Why the Second Amendment needs to be amended or abolished

I don't believe you've ever said a word about guns you're talking about some sort of missile launcher

 

Thought you might like a pic I took Thursday at a local gun store. No Stingers though, sold out.

 

.

 

Nice. What is circled in red? Click to expand.

 

Dragon on the left. Not sure what's in the corner.

 

What would you need to do to buy the dragon?

 

It's likely to be a disabled launcher, however in it's current environment it could be an FEL item. In that case you would need to submit an application to the ATF to become a Federal Explosives Licensee. Apply here:

https://www.atf.gov/explosives/apply-license

As for cost, I am unsure. I didn't inquire.

On second thought, I'm not certain that a FEL permit would cover guided missiles, but hey it couldn't hurt to hold several applicable permits if you dive into the world of explosives.

 

You miss the whole problem. The problem isn't firearms. It's government funding and subsidizing of unmarried Mothers, whose offspring grow up without Fathers/Husbands to guide them. That's where the overabundance of predators are originating. It is a poisoned well. As for firearms and the second amendment, we are already flush with regulations. About which, many would argue and rightfully so, that for a free people, we are over regulated. It all goes back to the welfare scam and the unholy alliance between the Democrat party and black Americans. That's ground zero.

 

You're desperate for anyone or anything to blame but the plague of weapons of war. Our plague is also Mexico's plague, incidentally, as the cartels get loads of American guns in exchange for the drugs they traffic up here.

The typical mass shooter comes from a normal family, not from a single-parent home, and is not a shooter for such reasons. The basic problem is treating gun ownership as a right when it is impossible to block every mentally or emotionally unfit person from getting one, and also very hard to keep those who already aren't supposed to have them from getting them anyway because they can go through intermediaries or buy them in some under-the-table sort of way.

The situation is basically out of control and the constant gun violence we see here and in our southern neighbor is a result of that. State and national government is handicapped by the Second Amendment from enacting and enforcing sufficient gun control laws to make a difference.

 

The automatic weapons and explosive arms don't come from sellers in the US. They're sourced locally from the Mexican Army or from neighboring states.

I'd love to see your data source for this claim.

Regardless of problems, gun ownership is still a right.

Then all you need to do is repeal the Second. Find a recent red/blue map of the states. Start counting red states. Stop when you get to 13.

Then go confiscated a few hundred million firearms.

 

I agree that what is needed is to repeal the Second Amendment, since it is being so badly misinterpreted. If it were interpreted more appropriately -- specifically, if the "well-regulated militia" part of it were given its due or if it weren't interpreted to refer to modern weapons of war that are FAR deadlier than the muskets that were state of the art when it was originally written -- then that probably would not be necessary.

 

I'm not desperate about anything. You simply don't know what you are talking about. Not only do seventy five percent of mass shooters come from broken homes, but all other shootings outnumber mass shootings by hundreds of times in numbers of victims. It seems that you are the one desperate to find a solution elsewhere than the truth so as to bury the responsibility. There is no easy way out, dude. I've already identified the problem for you in my previous post.

 

Are you presuming that the Founders didn't believe in an individual right?

The militia is well-regulated in accordance with the powers granted the federal government in the Constitution.

The vast majority of homicides and suicides are committed with handguns. The Second doesn't refer to any type of weapon - it refers to a restriction on the federal government. Does the 1st and 4th not protect your PC and cell phone?

 

Seriously? A free press back then was a hand cranked printing press. And speech was mouth to ear, or on hand printed letter carried on horseback. Besides, you can't have a militia without an armed populace. That's probably why they said "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

 

Again, you want the problem to be anything but gun freedumb. Even accepting your claims for the sake of argument, there is no fixing millions of broken homes, and you are failing to address the issue of mental and emotional problems which cannot be detected and screened out, as well as the issue of legally disqualified people (e.g., felons) from getting firearms unscrupulously. On top of this, no matter how the percentages break down, a great many mass shooters have issues that have little if anything to do with parenting. I don't want sociopaths or the mentally ill to have access to firearms, but for the most part it's their "right" to have them if they haven't done anything serious enough to be disqualified. I don't want gangs to have access to firearms, but they can always get them through straw buyers, or simply by stealing them from legal gun owners or even gun stores: America's 1st Freedom | How Gangs Get Guns (americas1stfreedom.org)

 

What militia? We have a professional military today that is not the kind of militia that existed then. I have no problem with our military having firearms.

I understand your point in the second paragraph and it is a good argument, but in practical terms it means that a lot of very deadly weapons are easily accessible to all, leading to a lot of gun violence, and therefore to a situation that I think is unreasonable and unacceptable.

 

“Well-regulated” modifies “militia”. The Constitution grants powers to government. The Bill of Rights restricts the powers of government.
The Constitution granted Congress the power to organize, arm and discipline the militia in Article 1, Section 8, Clause 16. Congress, using this authority, has passed five Militia Acts since ratification of the Bill of Rights to regulate the militia. Current law on militia regulation is 10 USC 246.
U.S. Code § 246.Militia: composition and classes
(a)The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b)The classes of the militia are—
(1)the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2)the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

How many guns do you wish to confiscate?

 

God forbid you be shot rather than stomped to death by a gaggle of cretins. Are you aware that you are twelve times as likely to be either stabbed or beaten to death, than killed by someone with an assault type weapon? That is right now in these times you say are made so dangerous by the right to keep and bear firearms.

 

Straw purchases and theft are already against the law.

 

Like many people who have served in the US Military, I took an oath to preserve and protect the Constitution against all enemies of the Constitution, foreign and domestic.
Since I do not recall an expiration date on that oath, I am obligated to regard America's gaggle of desperate gun banners with their hare brained gun ban schemes as traitorous, domestic enemies of the Constitution.

I am not, however, obligated to be vulgar and insulting and much prefer an amicable exchange of opinions so I can only say that repealing the 2nd Amendment will do nothing to reduce our homicide rate and may even cause it to go higher as determined killers will always find a way to kill.

An example of the inability of an individual to get a gun resulting in more deaths is the "Happy Land Fire"(1) in which 86 innocent people were murdered because a determined killer couldn't get a gun to kill only one person.

I believe that it is noteworthy that one dollar's worth of gasoline killed far more people than any single mass shooting with any type of modern firearm including "assault weapons"

Briefly put, any determined mass killer who for some reason cannot find a gun will simply resort to much deadlier yet easy to make WMDs so fewer guns will either change nothing or will result in more deaths.

Please leave our excellent Constitution alone as once you eviscerate one Amendment you open the door to eviscerating others.

Thanks,




(1) "Happy Land fire"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Happy_Land_fire

EXCERPT "González went to an Amoco gas station, then returned to the establishment with a plastic container with $1 worth of gasoline.[2][4] He spread the fuel at the base of a staircase, the only access into the club, and then ignited the gasoline.[5]

Eighty-seven people died in the resulting fire."CONTINUED

 

That has been well demonstrated here and elsewhere.

 

100%.

 

When the 2A was written, the militia was using the most modern weapon available. Privateers owned cannons. The founders had seen the technology of weapons evolve over their life times.

Are we really niavè enough to believe that the ingenious men steeped in philoshies of the time that wrote documents such as the DOI, The Constitution and the Bill of Rights (that is acknowledged, btw, as a mandate limiting government actions against citizens) couldn't foresee further advancement of weaponry? My god they weren't idiots, far more intelligent than any person in this thread.

 

To damn bad.

 

I disagree.


And the cartel probably get their automatic firearms the same place they get their RPG's. Not from America.