a thoughtful web.
Good ideas and conversation. No ads, no tracking.   Login or Take a Tour!
comment by user-inactivated
user-inactivated  ·  3190 days ago  ·  link  ·    ·  parent  ·  post: Gun sales loopholes that should be closed

Well, to be honest tla, it's not just about the concern of the loss of guns. It's also a concern about what a lot of people view as a general erosion of personal rights. When you combine that with an inherent, culturally ingrained distrust of the government, things start to get real sticky real quick.





tla  ·  3190 days ago  ·  link  ·  

That's what you get when you make things a right not a responsibility.

user-inactivated  ·  3189 days ago  ·  link  ·  

It's okay to disagree about gun ownership, but that's actually kind of an unfair statement to make. As I was explaining to j4d3, here in The States law abiding gun owners have a ton of responsibilities because of both State and Federal regulations. We're not as willy nilly about guns as a lot of people, Americans included, think. When you couple that with the fact that there are a multitude of factors that preclude a person from being allowed to legally purchase a gun, it really isn't a black and white issue at all.

tla  ·  3189 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I mean the right to bear arms. Which is laid out with explicit mandate that it needs to be well regulated. One of these bits tends to be forgotten.

user-inactivated  ·  3189 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Well, the 2nd Amendment reads as . . .

    A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

So the "well regulated" part isn't about regulating the right to bear arms, but maintaining a strong militia. Where people get upset about gun regulation is the part that says "the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." Many people see any laws that dictate what we can and can't do with firearms as exactly that, infringing. The whole issue is very difficult as you can no doubt guess. The brevity of the amendment has left it up for a hot, contentious debate for pretty much the whole history of the nation. Wikipedia actually has a great breakdown on the issue.

tla  ·  3189 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Well, a well regulated militia doesn't go around shooting up schools or churches. While that keeps happening, one part of that bargain isn't being kept.

user-inactivated  ·  3189 days ago  ·  link  ·  

The concept of a militia is so archaic at this point that we don't even have well regulated militias anymore. We have a standing army. And a standing navy. A standing air force . . . the marines. Hell, we even have the Coast Guard, so isn't that like 2 navies?

At any point, unfortunately a lack of guns doesn't necessarily mean there won't be tragedies involving schools and other large public places. People who want to be brutally awful will find a way.

tla  ·  3189 days ago  ·  link  ·  

It won't eliminate people hurting each other. lt will make them less deadly. Guns make it so much easier.

user-inactivated  ·  3189 days ago  ·  link  ·  

War and I both discovered, in the last gun thread that j4d3 posted, that the potential effects of Gun legislation can be ambiguous at best. Australia seems to be a decent case study, though I have to admit that's the only one we really looked in depth into. I think maybe tomorrow, if I have some free time, I'll read up on how gun laws have affected various nations.

War  ·  3189 days ago  ·  link  ·  

If you do end up researching this in-depth and posting your findings to Hubski, throw me a shout-out I'd be very interested to read your analysis.

user-inactivated  ·  3189 days ago  ·  link  ·  

Sure thing. Though, I have to say, this kind of thing isn't my forte, so I might have people correcting me left and right or I'll end up making edits as I go along. Such is life.

War  ·  3189 days ago  ·  link  ·  

I think it will definitely be an interesting discussion to follow.