Jimmy Higgins
Contributor
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2001
- Messages
- 44,388
- Basic Beliefs
- Calvinistic Atheist
QFTAttacking the NRA about this is wrong--the NRA's lobbying budget is small. It's just they say what tens of millions of gun owners think.
QFTAttacking the NRA about this is wrong--the NRA's lobbying budget is small. It's just they say what tens of millions of gun owners think.
You know I grew up in Miami during the HEIGHT of the Cocaine Wars. We had shootouts constantly. We had race riots. We had massive immigration when Castro emptied his jails/mental hospitals. Guess what? I NEVER EVER ONCE FELT THREATENED IN SCHOOL. NEVER.I agree with David Leonhardt in today's New York Times, The Truth About the Florida School Shooting.
He says,
Here's the truth, the kids killed in Florida yesterday, had the misfortune of growing up - of trying to grow up - in a country that didn't care enough about their lives.
May we honor them with an anger that does not cease until the unnecessary deaths of children do.
https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/15/us/florida-shooting.htmlPARKLAND, Fla. — The leader of a white supremacist group said on Thursday that the suspected gunman in one of the deadliest school shootings in modern American history was a member of his group and had participated in paramilitary drills.
Jordan Jereb, the leader of a group called Republic of Florida, told The Associated Press that he didn’t know Nikolas Cruz personally and that “he acted on his own behalf of what he just did and he’s solely responsible for what he just did.”
solution to gun problem...
You can't take their guns... but you can change the penalty for the smallest gun-related violation of law to a life sentence... or death.
Keep your guns.... but a mistake will land you in jail for the rest of your life, if you're lucky enough to not get executed. Your choice. If you handle the gun carefully and safely enough, you PROBABLY will stay out of jail... if it's worth it, then fine.
another idea....
handguns and automatic rifles are not "firearms" (change the definition). Call them "explosive-based weapons", or some other thing.
They are no longer covered under the 2nd amendment. Anyone that wants a "firearm" may have one... but they will have to smelt their own musket balls and make their own black powder.
Attacking the NRA about this is wrong--the NRA's lobbying budget is small. It's just they say what tens of millions of gun owners think.
Won't work, the Supreme Court will say no. If people want to do something it's time to use the second means to create a Constitutional Amendment. Get the state legislatures to call a Constitutional convention. People should do what the Tea Party did, start an anti-gun party.
I don't think anything less than a change to the constitution will have any meaningful impact on the problem.
Won't work, the Supreme Court will say no. If people want to do something it's time to use the second means to create a Constitutional Amendment. Get the state legislatures to call a Constitutional convention. People should do what the Tea Party did, start an anti-gun party.
I don't think anything less than a change to the constitution will have any meaningful impact on the problem.
I don't think anything less than a change to the constitution will have any meaningful impact on the problem.
Do you think the пистолет lobby is going to allow that any time in the next hundred years?
The Constitution does not prohibit gun control laws or even limited types of gun ownership bans. The barriers are all political, not legal. Unfortunately, the court system is dominated by a pro-gun SCOTUS that will seek creatve ways to block some practical gun control measures. For example, they have now ruled that gun ownership is protected if the purpose is home defense, even though the purpose made explicit in constitutional language is militia duty.
And you aren't going to get a super-majority to change the constitution on guns,
I don't think anything less than a change to the constitution will have any meaningful impact on the problem.
Do you think the пистолет lobby is going to allow that any time in the next hundred years?
If enough people support the changes then it can be done. Start a political party for anti-guns. The Tea Party put a dent in the Republicans. The lobbying effort goes only as far as they are supported by the voting base.
If enough people support the changes then it can be done. Start a political party for anti-guns. The Tea Party put a dent in the Republicans. The lobbying effort goes only as far as they are supported by the voting base.
Since when did you become a starry-eyed idealist? Current public sentiment (as dubiously measured by people who do that) was reported this morning at 94-95% in favor of overhauling gun laws, and 4% against. But when it comes to November in even-numbered years, they send people to Washington who will never get it done. Why? Well, they voted for whoever they voted for because the gun lobby told them to, and/or very effectively vilified anyone who might have gotten it done,
Get money out of politics, get rid of Citizens United, and I believe it could be done.
The Constitution does not prohibit gun control laws or even limited types of gun ownership bans. The barriers are all political, not legal. Unfortunately, the court system is dominated by a pro-gun SCOTUS that will seek creatve ways to block some practical gun control measures. For example, they have now ruled that gun ownership is protected if the purpose is home defense, even though the purpose made explicit in constitutional language is militia duty.