The Real 2nd Amendment Isn't The NRA Version

Started Dec 17, 2012 | Discussions thread
Don_Campbell
Contributing MemberPosts: 917
Like?
Re: You don't know what you're talking about
In reply to Lee Jay, Dec 18, 2012

ljfinger wrote:

Don_Campbell wrote:

ljfinger wrote:

Don_Campbell wrote:

Where do you see the reasonable limits?

Due process of law. Mental illness. Behavior that suggests a possible issue.

I meant limits to weapons available to the public to satisfy their urge to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights.

How do you see those limits interfacing with the rights of gun owners who say that their questioned gun is entertaining to them?

I'd allow people to buy darned near any weapon, but as they got farther from "muzzle loader" and closer to "weapon of mass destruction", I'd increase the difficulty, the waiting period, the expense, and the scrutiny. But if people want a Barrett or a mini-gun, and they can prove they can be responsible about it, I'd let them have it.

Why not fragmentation hand grenades? I'm sure they'd be fun under some scenarios. How about rocket propelled grenades? Lotta thrills there. The problem I see is that they're "responsible" until suddenly for whatever reason they aren't. I basically disagree I guess. I think that there are levels of firepower that go beyond common requirements for hunting and shouldn't be freely available.

From my perspective, maybe a couple of decades longer than yours, I don't believe in the sufficient predictability of human behavior to trust the average person who can pass a background check with a gun that can fire 100 bullets in a matter of seconds.

As I said above, increase the difficulty. For full-auto, perhaps you have to have yearly tests and agree to some sort of monitoring or something. People can already get explosives licenses (I think you need one for professional fireworks, for example). I wonder how those are managed.

Maybe most are trustworthy with that firepower but some will not be and there isn't enough benefit to the first to risk the firepower in the hands of the others. How many kids' lives are worth the fun of shredding a target in a firing range or a tree stump?

You want to see a picture of happiness? Watch this at 1:29:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-KmAOtkKf00

I saw the clip. Happiness wasn't what came to my mind in seeing it.

I wasn't talking about your happiness, I was talking about Kari's happiness. She's a mom and a vegetarian, and she still had a look of happiness on her face.

-- hide signature --

Lee Jay
(see profile for equipment)

I wasn't talking about myself either. However, whether it was happiness or satisfaction or determination, I don't think it is a good argument for allowing ordinary citizens to own equipment capable of such destruction. I don't think that your idea of managing it through testing and monitoring would adequately prevent unregistered people from getting around that management and stealing the legally registered weapon from the well-tested person. It might prevent some but we basically disagree about the utility of having these weapons be legal. Nevertheless, I appreciate you expanding your thoughts on the issue.

Don

Reply   Reply with quote   Complain
Post (hide subjects)Posted by
Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark post MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow