
Please stop twisting my words, I did not even come close to meaning wait until half the population is dead before addressing the issue. If you read my chat with Mark: He said the best way to answer a question is to expand it to extremes. I was showing him what my take on an extreme was to his argument. I did not agree with him saying the two arguments were the same. ... I was asking him if the death toll of gun deaths compared to an atomic bomb death toll was the main difference in the two arguments rendering them ... different.
Deeper than that I was trying to ask him what his thoughts were on the value of one life versus a hundred or thousands, etc. Its the train track question, with a different expectation for the answer.
Colleen Steen 500+
I don't think I have twisted any of your words...sorry you perceive that. I am reading your comments very carefully and responding to the best of my ability.
Gary Taylor
Colleen Steen 500+
You are absoluty correct about the number. I made an error in adding an extra 0....thanks for catching that:>) So, some machine pistols have a 900 - 1200 (I got it right this time) RPM.
If you check out the site again, you may discover this:
"As a small, concealable weapon with a high rate of fire, machine pistols have numerous applications. Bodyguards from government or private agencies sometimes carry concealed machine pistols when they are protecting high-risk VIPs. Criminal gang members such as narcotics traffickers also use machine pistols...."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Machine_pistol
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rate_of_fire
Mike Colera 10+