General Discussion

CTyankee

(68,254 posts)

86. Oh, haven't you heard? There are already some people who want to repeal the Voting

Sat Dec 15, 2012, 04:55 PM

Dec 2012

Rights Act.

I dunno about the 13th and 14th amendment. Haven't heard too much movement on repealing them. But I really don't think the the re-enactment of slavery and abolishing the right to vote for some groups have too much support, or at least none that I know of. I do know that there are people for whom the abolition of the 2nd amendment would be a popular idea, particularly here at DU, judging by comments I have been reading of late.

Then there are the families of people who have been slain due to gun violence. Betcha a bunch of those think abolition of the 2nd A would be a good thing.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

115 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Confiscate most guns in the country, and how it could be done [View all] quinnox Dec 2012 OP

Highly improbable ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #1

the gun culture would take time to change but quinnox Dec 2012 #4

You minimize the legal hurdles which are massive ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #10

There would be the added benefit of thousands of angry freepers dying while resisting confiscation librechik Dec 2012 #2

if a few Waco style confrontations/occurances happened, then so be it quinnox Dec 2012 #5

Waco was an incredible tragedy that should not be repeated kdmorris Dec 2012 #15

Waco ending was chosen by David Korash, the starting of fires was at his orders. Thinkingabout Dec 2012 #103

I know that kdmorris Dec 2012 #112

25 children were murdered at Waco. Cool plan. nt rDigital Dec 2012 #17

I'm not endorsing Waco, just being prepared for the reality that some of quinnox Dec 2012 #20

Regrettable? Does that mean acceptable instead of absolutely horrifying? Killing more children? nt rDigital Dec 2012 #26

no, it would be a terrible event but the blame would of course be placed squarely quinnox Dec 2012 #32

You've dug yerself a hole. Saboburns Dec 2012 #63

I think my answers have clarified what I meant and have been reasonable quinnox Dec 2012 #67

not endorsing Waco Trunk Monkey Dec 2012 #49

a "gun enthusiast" speaks.... mike_c Dec 2012 #76

Law enforcement gave Koresh 51 days to surrender. Instead, he continued hugging his guns and raping Hoyt Dec 2012 #31

What about the 25 dead kids? No sympathy for them either.... Disgusting. nt rDigital Dec 2012 #33

All you care about is your guns. Be honest. Hoyt Dec 2012 #34

No. rDigital Dec 2012 #35

Refusing to be honest? No surprise. ThatPoetGuy Dec 2012 #39

Pot meet kettle. See above. toodles. nt rDigital Dec 2012 #61

He should never have been able to stockpile those guns in the first place. CTyankee Dec 2012 #45

Good luck. Get to it. nt rDigital Dec 2012 #53

will do. and thanks. CTyankee Dec 2012 #85

Then what Amendment or laws get repealed next? atreides1 Dec 2012 #74

Oh, haven't you heard? There are already some people who want to repeal the Voting CTyankee Dec 2012 #86

Waco was not about guns. musical_soul Dec 2012 #68

OK, so why did Janet Reno go after them? nt rDigital Dec 2012 #70

She wanted to solve the problem....... musical_soul Dec 2012 #80

You think they sent the ATF in for an unstable man? DesMoinesDem Dec 2012 #83

what the fuck????? cali Dec 2012 #29

It wouldn't be "a few." Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #62

Funny joke... haha kdmorris Dec 2012 #23

Perhaps my reading comprehension skills are lacking geek_sabre Dec 2012 #3

with the full force of law and police agencies cracking down quinnox Dec 2012 #6

I love how gun people assume all the gun owners will just turn vicious felons alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #18

I agree quinnox Dec 2012 #25

If you pass the law, most people will comply with it. Trunk Monkey Dec 2012 #51

Yes, I'm willing to experiment with it alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #65

The vast majority don't take illegal drugs. jeff47 Dec 2012 #88

I think the fog of anger over this tragedy has clouded a lot of otherwise excellent minds. cherokeeprogressive Dec 2012 #71

Actually, you're not being respectful alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #81

Because guns don't use ammunition jeff47 Dec 2012 #89

At least ammunition AlexSatan Dec 2012 #96

If the vast majority used illegal drugs, you'd have a point jeff47 Dec 2012 #100

The problem is that AlexSatan Dec 2012 #101

Where do those illegally gotten guns come from? jeff47 Dec 2012 #106

Can you support that claim? AlexSatan Dec 2012 #107

Because Washington DC is a state jeff47 Dec 2012 #108

I appreciate the data AlexSatan Dec 2012 #114

" Because those laws allow us to stop drunk drivers before they kill someone." Ghost in the Machine Dec 2012 #110

Because my post said laws were 100% effective in all cases. jeff47 Dec 2012 #111

Because politicians and elected sheriffs and judges in red states hack89 Dec 2012 #43

