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Has the time come for the U.S Second Amendment to be repealed or amended?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Should it be repealed on the grounds that when originally written it was for a smaller population to defend the "State" and meant for Muskets and flintlocks not semi automatics and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

+25
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

    Gary Taylor

    • +1
    Jan 14 2013: Just to point out what people who oppose amending the constitution and banning certain guns have been called:

    Having a cowardly mentality, extremist paranoia, wanna-be Rambo, uncivilized, primitive thinkers, cowboy and indian mentalities, wild west mentality, lack of care for children, stubborn and gun-crazy, selfish, zealots .... we have a complete disregard for life, we have been duped (= we are impressionable and silly) ... so much for a respectful conversation.

    Oh yes, I forgot my favorite, Angry Blind People.

    • John Frum 30+

      • +1
      Jan 14 2013: Let's hope your comment does not get flagged as "disrespectful" and get deleted ;-)
    • thumb

      Colleen Steen 500+

      • +2
      Jan 14 2013: Gary,
      With all due respect, we also know what YOU have called people on this comment thread, so how about we not accuse others....those who live in glass houses should not throw stones?
      • thumb

        Gary Taylor

        • 0
        Jan 14 2013: I knew you would not fail to comment on this. Its not an accusation, its true, the proof is in the comments. I notice you have let all disrespect slide from the people on your side of the debate.

        Funny thing is in a way I am on both sides of the debate. The freedom of choice for each individual creates a better quality of life for everyone. The more people believe they're opinion is what everyone should adhere to, the worse off all Americans will be.
        • thumb

          Colleen Steen 500+

          • 0
          Jan 14 2013: Well, mine is not an accusation either....it's true! Funny thing Gary, I am in the middle of the debate as well. I am all for the freedom to own guns, and I support the effort our local, state and federal governments are taking to remove assault weapons from our communities.

          I am not responsible for respect or disrespect coming from any individuals....not responsible for letting "disrespect slide".
      • thumb

        Gary Taylor

        • 0
        Jan 15 2013: I wrote that last post wrong. I am not for both sides of the debate because I do not believe you can control my choice. I do mean that my stance on the freedom of choice and freedom from being chosen for, would benefit both parties.
        • thumb

          Colleen Steen 500+

          • 0
          Jan 15 2013: I AM NOT trying to control your choice darlin' :>)
          Majority rules, and I think that is what a democracy is all about:>)
      • thumb

        Gary Taylor

        • 0
        Jan 15 2013: Democracy most certainly does not mean majority rules.
        • thumb

          Krisztián Pintér 200+

          • 0
          TED Translator
          Jan 15 2013: what then?
        • thumb

          Colleen Steen 500+

          • 0
          Jan 15 2013: Gary,
          I don't know what you think democracy means....here's the definition:>)

          " a: government by the people; especially: rule of the majority"

          http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/democracy

          This question... "Has the time come for the U.S Second Amendment to be repealed or amended?"...is being discussed throughout our country, on local, state and national levels. I have confidence that the outcome will respesent the wishes of the majority.
    • thumb

      Morgan Barnes

      • 0
      Jan 15 2013: Gary what you may not of seen yesterday as it was up for less than 5 minutes was a totally racist rave which took me off guard and it wasn't just aimed at your country it was aimed at mine a number of others.

      If it stayed up it would of looked like a recruitment ad for the KKK or ANP it is a shame that pro-gun and some of it's loudest defenders are hate groups. That in itself should be worrying that those groups also have a say.

      • John Frum 30+

        • 0
        Jan 15 2013: I haven't seen that comment either. But you seem to be judging all pro-gun people by that. Gary mentioned quite a few specific words. I can scroll down and find them even now.
        • thumb

          Morgan Barnes

          • +1
          Jan 15 2013: I wasn't having a go at Gary it was just an FYI that it was out there and to be aware of it.

