Discussion in 'United States' started by kungfuliberal, Aug 3, 2019.
Not all change is for the worse. I don't fear change, & I never want to start.
The Constitution changes along with all sides of an issue, not just liberals--though liberals are by nature, more tuned in to change as a positive force.
Why is the 2A needed more today than in 1791?
There are more rights to be concerned with than just gun rights or 2A rights. I find those other rights more important.
Why is the conservative focus always on "fighting" everyone instead of working with them? We have far more common ground than differences. Why always focus on the differences? That's crazy.
There are more threats today than there was in 1791.
There is nothing more important than our 2A rights.
Trump swore an oath to "preserve, protect & defend" the Constitution of the U.S. When he takes actions contrary to that oath, I become concerned, & he's done a lot of that since becoming President.
1. Trump has ignored the Emoluments Clause in the Constitution, which forbids any President from taking money or gifts from anyone in a foreign country. Trump has been receiving money from visiting dignitaries from many other countries, who are staying in Trump hotels during their visits. Under Trump, for the first time ever, our military has been refueling its planes on duty in Europe, at airports located adjacent to Trump resorts, & appear to be doing that as part of a White House plan to save those resorts from insolvency. Our military has been paying higher prices for that fuel than they normally would at the regular military locales. Trump is constantly making political decisions that affect the nation, based on how that decision will affect him or his businesses personally, rather than how it will impact the nation or its people. I find these behaviors contrary to his oath of office.
2. Presidents before Trump have mostly been careful to protect & preserve the functional independence of the Dept of Justice (DOJ), as a way to insure that no one--not even a President--is seen to be above the law. Trump has completely disregarded that policy & striven constantly toward making the DOJ subservient to himself. His harassment of Mueller & important witnesses during the Mueller investigation, was reminiscent of behaviors & actions taken by Nixon before his ouster. Trump's continuing refusal to cooperate with Congressional subpoenas is another obstructionist action that appears to counter his oath of office. The Constitution mandates that Congress has the responsibility to investigate any President who appears to have conflicts with the law or the Constitution. No President has the right to obstruct those Congressional investigations or interfere with its witnesses. Those are grounds for legal action against most people, or impeachment against the President.
3. Trump has publicly discussed information regarded by his own government as secret or worse. The law gives the President the power to disclose secret info, but having the right to do something doesn't always translate to being right in doing it. Trump made a big issue over Hillary's failure to be sensitive in her use of emails on her computer, but the lack of foresight or thought by Trump in these sensitive discussions &/or public pronouncements, go far beyond what Hillary did in respect to threatening national security. Trump is such an arrogant egotist, any concerns he might have regarding his oath of office, appear to get lost in his eagerness toward self-promotion.
4. Trump's latest outburst, over the sharpie marks on the hurricane map indicating a path toward & threatening Alabama, is just one more example of narcissistic insanity over good judgement. Now high ranking officials at NOAA are having their jobs & careers threatened by Trump's Commerce Secretary, for publicly disagreeing with Trump. But Trump's commentary on the hurricane threatening Alabama was not only false, but would have created havoc & cost millions in unnecessary expenses, if pursued. The NOAA officials were absolutely right in publicly denying Trump's tweet. Trump was risking mass havoc & a great public expense--possibly even life threatening public responses over a report based on false information. That's a level of Presidential irresponsibility I've never seen before, even in the worst Presidents. It offers support to the theory that Trump is incompetent & inept in his job. It also illustrates Trump's personal propensity toward self protection above national interests--something no President should ever display.
Those victimized by the Pulse Nightclub shooter had no way of knowing his gun jammed. It was dark inside the nightclub, & they probably thought he was just pausing while looking for more victims. Your post seems to imply they were cowardly or just stupid, but it's difficult to imagine being in that situation for real or know how it would affect your or my thinking while it was ongoing. Hindsight is always easier & better than the real thing.
Based on your posts, you seem to exist in a world filled with confrontation & conflict, & it seems to have a constant presence either in your physical life or at least in your head. My life isn't like that. Nor do I want it to be. I wouldn't wish such an existence on anyone. While I can understand how such a challenging existence could convince anyone guns were an important element of anyone's life, I know not everyone's life exposes them to such challenges as you describe. My own case being a good example.
The scenario you describe certainly posses a possibility of happening. I would suspect there would be a percentage of gun owners who wouldn't comply with any laws requiring them to turn in automatic weapons or assault weapons, if that law were passed. Rather than sending in squads of police or soldiers to force their compliance, I'd suggest leaving it alone until a crime was committed with such weapons & then holding the owner at least partially responsible--even if the weapon was stolen before the crime was committed. The gun owner's failure to comply with the law would make him or her partially responsible for the crime being possible. So, they should pay in some way for their non-compliance.
If every member of humanity fit the description you offer, then I'd agree with your conclusions. But there is a sizable minority of humanity that totally disagrees with its propensity for self-destruction. The problem may lie in the fact that the portion you describe is in the majority, & practice control over the rest of us with their insanity. Perhaps an answer would be to empower the minority who don't believe in the power of brute force, or coercion, or authoritarianism, or conflict itself for that matter. The world would be a far better place for all of us, if those who love peace were empowered.
The Constitution changes IF 3/4ths of the the State Legislatures ratify the change.
Perhaps there are more perceived threats today due to the fact that there are more people with guns walking around loose.
On the Bill of Rights, I'd rank the 2nd Amendment somewhere between 5th & 10th.
Which explains why Constitutional changes are so rare.
More fake news.
That is factual incorrect. Per capita, there are less people walking around with guns today than in 1791.
The 2A is ranked #1. Without it, the people have no way of defending the other rights.
Name one thing we share an opinion on.
The same way ones feels safe in the same society, where the same individuals lacking personal self control, have access to motor vehicles, knives, and other potential weapons of opportunity. If an individual cannot control themselves appropriately enough to avoid using a firearm to harm others, what is serving to prevent them from using a motor vehicle to do the same thing?
Only if they are equally uncomfortable with motor vehicle ownership and use being so widespread, as the number of motor vehicle-related deaths in the united states are quite widespread, and equal or greater to the number of firearm-related deaths.
Because the society of the united states is far more violent than it was at the founding. Warring native american tribes have been replaced with violent gang organizations, both foreign and domestic in origin, and the united states government is demonstrating greater and greater levels of contempt for the rights and freedoms held by the public.
Pray tell, exactly why would it be believed the second amendment would not be needed in the modern era? Exactly what has changed for the better since the inception of the united states?
Which constitutional rights are being referred to on the part of yourself that are in need of being concerned with? Name them, any of them, and examples will be found to show the liberal side of the political divide in the united states holds disdain for them as well.
One cannot work with a group that sees them as being the enemy that needs to be punished for one thing or another.
Because the human species ultimately thrives on differences that allow for the separation and division of one another, particularly in matters of conflict and violence. If matters of race and religion did not exist to fuel wars, matters of height and eye color would ultimately be deemed sufficient for such.
He was on his phone at the time, looking up a video on youtube of how to clear the malfunction for an extended period of time.
One of the most common arguments presented for restricting the capacity of detachable box magazines, is that the more a shooter is forced to pause and change magazines, the more individuals will be able to escape in between the periods of shooting. This incident demonstrates that such an argument is factually incorrect. As such the argument is now invalid.
Separate names with a comma.