They weren't going to enforce integration either alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #66

It will never get to that point fortunately hack89 Dec 2012 #75

Great idea! AlexSatan Dec 2012 #95

That worked great with cocaine and marijuana, too (nt) Recursion Dec 2012 #99

Ammunition sales. jeff47 Dec 2012 #87

How do you get around the courts? white_wolf Dec 2012 #7

my OP is predicated on the idea of the constituiton question already being decided quinnox Dec 2012 #9

When one starts in fictional territory indeed all things are possible ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #12

I'm not a Doctor Jim, I'm a pool man! nt rDigital Dec 2012 #19

I'm merely speculating and saying it could happen quinnox Dec 2012 #22

The SC has already ruled that the 2A is an individual right NickB79 Dec 2012 #109

Then I guess we'd better start nominating SC justices that are on our side. Change the CTyankee Dec 2012 #48

Now that I can get behind. white_wolf Dec 2012 #56

Remind the courts that "well regulated militia" appears in the 2nd amendment jeff47 Dec 2012 #90

If we quit the war on drugs and Afpak, we could do this Taverner Dec 2012 #8

That would probably work as well as the war on drugs. shraby Dec 2012 #11

One small difference being guns are an enumerated Constitutional right. Common Sense Party Dec 2012 #77

Only issuing licenses to security personnel or subsistance hunters? Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #13

no, it couldn't be done as you lay out. It's just a fantasy. cali Dec 2012 #14

Correct, but this is a women's suffrage type Constitutional project alcibiades_mystery Dec 2012 #16

If it takes more than one election cycle it won't work. rrneck Dec 2012 #21

Precisely. nt rDigital Dec 2012 #28

NRA propaganda. ThatPoetGuy Dec 2012 #41

Yes, let's not let this propaganda go unchallenged. Onward! CTyankee Dec 2012 #50

Stricter gun control and confiscation are two different things. rrneck Dec 2012 #58

Ah stricter gun control means confiscation of most guns. Glad you have clarified that. dkf Dec 2012 #60

I have firearms that nobody knows about. Throd Dec 2012 #24

You can build your own ARs with unregistered receivers and there is no Federal requirement to ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #27

And you guys tell us gun lovers are "law-abiding and responsible." Apparently, you don't even Hoyt Dec 2012 #36

Nothing I said was illegal in the least nor irresponsible ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #42

That the problem with a lot of gun folks -- Things can be legal, but immoral. Hoyt Dec 2012 #52

Nothing there is immoral either ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #64

No. I think most people realize guns contributed greatly to this tragedy. Hoyt Dec 2012 #73

The clear implication of your words quakerboy Dec 2012 #97

I and others have pointed out the fallacy of collection squads ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #98

You're just one of tens of millions. nt rDigital Dec 2012 #30

Guns no one knows about is not even the beginnnig of the problem. Lurker Deluxe Dec 2012 #40

Good barrels require specialized tooling to do the rifling ProgressiveProfessor Dec 2012 #44

Then you're part of the problem. baldguy Dec 2012 #46

How? Throd Dec 2012 #84

So you are saying "self defense in my home" would not be a valid reason? Or target shooting? Logical Dec 2012 #37

I have not considered all details quinnox Dec 2012 #38

I think your collection of the current 300 million guns might be harder than you think..... Logical Dec 2012 #47

It would be a tax break for any returned weapons, not cold hard cash quinnox Dec 2012 #55

No way they could take guns and not compensate the owner for fair market value. Logical Dec 2012 #72

Its even worse than that. Travis_0004 Dec 2012 #91

People are not being realistic at this point. How has removing all illegal drugs worked? Logical Dec 2012 #92

Do you really want cops to be the only ones with guns? musical_soul Dec 2012 #54

me either-- take them away from cops, too.... mike_c Dec 2012 #78

So.... musical_soul Dec 2012 #82

with a trudgeon or other non-lethal means.... mike_c Dec 2012 #93

We have a couple rifles which we need when predators are going after our hens. peacebird Dec 2012 #57

that situation would fall under an acceptable gun license quinnox Dec 2012 #59

Because we don't have enough people in prison bluestateguy Dec 2012 #69

Banning drugs has worked out really well Recursion Dec 2012 #79

+1 Carnage251 Dec 2012 #102

I strongly dislike guns, but even more so, the idea that the populace would be unarmed and not the Fire Walk With Me Dec 2012 #94

All I tend to hear is we want to turn the screws to a level that won't be tolerated TheKentuckian Dec 2012 #105

It can't be done Carnage251 Dec 2012 #104

until the 2nd amendment goes away it cant be done rdking647 Dec 2012 #113

More pragmatic idea: let people keep them Nevernose Dec 2012 #115