          I know both sides have slagged each other off quite significantly and I have copped a decent share of it so no argument there :-)

    • Craig Shamwell

      • 0
      Jan 15 2013: Gary, seriously...whats your point? I won't be as kind as Colleen. What you are attempting to do is minimize and some how demonize the descriptions that have been used for folks who are part of an unprecedented number of Assault Weapons Purchased Since Barrack Obama was elected. In the past Month again there were record sales! When Neil Boortz implies on National Radio, that if this President gets re-elected, you better go out and buy a gun to protect yourself from the Government, every description of folks protecting their gun rights is accurate. There is with no doubt a serious paranoia in many Repub/Cons thinking that their rights are going to be taken away and that even in the attempt to Protect Children, Assault Weapons should be legal. The term "COWARDLY" which I used, is also Accurate, because it will take some faith and guts to believe that stricter laws will work as they have in other countries. To try and do what you are attempting is again "cowardly" in that instead of admitting there is Paranoia, you attack those who are simply pointing it out. A common tactic of Sean and Rush.
      • thumb

        Gary Taylor

        • 0
        Jan 15 2013: @ Craig Shamwell. Neil Boortz, Hannity, Rush... I have a brain of my own. No one does my thinkiing for me. Not these people, the president, you, no one.

        A person's choice should not be taken away because you or anybody else feels that children will be safer by enacting a useless ban. You do not know what is best for the entire country. Your opinion does not matter more than mine or anyone else. Your opinion shall not be used to pass judgement on people you have no knowledge of.

        No one is making a decision to sacrifice a child in order to own a certain type of gun. That guilt trip will not work. There is no truth in it.

        I have not attacked anyone, Craig. I was just pointing out what people assume to know about other people.

        • Craig Shamwell

          • 0
          Jan 15 2013: How is describing a person's attitude, as well as statements assuming? Its an observation. You say I don't want anyone controlling your choice. That is "EXACTLY" the words Sean Hannity and others use every day. While you may have a voice of your own, if you don't, I am sure you have had conversations with people who do and have listened to them. And the point you argue is a clear, deliberate action, in the form of Fear Speech that distracts from the main point. Its not controlling your choice, but making sure that some of the choices we have, if they can result in mass killings are not an option. But this is very hard for folks like you to grasp, because you have been told or are of the opinion that Bans on certain Weapons don't work. Where is your proof, and how many sources, by who do you have to support your claim? The truth is, it has worked in other Countries and we are the only civilized country with a 2nd Amendment. So, no I am not assuming much when it comes to what you have said. This issue is very cut and dry. People with access to Assault Weapons are capable of doing what others cannot. And that's kill a lot of Folks in very short period of time. You either want folks to have access to such weapons or you do not. The issue is not about taking away your rights, or controlling your choice. Its ultimately about common sense.
      • thumb

        Gary Taylor

        • +1
        Jan 15 2013: You talk down to me and slander people you do not know. You mistake your two cents for common sense.You have the same lack of proof as anyone on this forum including me. You are exactly the example of why majority rules does not work. There is no way that you, a man who shows incoherent rage and will not shut up about Rush and Hannity, should be able to decide anything for anyone but yourself.

        • Craig Shamwell

          • 0
          Jan 15 2013: No slander intended, nor am I talking down. And no, I have no rage either. But I will say that one day a few years ago I stumbled upon Cons Talk Radio. I was shocked by what not only was being said, but by how many would call in and agree with these people. I started tracking the strands of thought and clearly saw an agenda throughout that Spectrum. I started hearing people say things that were verbatim out of the mouths of these same people including Rep. Congressman and some Senators. There is no question these people have a major influence on how a large part of the US opines. So whether you listen to them or not, you share similar views to these folks and I am sure through the many conversations you have had, advice has been given to you via these folks, without you even knowing. For instance, I specifically said "the rise in mass shootings" and someone said the statistics don't show a rise in "Crime"...not what I said. This is the kind of "twisting of facts" I have observed for several years. Another example: Where is the fear of the Government coming from all of a sudden? And why was there not the same fear when Bush and Cheney were in office? Proof shows that that administration was much more intrusive in our personal lives, and did more to cripple our economy than the past and several before it? So tell me, where is "the Government is now the greatest Domestic threat to our Freedoms!" coming from? Its been either implied or stated outright several times in this thread. Where did that dialogue start? I heard it months ago on Conservative Talk Radio! And now its moved to the forefront of the fear mongering. I believe this kind of 24-7 rhetoric is Cancerous to our Society. Suggesting people buy guns, literally calling the President a "thug" and many other untruths and outright lies. But many People stand under what they preach. This is not anger, or hatred, this is again is common sense. I have decided that they should be called out along with their ideologies.

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.