Did anyone else flip their positions on the 2nd amendment in the last month?

[Jean-Jacques Roussea]

Before Nov 9th I was all like "hahah tea partiers eat shit there's never gonna be a time when the government in tyrannical enough that we need assault rifles if some time in the future we want to overthrow it".

Now I'm like "n-now hold on a sec... maybe there's something to this after all/w-what's the best guns to take down an unmanned gold-plated drone?"

[TreasonousBastard]

1. We are far from the point where we talk armed revolution...

Besides, it would probably end badly for anyone who tried.

[Jean-Jacques Roussea]

4. Nobody said we were close

Just that this is starting to look like the backstory of those apocalyptic dystopian society movies.

[rzemanfl]

5. Somewhere here there is post about a bookstore sign-

"Post-apocalyptic fiction has been moved to Current Events."

[workinclasszero]

31. What about protection from the fascist Trump Taliban?

I live in a red state surrounded by armed Republican mouth breathers.

We will be armed and carrying in Führer Trump's Amerika!

[marybourg]

2. No. nt.

[stillcool]

3. I won't have a gun around...

because I might use it...but a tank might be nice

[linuxman]

6. No. I've always been pro-gun.

[left-of-center2012]

7. "what's the best guns to take down an unmanned gold-plated drone?"

My money's on a 12 gauge shotgun

[CentralMass]

26. This might do it.

http://newatlas.com/dronegun-neighborhood/46656/

[ileus]

8. I have been and always will be a solid 2A progressive.

[roamer65]

9. I've become much more of a Constitutionalist in general.

2A included.

[Skittles]

10. gun control does not mean you cannot have a gun

only paranoid gun humping conservatives think like that

[SQUEE]

11. No, not an inch.

Sadly, my family knows how quickly a civilized nation can flip the switch to savagery.

Berlin was an arts mecha in the 20's and Vienna a center of culture and light.

[Kang Colby]

12. I'm unapologetically pro-gun and against gun control.

But I've always been that way.


I'm also a life long Democrat.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

13. I've conceded that further gun regulations shouldn't be a national policy...

... going forward if it's truly hurting Democrats from winning votes in rural areas.

EDIT: However, if local voters support various gun restrictions in their area, I think they should be free to do so.

[madinmaryland]

14. I've never owned a gun, but I'm afraid that the Repubic's will be grabbing any gun that I own...

It will be fucked up when tRump starts grabbing guns. The nutters in the Gungeon will be freaking out.

[NightWatcher]

15. This is what the rw gun folks were prepping for, but instead of fighting, they put trump bumper stix

on their pickups and welcomed the foreign invasion.

Dumbasses.

Wolverines!!!

[boston bean]

16. no because bombs, nuclear weapons, etc.

[SQUEE]

19. ..

[Paladin]

17. Nope. I'm still a gun-owning gun control advocate.

But the irony remains: the pro-gun movement has been propelled for decades by paranoia over the imagined excesses of a left-wing government---and they help deliver the most dangerous administration in this country's history, and it is, of course, right-wing.

Thanks for nothing, pro-gunners.

[HAB911]

18. It all comes down to one question

Will the armed forces support the chain of command or side with the citizens and mutiny, because your little "assault rifle" will be a peashooter if they don't, and they won't. Ref: Kent State.

[Marengo]

21. The protesters at Kent State were armed?

[HAB911]

22. No they were not armed

but the tin soldiers followed orders from their chain of command to kill them.

[DLevine]

20. Hell no. nt

[etherealtruth]

23. No ... am even more committed to gun control given the current climate

[Iggo]

24. Nope.

[yallerdawg]

25. Hell, no!

I'm still a Democrat!

[johnp3907]

27. No.

We need stricter gun control laws.

[ZoomBubba]

28. I don't think it is as much flipped for a lot of people ...

... as it is backing off of it.

With III%'ers and Oathkeepers taking advantage of open carry laws to turn out at polling sites, it may be necessary for us to start groups that take advantage of the same laws and show up where they are, guns visible.

That's not encouraging violence, it's more of a "we got 'em too" message.

[duffyduff]

29. The second amendment has nothing to do with the dubious "right to bear arms."

It deals with state militias.

The NRA started that bullshit that everybody has the "right" to have guns when a one-time convicted murderer (whose conviction was either overturned by the courts or he was pardoned--I am not going to look up the particulars right now) took over the NRA in 1978. He literally made that shit up.

Prior to that idiot, the NRA did support gun control legislation.

ETA: It was Harlan Carter, who shot and killed a Latino in 1931 and later regretted it.

Mr. Carter, then 17, was convicted in 1931 of murdering a 15-yearold Mexican boy, Ramon Casiano, in Laredo, Tex., and was sentenced to three years in jail. Mr. Carter testified at his trial that he had fired his shotgun after the boy threatened him with a knife.

The Texas Court of Criminal Appeals overturned the conviction on the ground that the trial judge had not given jurors adequate instruction on the law of self-defense.

Mr. Carter said that the action of the appeals court and subsequent dismissal of charges by the state's attorney demonstrated that the killing ''did not involve culpability on my part.''

http://www.nytimes.com/1981/05/06/us/leader-of-rifle-group-affirms-that-he-shot-bot-to-death-in-1931.html

He remained batshit crazy the rest of his life.

