chbare Posted February 21, 2013 Posted February 21, 2013 With all of the SCOTUS rulings that have occurred, there is no doubt that the second amendment applies to firearms. However, the big question is what types firearms does this cover? We basically have two groups with very different interpretations with the folks pretty much spread out between the two stances.
Secouriste Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 A well-done clip: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xz3fbq_petition-pour-renforcer-la-loi-sur-les-armes-a-feu_news
chbare Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 However, our gun laws have been in a state of flux over the years, particularly at the state level. In that, I mean, they have been changing. I have a suspicion this video really wants to say, "we need to change the constitution because the second amendment was created during a different time when we had different weapons." It's unfortunate that the people who made this video perhaps did not clarify or were too wimpy to actually come out and say it because clearly, gun laws have changed since the foundation of our country. (Maybe my suspicion is wrong?) Also, the video doesn't say anything about what changes should occur or what solutions could be implemented.
ERDoc Posted April 18, 2013 Author Posted April 18, 2013 Despite all of the talk and attempts at bringing change, I personally don't think anything will change. We have been such a gun obsessed country for so long that there are so many guns out there that you really can't do anything about it. We can ban things such as assault weapons (feel free to pick your definition) now but it will be decades (a century?) until it will have any affect as the guns that are already out there will stay out there. It is only when they start breaking down that any change will happen as there will no longer be a supply to replace them. I feel that we are spending a lot of time on an exercise in futility.
island emt Posted April 18, 2013 Posted April 18, 2013 Can anyone explain the republican stand against background checks and restricting gun show sales & internet sales, without doing them? It would seem to me that responsible gun owners would want to make sure that the flow of weapons is directed to those that can legally possess them, and keep them out of the hands of those that shouldn't
ERDoc Posted April 18, 2013 Author Posted April 18, 2013 Island, I think this sums it up pretty well. Just like the Dems will never be in favor of true tort reform as the trial lawyers make huge contributions to their campaigns. 2
mikeymedic1984 Posted April 23, 2013 Posted April 23, 2013 Sorry, too much to read, but here is two cents worth on all of these "issues". As I explained to my daughter, in the 70's you could smoke cigarettes everywhere (airplanes, McDonalds, every public indoor place). People have fought to ban smoking, which will never happen, but after all of their efforts, you can now eat in McDonalds anywhere without getting second hand smoke. Mothers against drunk driving have not stopped drinking and driving, but there is a big difference between now and the 70's-80s, when at worst, the cops would drive you home. There is never going to be a ban on all of the weapons, but maybe one day we can find the happen medium.
Just Plain Ruff Posted April 24, 2013 Posted April 24, 2013 Mikey, I don't think there will be a happy medium. The best compromise yet to this debate according to Obama was just defeated in the Senate last week and Obama was really pissed and he didn't care who he let see his anger. He blamed the NRA for lying to the public. But you know what, had the amendments have passed, he would have been strutting around like a turkey who survived thanksgiving. There is no happy medium in this issue, There are people who only want their issues to win in the end and they won't see that there is a common ground that can be met. I'm not smart enough to know what that common ground is at least not this morning I'm not but there is common ground but with this current group of legislators that we have representing us, I fear that they can't get us there.
emtdennis Posted April 24, 2013 Posted April 24, 2013 (edited) You know Capt, you are right. there will be no happy medium. Sorry to say that. People think guns should be registered. Why? Any rule that is applied will be to the law abiding citizens and no one else. You can have all the rules you want, but nothing will change. Look at several of the last incidents we have had in this country. The weapons were legally registered, maybe not to the person who used them in the crime but they were registered. No form of government intervention will change the ultimate use of the weapon. You still will have underground or criminal element, that regardless of rules in place will have no regard for safety. Let's outlaw cars, because there are so may accidents. Why don't we outlaw liquor because of the many people killed on the highways. This arguement has been going on for over 50 years, and I for one am afraid to put any more control of what I can do, into the hands of the government. JMHO! Edited April 24, 2013 by emtdennis
Just Plain Ruff Posted April 24, 2013 Posted April 24, 2013 I think that if we really want to look at a model of gun control and where we really don't want it to go is to look no farther than Chicago. Toughest gun control in the US (from what I've heard) and it has one of the highest murder rates in the country. Please correct me if I'm wrong but I don't think I am.
Recommended Posts