America's Gun Violence

jeffbr

HughFreakingDillon said:

InHiding80 said:

If only both sides followed Colorado by legalizing pot since it helped lower crime within a year. It would put an end to this petty bickering and cherry picking of the issue on BOTH sides. I'm all for Bernie Sanders but if there's one issue I disagree with him and socialists on, it's rewriting the constitution.

why? it's a living document. it's meant to be rewritten as the times change.

In our current political climate, this would be impossible. We can barely get our congresscritters to figure out how to keep the gov't funded.

dudeman

rgambs said:

dudeman said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

InHiding80 said:

If only both sides followed Colorado by legalizing pot since it helped lower crime within a year. It would put an end to this petty bickering and cherry picking of the issue on BOTH sides. I'm all for Bernie Sanders but if there's one issue I disagree with him and socialists on, it's rewriting the constitution.

how did legalizing pot lower crime? because having it is no longer a crime? or non-pot related crimes went down?

I'm curious about this, too. It seems like there was a huge increase in ER visits due to people "overdosing" on THC, particularly in edible forms.

Police and Sheriff departments were scrambling to establish a field sobriety test for people driving under the influence of pot due to an increase in traffic accidents.

I don't care so much about legalized Marijuana. I'm not a smoker and I don't use drugs or alcohol.

I'm not sure that's accurate.

Maybe not. I believe it was a story on one of the NPR shows. I don't have a link to the story.

dudeman

rgambs said:

dudeman said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

InHiding80 said:

If only both sides followed Colorado by legalizing pot since it helped lower crime within a year. It would put an end to this petty bickering and cherry picking of the issue on BOTH sides. I'm all for Bernie Sanders but if there's one issue I disagree with him and socialists on, it's rewriting the constitution.

why? it's a living document. it's meant to be rewritten as the times change.

What should the Second Amendment say if it were to be rewritten?

It doesn't need rewritten. It says "well regulated" and that is all we are trying to achieve.

"Well regulated" by what means? Please be specific.

josevolution

I'm sick of this topic i say let everybody pack guns , you have a problem with me on the road im pulling my gun out and settle things right there you against me gun vs gun , you bump into me at a night club im taking my peice out shoot you right there , you tell me my name is not on the list at the next PJ show im shooting that list right there on line , no more flipping the bird at people thats for wooossies just point & shoot .....

dudeman

Okay, Jose.

Gern Blansten

dudeman said:

rgambs said:

dudeman said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

InHiding80 said:

If only both sides followed Colorado by legalizing pot since it helped lower crime within a year. It would put an end to this petty bickering and cherry picking of the issue on BOTH sides. I'm all for Bernie Sanders but if there's one issue I disagree with him and socialists on, it's rewriting the constitution.

why? it's a living document. it's meant to be rewritten as the times change.

What should the Second Amendment say if it were to be rewritten?

It doesn't need rewritten. It says "well regulated" and that is all we are trying to achieve.

"Well regulated" by what means? Please be specific.

Background checks, licensing and registration

dudeman

Background checks and proficiency licensing are cool with me. Registration is a slippery slope and I don't think anything good could come of it.

Just my opinion.

Also, if we start licensing, there would be no reasonable opposition to a national Right to Carry bill. Right? If everyone has to pass a safety and proficiency test, only qualified and responsible people would have guns. There would be no reason to be fearful of those who carry concealed guns anywhere in the country.

We could do away with "Gun Free Zones" too.

josevolution

dudeman said:

Okay, Jose.

great so you agree i thought you would ...

ldent42

dudeman said:

Background checks and proficiency licensing are cool with me. Registration is a slippery slope and I don't think anything good could come of it.

Just my opinion.

Also, if we start licensing, there would be no reasonable opposition to a national Right to Carry bill. Right? If everyone has to pass a safety and proficiency test, only qualified and responsible people would have guns. There would be no reason to be fearful of those who carry concealed guns anywhere in the country.

We could do away with "Gun Free Zones" too.

I understand the rationale, but I cannot get behind a right to carry bill. Lol I'm not saying you're wrong, if all gun owners were vetted and licensed I could understand the rationale, but I'm still like ".....no." cuz guns are scary

rssesq

scary is the media's obsession with normalizing any and ALL new restrictions on the 4th a, amen.

Gern Blansten

dudeman said:

Background checks and proficiency licensing are cool with me. Registration is a slippery slope and I don't think anything good could come of it.

Just my opinion.

Also, if we start licensing, there would be no reasonable opposition to a national Right to Carry bill. Right? If everyone has to pass a safety and proficiency test, only qualified and responsible people would have guns. There would be no reason to be fearful of those who carry concealed guns anywhere in the country.

We could do away with "Gun Free Zones" too.

You think people don't carry in gun free zones?

dudeman

Gern Blansten said:

dudeman said:

Background checks and proficiency licensing are cool with me. Registration is a slippery slope and I don't think anything good could come of it.

Just my opinion.

Also, if we start licensing, there would be no reasonable opposition to a national Right to Carry bill. Right? If everyone has to pass a safety and proficiency test, only qualified and responsible people would have guns. There would be no reason to be fearful of those who carry concealed guns anywhere in the country.

