The Second Amendment

[barbara]

http://m.washingtonpost.com/opinions...245_story.html

Its about time we get this right.

[Ike Bana]

I would feel much more comfortable with two more justices on the SCOTUS before Obama leaves office...just in case something goes radically wrong in the 2016 presidential election.

Specifically regarding the 2nd Amendment and the right...it is the most blatant of their hypocrisies. They insist the 2nd Amendment is to protect us from the government, not each other at the same time they insist that we have the right to firearms to defend ourselves from each other.

[Bigerik]

And it will never happen.

[icenine]

Good article Barbara.

It is basically selfishness on the part of Americans. I want to have an AR-15 for whatever reason. The fact that others who own them may end up killing first graders is no concern to me, since it was not my kid who was killed.

That is why we cannot get rid of assault weapons.

My real fear is that there will be an assault like the one that took place in Russia back in 2004, where hundreds of kids were killed. A massacre so bad but at the same time after it is over no one does anything. And then massacres or less than a hundred of so people becomes mundane. I can see it happening here already, as Sandy Hook is showing us.

All in the name of this false perception that I have an unequivocal right to own a weapon that should only be used by trained military/law enforcement members.

[Ike Bana]

Originally Posted by icenine

Good article Barbara.

It is basically selfishness on the part of Americans. I want to have an AR-15 for whatever reason. The fact that others who own them may end up killing first graders is no concern to me, since it was not my kid who was killed.

That is why we cannot get rid of assault weapons.

My real fear is that there will be an assault like the one that took place in Russia back in 2004, where hundreds of kids were killed. A massacre so bad but at the same time after it is over no one does anything. And then massacres or less than a hundred of so people becomes mundane. I can see it happening here already, as Sandy Hook is showing us.

All in the name of this false perception that I have an unequivocal right to own a weapon that should only be used by trained military/law enforcement members.

If I might extend this to another issue...the reason why we are still the world's foremost center of democratized gun carnage, and the only western 1st world country without a decent health care system is because of self-absorbed Americans.

[Pio1980]

We have some of the best-armed nut jobs anywhere, a costly for-profit justice system to deal with them, and a costly for-profit health care system that primarily serves stockholders bottom-to-top to deal with their victims. Being a victim can bankrupt a person for life on top of the rest of the trauma, assuming they survive the attack and the process.
Not my definition of a socially advanced 1st-world nation.

[Pio1980]

Originally Posted by barbara

http://m.washingtonpost.com/opinions...245_story.html

Its about time we get this right.

The NRA would never permit opening a revue of the 2nd amendment for any reason, the wing-nuts that control them wouldn't allow it. There's a fair chance that if it happened it might be seen that conditions have changed since the frontier began somewhere in central Pennsylvania and the 2nd could be changed to something with more clearly defined language and goals re liberty rights and domestic/personal defense vs private arsenals comprised of racks of tactical weaponry and ammunition bunkers. A common-sense regularly scheduled revue of mental/emotional suitability to possess any weaponry would be anathema to them.

[icenine]

Originally Posted by Pio1980

We have some of the best-armed nut jobs anywhere, a costly for-profit justice system to deal with them, and a costly for-profit health care system that primarily serves stockholders bottom-to-top. Being a victim can bankrupt a person for life on top of the rest of the trauma, assuming they survive the attack and the process.
Not my definition of a socially advanced 1st-world nation.

I think your point is valid. Perhaps people want assault weapons because of the perception their government lets them down and does not take care of them. Thus owning an assault rifle gives them power. I can almost bet that cradle to death single payer health care nations have very low deaths from guns. That massacre in Norway is an everyday occurrence here if you add up the deaths from all 50 states. Potter Stewart said 88 a day in his article.

[4-2-7]

This is why it's in place for more than 200 years.

The first 10 amendments to the Constitution placed limits on the powers of the new federal government. Concern that a national standing army might pose a threat to the security of the separate states led to the adoption of the Second Amendment, which provides that “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.”
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinio...245_story.html

If you haven't noticed the threat yet your head is in the sand.

[Pio1980]

The bit about a "Well-regulated Militia" and infringement is where the problem lies. The Militia thing seems pretty meaningless in this era and accepted "infringements" already exists in the form of regulation and prohibition of certain classes and types of weaponry.

Militias;
There have been grand-standing attempts to use State National Guard and Reserve troops to enact nullification and support cherry-picking of other portions of the BOR specific to racial discrimination that went nowhere.

Re "infringement";
We don't get full-auto weaponry or silencers without a special permit. The Koch Bros. don't get their own nuke-tipped ICBMs F.I. regardless of how deep their pockets are. OTOH The Supremes may have made it possible for them to buy the outfit that has and controls them and rapid-fire large bore artillery and such along with the support personnel, but that's another issue.