TED Conversations

Morgan Barnes

Law Enforcement Officer, government agency

This conversation is closed.

Has the time come for the U.S Second Amendment to be repealed or amended?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Should it be repealed on the grounds that when originally written it was for a smaller population to defend the "State" and meant for Muskets and flintlocks not semi automatics and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

  • thumb
    Jan 9 2013: There is one aspect of the 2nd Amendment that I want to succintly state: The right to bear arms is the right to armed revolution against the government. The 2nd Amendment reserved that right to the electorate.

    The most powerful entity in a government of the people, is the people, the electorate.

    The people reserve the right to revolt against a government that is no longer considered a true representation of the electorate; and that they can not reclaim it by other legal process.

    This provision was based on the certain knowledge that like cream floating to the top of milk, that those who seek power for power's sake, would eventually, effectively defeat the mechanisms that were put in place to keep the government of the people in force' and that the pure practice of Constitutional law would be eroded, one bit at at time until the aggregate affect would again be "might makes right".
    I know many people who feel that in large part, the people who now occupy the Federal government are not a true reflection of the people themselves. There are dozens of speakers on TED who talk about this configuration. Personally, I haven't given up on the Representative government. I am proud to say that I live in a state where both our Senators voted against the NDAA bill. Both are left-wing Democrats. Unhappily, they are 2 among only 17 that stood against the NDAA. To me, there is no clear indication that we are heading towards an enhanced civil society that respects the rule of law. To me, the indications are that the electorate no longer understands the importance of the rule of law as it pertains to the government, that there is a generation of people who only understand top down governance.
    The more that people clamor for more top down, authoritarian constructs such as the gun bans, the more convinced I am that nobody should willing cede one iota of a right to anyone of them.
    • Jan 9 2013: I agree with you, we need to retain the right to argue with our government. Sometimes you must be armed to do so. I truly believe our government is no longer of the people, but of the corporation. If the corporate giants can remove the threat of an armed citizenry, they reduce us to serfdom.
      • thumb
        Jan 9 2013: Ultimately that is what can not be ceded. We are sorry that people kill people, with or without guns. However, taking arms away from lawful owners carries too many sinister results. Mao took away the guns from the people, Stalin did the same...it puts a new spin on the idea that "only criminals will have guns"

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.