We could do away with "Gun Free Zones" too.

You think people don't carry in gun free zones?

Not legally.

dudeman

ldent42 said:

dudeman said:

Background checks and proficiency licensing are cool with me. Registration is a slippery slope and I don't think anything good could come of it.

Just my opinion.

Also, if we start licensing, there would be no reasonable opposition to a national Right to Carry bill. Right? If everyone has to pass a safety and proficiency test, only qualified and responsible people would have guns. There would be no reason to be fearful of those who carry concealed guns anywhere in the country.

We could do away with "Gun Free Zones" too.

I understand the rationale, but I cannot get behind a right to carry bill. Lol I'm not saying you're wrong, if all gun owners were vetted and licensed I could understand the rationale, but I'm still like ".....no." cuz guns are scary

That's the tricky part. Gun Control advocates want to ask for concessions from the Pro 2A side but don't want to make any concessions on their end. Pro-gunners aren't really excited to give an inch for fear of a mile being taken.

mickeyrat

dudeman said:

rgambs said:

dudeman said:

HughFreakingDillon said:

InHiding80 said:

If only both sides followed Colorado by legalizing pot since it helped lower crime within a year. It would put an end to this petty bickering and cherry picking of the issue on BOTH sides. I'm all for Bernie Sanders but if there's one issue I disagree with him and socialists on, it's rewriting the constitution.

why? it's a living document. it's meant to be rewritten as the times change.

What should the Second Amendment say if it were to be rewritten?

It doesn't need rewritten. It says "well regulated" and that is all we are trying to achieve.

"Well regulated" by what means? Please be specific.

For a start we would be well served to understand by what definitions was intended by the language of the day.

In my view 2A needs applied in its full context. Scalia seems to have made null the first part. Which is not in his power to do.

To my mind a well regulated militia in the modern era is fullfilled by the national guard who are under the command of the individual governors.

rgambs

dudeman said:

Background checks and proficiency licensing are cool with me. Registration is a slippery slope and I don't think anything good could come of it.

Just my opinion.

Also, if we start licensing, there would be no reasonable opposition to a national Right to Carry bill. Right? If everyone has to pass a safety and proficiency test, only qualified and responsible people would have guns. There would be no reason to be fearful of those who carry concealed guns anywhere in the country.

We could do away with "Gun Free Zones" too.

That's where gunners jump the fence and leave the pasture. Slippery slope to what?? Shutting down the black market on guns? Nothing good can come from it? That's ludicrous.

Gern Blansten

The majority of NRA members support what Obama has enacted. They have supported that for years. It's the leadership of the NRA that is insane.

pureoc

I guess the suspected terrorist with Milwaukee ties arrested yesterday had frequented a gun range i pass everyday to work, only about a mile from my office and less than 5 miles from my home. I cannot understand how anyone could think letting anyone have access to weapons without a background check is a good thing.

jeffbr

mickeyrat said:

For a start we would be well served to understand by what definitions was intended by the language of the day.

In my view 2A needs applied in its full context. Scalia seems to have made null the first part. Which is not in his power to do.

To my mind a well regulated militia in the modern era is fullfilled by the national guard who are under the command of the individual governors.

Not just Scalia. Has there ever been a court ruling upholding what you're suggesting? And while anti-gunners talk about pro-gunners dismissing or glossing over the well-regulated militia wording, the converse it true with the anti-gunners glossing over "the right of the people". In fact, I believe the 2nd amendment is the only one that specifically uses the phrase "the right of the people", seeming to stress that it is an individual right. I'm no gun nut, nor am I a Constitutional scholar, but this is something that can be debated on here for the next 10 years, and we'll be right back where we started, since the various courts over time have been unable or unwilling to provide us with definitive answers.

PJ_Soul

Gern Blansten said:

The majority of NRA members support what Obama has enacted. They have supported that for years. It's the leadership of the NRA that is insane.

In that case, it's pretty weird that the NRA has as many members as it does.

ldent42

dudeman said:

ldent42 said:

dudeman said:

Background checks and proficiency licensing are cool with me. Registration is a slippery slope and I don't think anything good could come of it.

Just my opinion.

Also, if we start licensing, there would be no reasonable opposition to a national Right to Carry bill. Right? If everyone has to pass a safety and proficiency test, only qualified and responsible people would have guns. There would be no reason to be fearful of those who carry concealed guns anywhere in the country.

We could do away with "Gun Free Zones" too.

I understand the rationale, but I cannot get behind a right to carry bill. Lol I'm not saying you're wrong, if all gun owners were vetted and licensed I could understand the rationale, but I'm still like ".....no." cuz guns are scary

That's the tricky part. Gun Control advocates want to ask for concessions from the Pro 2A side but don't want to make any concessions on their end. Pro-gunners aren't really excited to give an inch for fear of a mile being taken.

I understand, but I kinda feel like "less people getting shot" is something we can all agree is a win-win. I kinda feel like it's less about the give and take over the law and more about, Hey let's make our country less deadly.