General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsThis is an interesting idea. Call it gun regulation instead of gun control.
Link to tweet
?t=JQkYWI_WQLamDTTDj1h_ug&s=19
David Weissman
@davidmweissman
Regulations of gun ownership is not an infringement of the 2nd amendment.
5:18 PM · May 31, 2022
2K
Reply
Share
Use the same terms as 2A: well regulated.
hlthe2b
(102,509 posts)Walleye
(31,147 posts)Arkansas Granny
(31,540 posts)Those are the words of the Founding Fathers, after all, and the RWNJs seem to revere their words.
hlthe2b
(102,509 posts)Alexander Of Assyria
(7,839 posts)The loathsome pirates of democracy and the crew that man the pirate ships know what cannonball will sink them in a well regulated militia are frightening words to them.
AnrothElf
(672 posts)I'm sticking with "Repeal the 2A and pry guns from cold, dead hands."
I'm done asking for reasonable solutions. They're too easy to blow off. I'm asking for UNreasonable solutions now.
What would actually work, never mind if it's politically feasible.
Canada, NZ, Australia have shown the way. We just need to follow their example
anarch
(6,535 posts)just saying...you asked for unreasonable solutions
AnrothElf
(672 posts)Out loud:
Never Again will fail to exterminate Nazis before they can exterminate us.
sarisataka
(18,895 posts)How many are you willing to have exterminated?
AnrothElf
(672 posts)Once the 2A has been repealed, then I consider owners of any then-illegal guns to be criminals.
Ruby Ridge the militias.
Waco the heavily armed cult compounds.
Exterminate the Nazis before they can exterminate us
sarisataka
(18,895 posts)Of irony.
AnrothElf
(672 posts)No longer law.
How is using a democratic process to ban guns, and then enforcing the new law of the land in any way fascistic?
You sound like the Republicans on Reddit calling me a "tyrant" for advocating the democratic repeal of the utterly indefensible 2A?
Intolerance of intolerance is not intolerance.
sarisataka
(18,895 posts)Take a step back and read your post until you spot it.
Hint- I haven't said squat about the idea of repealing anything.
AnrothElf
(672 posts)sarisataka
(18,895 posts)Who don't comply with laws you feel are the solution.
Even assuming a 90% compliance rate, that leaves millions who potentially need to be "exterminated".
Given your models of Ruby Ridge and Waco as examples to follow, families and children are collateral damage.
Fla_Democrat
(2,547 posts)AverageOldGuy
(1,567 posts)All laws dealing with firearms should be called "gun safety" legislation.
Do not use terms such as "gun control" or "gun regulation".
Republicans and gunhumpers oppose all "control" and all "regulation". How can anyone oppose "safety"?
Ferrets are Cool
(21,116 posts)Repugs would oppose sunshine if it were proposed by Democrats. And their constituents would back them up.
rickford66
(5,532 posts)Like the usual GQP miss-named laws.
Augiedog
(2,549 posts)Laura PourMeADrink
(42,770 posts)will be an army battalion going house to house confiscating any gun they can find.
Although that's what it probably would take to get rid of guns in the red part of Texas I am familiar with. I was utterly floored and astounded at the popularity of an auction item at a recent charity event here - woman's concealed weapon purse!
2naSalit
(86,918 posts)Legal terminology is important. So I submit that both words used together get closest to the point and can be found in both narratives at odds with each other. In identifying these "terms" we can find the appropriate route to reach the goal. Or so we're taught in policy analysis and mediation classes and the methodology politicians claim to employ.
In this case, though, your idea is a good one because the words chosen will guide the conversation. We need to drive this bus to the station and park it.
Mr. Ected
(9,675 posts)But somewhere along the line, if the Supreme Court doesn't revisit its determination in Heller we're just playing a game with gun enthusiasts for time immemorial and the death count will continue to mount.
Stack the Court. Reinstate Roe and overturn Heller.
Amishman
(5,559 posts)Banning them is the relatively easy part - and as we've seen that's pretty damn hard.
Enforcement and removing what is out there is the true challenge.
Reverse Heller and you'll get state level nullification and defiance in 25-30 states, and non-enforcement in the red areas of the rest.
You can't force them to turn them in. Even in areas where law enforcement isn't actively working against it, they will not be interested in putting themselves in harm's way to enforce it.
Mr. Ected
(9,675 posts)The 2nd Amendment should be interpreted in the manner it was intended. To derive from its words that individuals retain the right to bear arms is a travesty that must be overturned.
3825-87867
(858 posts)does it say the number of guns you can have. It just says right to bear arms shall not be infringed.
Doesn't say we can't limit the amount anyone can own. Pass a law that limits guns to one per person. No rights have been "infringed".
We can limit the 1st Amendment to "free speech zone" so we should be able to do a Scalia interpretation of the 2nd to limit the number.
IronLionZion
(45,625 posts)and regulate it well
inthewind21
(4,616 posts)has sailed. Loooooong ago
IronLionZion
(45,625 posts)EX500rider
(10,891 posts)See the Dick Act. The 1903 act repealed the Militia Acts of 1795 and designated the militia (per Title 10 of the U.S. Code, Section 311) as two classes: the Reserve Militia, which included all able-bodied men between ages 17 and 45, and the Organized Militia, comprising state militia (National Guard) units receiving federal support.
IronLionZion
(45,625 posts)SYFROYH
(34,186 posts)Otherwise its just the same old thing.
nowforever
(316 posts)are their security blankets...so in order for anything to work you must replace the guns with something that would help them get over their insecurities...I propose we replace the guns with a thinking brain.
DaveDuhRave
(17 posts)I have always thought that we should be issuing "Shooters Licenses". Just like Drivers Licenses. You can own as many cars as you want but in order to use it you have to be tested, trained and insured.
A "Shooters License" would avoid legislating gun ownership restrictions which (sorry!) will never be passed in this country. It would also provide a path to checking for violent history, mental disorders, etc. just like driver's licenses do.
gopiscrap
(23,767 posts)Pluvious
(4,339 posts)Lets see those f*ckers vote against that
UTUSN
(70,783 posts)such as crime of all sorts, terrorism, et al. Clueless types make speeches about wiping out different stuff that can only be *managed* at best.