Jan 8 2013: Jimmy, please re-read my previous post, as that is not what I said:
*******************
Gary, our Constitution doesn't grant our rights, it guarantees our rights! This coupled with the Declaration of Independence secures what are the peoples rights.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
So basically to sum it up, wouldn't you, even an avowed atheist, rather have you rights as a human being granted by a power you don't believe in vs. a human that can snatch them away?
Jan 7 2013: I could go into a bunch of statistics about how crime in America is lower per capita than many, many other smaller countries, but I think it would fall on deaf ears.
Our country has 310 million vs. New Zealand 4.4 million citizens.
http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun_facts_6_1_screen.pdf
Our country has the only Constitution of it's kind and has done very well for our country for 234 plus years! Our Constitution establishes, in the Bill of Rights, guarantees for our freedom and liberty. This is at the core of American history and tradition.
If you've never studied the United States Constitution, I suggest you do. It's very enlightening. You would have to read the Federalist Papers, and other documents written by our Founders to truly understand the context and meaning.
Bottom line, it's easy for the uninformed to interpret the 2nd Amendment, but America having been born from the tyranny of the English King, this should be understanding enough!
Jan 6 2013: I don't support everyone on the block owning a .50 cal machine gun, but I do support the current licensing and control placed on those that would like to own them.
This discussion is primarily about semi-automatic weapons. Many average hunting rifles function the exact same way as the Bushmaster semi-automatic rifle.
As far as a 30-round magazine, I agree a good hunter need only one well placed shot. I just don't think it matters whether a killer carry's a 30-round mag or 3 10-round mags. Again, the criminal will always ignore the law so why have ineffective laws on the books. Who are you to decide, or the government to decide, what we law abiding citizens need or want. It's like choosing a red Corvette vs. a black one. It's our choice, but in this case it's addressed in our 2nd Amendment!
Personally, I just enjoys shooting, and this includes a 30-round mag at the target range. If I were still hunting I would chose a nice bolt action 7mm Mag, and not a Bushmaster .223 Cal with 30-rounds. If the ant-gunner had their way, they may determine that a 7mm Mag is overkill and outlaw that.
Your right we have placed controls on fertilizer, but there are many other choices for the would-be criminal to use to kill. No, I personally don't support mechanical imprinting i.e. micro-stamping as this only adds undue cost to weapons for no gain.
Jan 6 2013: We American's can curb the violence with enforcement of our current gun laws. Put the criminals away, with no plea bargaining, in prison. I say extra time if you use a firearm. Enforce the death penalty if you kill someone while committing a crime!
Allow all law abiding citizens their right to concealed carry. The law already states that if your a felon or have been diagnosed with a mental illness you cannot have a firearm. Concealed carry has already proven to be a deterrent.
More people are killed in America by other means, so guns are not a primary issue in the hands of trained law abiding citizens.
If you confiscate weapons, you will never get them out of the hands of devoted criminals. Criminals use what ever weapon is at hand, not necessarily a gun.
There are a few other things we can do, like improve the proper education about right vs. wrong, etc. Proper and safe use of firearms.
Jan 6 2013: Thank you for a rational discussion. This is what's missing from the national debate on this issue. You make a good point concerning the "well regulated' clause.
The original intent of our 2nd Amendment, in my understanding and after reviewing many of our Founders own writings, was to deter tyranny by Government. This may be an unfounded risk that many push aside, but it's happened quite often in many countries. I'm not an alarmist or see that this is on the horizon by any means, but just address the original intent of our Founding Father's.
As to the regulation issue, we have a lot of laws on the books concerning guns, murder etc, that seem to be ignored by the criminal elements. My primary issue with the anti-gun crowd is the false information or lies being spread to incite unfounded fear and mis-understanding of the issue at hand.
Jan 6 2013: First, I don't have much respect for anything Michael Moore says.
With that said, I don't think fear of each other is the issue. Fear of having harm done to self and family is an issue. The police can't be everywhere and response time is an issue in a quickly volatile situation.
Many of these weapons are enjoyed by the owner just for the fun of shooting. Many choose a semi-auto pistol for home or personal defense.
As far as the 2nd Amendment statement, "well regulated" and "militia." We the people, that fought in the Revolution we're the ordinary (farmer, lawyer, printer, etc) citizens. A citizen militia. That is "we the people."
Jan 6 2013: Gary, our Constitution doesn't grant our rights, it guarantees our rights! This coupled with the Declaration of Independence secures what are the peoples rights.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
And, what is not addressed in our Constitution is deferred to the States or to the people. This is why I say that many gun control laws on the books at the state/local levels are un-Consitutional. If they were challenged in court they would most likely be stricken from the books.
Jan 6 2013: Jody, landmines and other weapons of war are not addressed in our 2nd Amendment, so this argument jumps to extremes.
We're talking about semi-automatic weapons, but many are injecting military automatic weapons into the argument. This is not helpful to a proper discussion.
There are many more murders caused by other means than lawfully owned firearms. Why don't we focus on what might reduce the killing, not the means with which to kill? If a killer chose to ram a school bus full of explosive fertilizer into a school building, how will a new law banning guns help?
Jan 6 2013: I've read the Constitution many times. It clearly states, and has been clarified by a recent Supreme Court decision, that the 2nd Amendment is an individual right.
The states have passed, very questionable gun control laws, that may or may not really be Constitutional. They just haven't been challenged all that much.
Yes, I would rather have my natural rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
The term assault rifle is primarily associated with a "select fire" capability. The weapons in this discussion are semi-automatic, not select fire.