[Kang Colby]

41. Not quite.

The United States has never taken the public policy position that only those serving within the militia have the right to keep and bear arms, with others being lawfully excluded from owning arms. It never happened, nor will it.

I feel bad for gun control advocates, essentially forced to take illogical positions. Gun control proponents are forced to believe that near the beginning of the Bill of Rights, Amendments clearly designed to limit governmental power and to protect citizens, is a statement designed to enable the government to raise militias and to keep individuals from owning firearms. They must believe this despite the fact that in Article I Section 8 of the US Constitution the Congress is given the power "To raise and support armies."

As if it couldn't get any worse, you have the state constitutions.

Kentucky: The right of the citizens to bear arms in defence of themselves and the State shall not be questioned. (1792)

Vermont: The people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State -- and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power (1777)

Pennsylvania: That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state; and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; And that the military should be kept under strict subordination, to, and governed by, the civil power (1776).

Etc., so on, and so forth.

[Jamie Mayfield]

30. Dem from the country

I believe in the right to own guns, but I also believe in reasonable gun control like background checks and waiting periods. My views on the issue hasn't changed, just the type of gun I am thinking of buying for personal use. Went from a 9mm for fun target practice to a semi-automatic shotgun to unleash my rage. Next time I go to the gun range for target practice, I want to unload a canon. If an unmanned, gold-plated drone flies in front of my target then there was obviously nothing I could do. All that being said, as a democrat I am very willing to register my guns and they are kept unloaded and locked when not in use.

[scscholar]

37. "unleash my rage"

That's concerning and a little scary.

[Jamie Mayfield]

39. Accepting of every emotion except anger

This is something that gets to me about democrats. They believe in giving safe spaces and allowing for ever emotion except for anger. But I am angry. As a female, I was just told that I am worthless, that my education doesn't matter and that my rights are not my own. I will never be as successful as my husband because I am a female. I even questioned if I wanted to continue in my graduate program where I am trying to get my PhD in political science/international relations. There doesn't seem to be much of a point anymore. This election has enraged me. I spent election night screaming into a pillow as my husband held onto me because the message was clear, that I would never be equal. I have been productive by protesting and making posters, but at the end of the day, I still feel that emptiness. So yeah, I want to go out an shoot a high powered weapon at a gun range until the vibrations from the gun make my hands numb. I want to scream until I lose my voice, I want to savagely rip a pillow into shreds and I want to go into a room full of glass and break every last piece. It is concerning that an election can make someone feel so violently ill and angry. I threw up for about a week straight every single morning after the election. I have cried and cried and cried non-stop. It is amazing that I was able to pull myself together enough to write my final papers this semester. At work I just isolate myself from all of my co-workers except for those who feel a similar way. I am in a lot of pain and I do need a way to "unleash" it because it is eating me up. Democrats need to be more accepting of anger because making it so taboo leads to people unleashing it in unhealthy ways. Firing a gun and doing a shit ton of damage makes me feel powerful. It makes me feel something I can't feel in everyday life because as a woman, I never get to feel much more than belittled. Women are also more likely to internalize their anger, they cut and abuse their bodies because we are taught from a young age that any outward aggression is unladylike and a sign that we are hysterical. So is it less scary if I keep it in and just keep throwing up and keep my issues internal, or do you think it would be okay for me to get this shit off of my chest by shooting the shit out of a target at a fucking range? I don't want to concern anyone with my female hysteria after all.

[Kang Colby]

42. What's reasonable about waiting periods?

If someone owns ten guns, what difference does making them wait a few days each time they purchase another gun?

Gun control laws are to some Democrats what abortion restrictions are to most Republicans.

[La Lioness Priyanka]

32. no, because last i remember the US government had much more effective weapons

plus a trained military and police forces.

[Tommy_Carcetti]

33. No.

Next question.

[Kang Colby]

43. What we need are reasonable, common sense bicycle safety reforms. N/t

[cry baby]

34. Funny! I'm more afraid of pussy grabbers than gun grabbers. nt

[gordianot]

35. What you need to protect yourself is not government or police.

The danger will be right wingers or looters. No need for this liberal to ever purchase firearms or ammunition.

[RedWedge]

36. No, my opinion changed slowly over several years.

2A issues can be losing issues in places we need votes, and being a liberal gun owner is a great way to establish common ground with political opponents and open the door to discussion -- or frustrate them, if that's your approach. I don't pretend that my rifle is going to save my family in the event the jackbooted thugs start marching, but my opinion has definitely changed about self-defense carry over the years.

[Hoyt]

38. Have not changed my mind. While some may arm up to protect themselves from white wing gun nuts,

I don't want to live where citizens are armed and fighting each other. We won't be fighting the government, we'll be fighting those that support certain ideologies. No one will win short-term in civil war.

With citizens fighting, there will be no Social Security, Medicare, jobs, health care, etc. You think things are bad now, give the friggin white wing racist gunners -- the majority of current gun owners in this country -- an excuse to become like George Zimmerman, Dylann Roof, etc.

[Calculating]

40. I've always been pro 2A

Guns are to secure some semblance of control over your own destiny. Without them you're at the mercy of those in society who would seek to subjugate, oppress, victimize or otherwise harm you.

I also believe the gun control issue is what cost Hillary the election by alienating huge portions of rural voters. Nobody is gonna vote dem just to get gun control, while plenty will vote the other way if they hear the dem candidate talking about it.