Gun Control

[trdsf]

"A total gun ban is not Constitutionally possible anyway.  It would require amendment, and is simply not even a remotely plausible goal on any time frame less than many, many decades -- and isn't really plausible even then."

That's giving up to me.

Well, you're free to misinterpret me if you like.  I've made where I stand clear, I think.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

Well, you're free to misinterpret me if you like.  I've made where I stand clear, I think.

Fine, and I'll go with the impression I got from your post.

[Baruch]

"A total gun ban is not Constitutionally possible anyway.  It would require amendment, and is simply not even a remotely plausible goal on any time frame less than many, many decades -- and isn't really plausible even then."

That's giving up to me. First off, as I noted, we don't need an amendment to change the amendment, as SCOTUS has proven. Second, the harder we try the sooner we're going to get this under control. I don't want a total ban either, but as long as the gun nuts are entrenched it may be the only option.

You could try locking up anyone with an IQ less than 100.

[Baruch]

"Well-regulated" just meant they were thoroughly drilled in the "regulations" (i.e., requirements) for the job. The King's Regulations governed the British Army and we just "borrowed" them for our guys.

Probably goes back further, to the Medieval English requirement to practice every Sunday with the longbow.

[Baruch]

That WAS the original army and what the Founders thought was possible.  They had no more concept of our modern army that farmers then had of tractors.  The Founders lived in a time of citizen armies and we do not now.

Citizen armies in the US.  Not in the British military.  They weren't militia.  Originally there was a huge argument over the US Navy (1787) because it was a standing military by necessity, unless you wanted to stick to privateers with letters of marque.

[Cavebear]

Citizen armies in the US.  Not in the British military.  They weren't militia.  Originally there was a huge argument over the US Navy (1787) because it was a standing military by necessity, unless you wanted to stick to privateers with letters of marque.

Just as a very tiny minor quibble...  We aren't discussing British law in this thread.   But it could lead to 1812.

"Put a feather in his cap and called it Yankee Doddle"...

[Gawdzilla Sama]

We did issue letters of marque during War of 1812.

[fencerider]

O.P. It probably is time to make some changes, but there are no changes that can be made without an ammendment to the Constitution. and I mean the Constitution, not the Bill of Rights.

You need to read federalist editorials #40-#45 and then read the defense structure of the U.S. in the Constitution. The founders were adamantly opposed to the U.S. having a standing army. The only reason it isn’t specifically madated in the Constitution is because they couldn’t figure out how to to it. They decided on the side of caution to put it in the hands of Congress. Not more than every two years Congress is supposed to evaluate the threat to the U.S.. If it appears to be a time of peace Congress is supposed to disband the army (not the navy). And the defense of the U.S. falls onto the citizen soldiers; of which we all are( except for those enlisted as citizen soldiers of the several states- a double layer of protection) If called into service citizen soldiers are required to show up with a weapon capable of fighting alongside army regulars. Or in the case of a military coup we are all supposed to defend the government from the army.

Maybe this sounds outdated but I havent seen any ammendments to the Constitution to change this... by default (no ammendment) this is still the current state of the law.

I dont really know where I am on this issue. But hell we built this gvament, I think we could take it down. Maybe that’s why they keep doping us with fluoride in the water and chemical fantasia in our food.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

"Maybe that’s why they keep doping us with fluoride in the water and chemical fantasia in our food."

:giggle:

[Baruch]

"Maybe that’s why they keep doping us with fluoride in the water and chemical fantasia in our food."

:giggle:

Unfortunately for diabetics and others, our chemical imbalance makes even good food and drink, poison.  And putting corn syrup in everything, is part of the diabetes epidemic.  But they didn't conspire to ruin our food, and Monsanto would never produce franken-seeds.  :giggle:

[Jannabear]

While I'm not completely against gun control, gun control isn't going to fix the problems we have, proper mental healthcare, addressing poverty, and ending the war on drugs which creates black markets where quite a lot of the violence comes from is what needs to be done.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

While I'm not completely against gun control, gun control isn't going to fix the problems we have, proper mental healthcare, addressing poverty, and ending the war on drugs which creates black markets where quite a lot of the violence comes from is what needs to be done.

Meanwhile we have less than a million people owning 123,000,000 guns. That's something that needs to be addressed right now.

[Shiranu]

While I'm not completely against gun control, gun control isn't going to fix the problems we have, proper mental healthcare, addressing poverty, and ending the war on drugs which creates black markets where quite a lot of the violence comes from is what needs to be done.

[Hydra009]

While I'm not completely against gun control, gun control isn't going to fix the problems we have, proper mental healthcare, addressing poverty, and ending the war on drugs which creates black markets where quite a lot of the violence comes from is what needs to be done.

I completely agree.  But eliminating poverty is a pretty lengthy, daunting task.  Doing something to staunch the tide of violence first seems like a prudent first step.

[Hydra009]

Why gun control will fail in the foreseeable future in two graphs:



Source:  http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2017/06/22/key-takeaways-on-americans-views-of-guns-and-gun-ownership/



Source: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-41488081