TEDCred score: +0.90 TEDCred reflects your contribution to the TED community.
A comment on Conversation: Has the time come for the U.S Second Amendment to be repealed or amended?
http://www.theblaze.com/stories/the-media-isnt-being-honest-about-this-oddly-enough-the-data-in-this-viral-vid-has-been-left-out-of-the-gun-control-debate/
A reply on Conversation: Has the time come for the U.S Second Amendment to be repealed or amended?
*******************
Gary, our Constitution doesn't grant our rights, it guarantees our rights! This coupled with the Declaration of Independence secures what are the peoples rights.
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
So basically to sum it up, wouldn't you, even an avowed atheist, rather have you rights as a human being granted by a power you don't believe in vs. a human that can snatch them away?
A reply on Conversation: Has the time come for the U.S Second Amendment to be repealed or amended?
Our country has 310 million vs. New Zealand 4.4 million citizens.
http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun_facts_6_1_screen.pdf
Our country has the only Constitution of it's kind and has done very well for our country for 234 plus years! Our Constitution establishes, in the Bill of Rights, guarantees for our freedom and liberty. This is at the core of American history and tradition.
If you've never studied the United States Constitution, I suggest you do. It's very enlightening. You would have to read the Federalist Papers, and other documents written by our Founders to truly understand the context and meaning.
Bottom line, it's easy for the uninformed to interpret the 2nd Amendment, but America having been born from the tyranny of the English King, this should be understanding enough!
A reply on Conversation: Has the time come for the U.S Second Amendment to be repealed or amended?
This discussion is primarily about semi-automatic weapons. Many average hunting rifles function the exact same way as the Bushmaster semi-automatic rifle.
As far as a 30-round magazine, I agree a good hunter need only one well placed shot. I just don't think it matters whether a killer carry's a 30-round mag or 3 10-round mags. Again, the criminal will always ignore the law so why have ineffective laws on the books. Who are you to decide, or the government to decide, what we law abiding citizens need or want. It's like choosing a red Corvette vs. a black one. It's our choice, but in this case it's addressed in our 2nd Amendment!
Personally, I just enjoys shooting, and this includes a 30-round mag at the target range. If I were still hunting I would chose a nice bolt action 7mm Mag, and not a Bushmaster .223 Cal with 30-rounds. If the ant-gunner had their way, they may determine that a 7mm Mag is overkill and outlaw that.
Your right we have placed controls on fertilizer, but there are many other choices for the would-be criminal to use to kill. No, I personally don't support mechanical imprinting i.e. micro-stamping as this only adds undue cost to weapons for no gain.
A reply on Conversation: Has the time come for the U.S Second Amendment to be repealed or amended?
Allow all law abiding citizens their right to concealed carry. The law already states that if your a felon or have been diagnosed with a mental illness you cannot have a firearm. Concealed carry has already proven to be a deterrent.
More people are killed in America by other means, so guns are not a primary issue in the hands of trained law abiding citizens.
If you confiscate weapons, you will never get them out of the hands of devoted criminals. Criminals use what ever weapon is at hand, not necessarily a gun.
There are a few other things we can do, like improve the proper education about right vs. wrong, etc. Proper and safe use of firearms.
A reply on Conversation: Has the time come for the U.S Second Amendment to be repealed or amended?
The original intent of our 2nd Amendment, in my understanding and after reviewing many of our Founders own writings, was to deter tyranny by Government. This may be an unfounded risk that many push aside, but it's happened quite often in many countries. I'm not an alarmist or see that this is on the horizon by any means, but just address the original intent of our Founding Father's.
As to the regulation issue, we have a lot of laws on the books concerning guns, murder etc, that seem to be ignored by the criminal elements. My primary issue with the anti-gun crowd is the false information or lies being spread to incite unfounded fear and mis-understanding of the issue at hand.
A reply on Conversation: Has the time come for the U.S Second Amendment to be repealed or amended?
With that said, I don't think fear of each other is the issue. Fear of having harm done to self and family is an issue. The police can't be everywhere and response time is an issue in a quickly volatile situation.
Many of these weapons are enjoyed by the owner just for the fun of shooting. Many choose a semi-auto pistol for home or personal defense.
As far as the 2nd Amendment statement, "well regulated" and "militia." We the people, that fought in the Revolution we're the ordinary (farmer, lawyer, printer, etc) citizens. A citizen militia. That is "we the people."
A reply on Conversation: Has the time come for the U.S Second Amendment to be repealed or amended?
"We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness."
And, what is not addressed in our Constitution is deferred to the States or to the people. This is why I say that many gun control laws on the books at the state/local levels are un-Consitutional. If they were challenged in court they would most likely be stricken from the books.
A reply on Conversation: Has the time come for the U.S Second Amendment to be repealed or amended?
We're talking about semi-automatic weapons, but many are injecting military automatic weapons into the argument. This is not helpful to a proper discussion.
There are many more murders caused by other means than lawfully owned firearms. Why don't we focus on what might reduce the killing, not the means with which to kill? If a killer chose to ram a school bus full of explosive fertilizer into a school building, how will a new law banning guns help?
A reply on Conversation: Has the time come for the U.S Second Amendment to be repealed or amended?
The states have passed, very questionable gun control laws, that may or may not really be Constitutional. They just haven't been challenged all that much.
Yes, I would rather have my natural rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
The term assault rifle is primarily associated with a "select fire" capability. The weapons in this discussion are semi-automatic, not select fire.