WTF Is Wrong With America And Gun Control?

[florduh]

The smoothbore musket fired approximately 80 caliber ball ammo accurate to about 100 yards. The rifle musket fired approximately 50 Calibre ball ammo accurate up to about 400 yards. The AR-15 fires significant smaller rounds than either -- the 223 is just north of 22 Calibre -- accurate to about 600 yards.

We're talking centuries, that's incremental not evolutionary progress.

The founders of course fully anticipated the internet, otherwise sensible regulation to protect the public from dangerous information would limit the first amendment to hand cranked printing presses and speaking with feet firmly planted on an 18th century soapbox.

That's a tall claim. That the Founders anticipated modern weaponry. Even in 2018, we have no clue what weaponry will look like in 300 years. I think that's a stretch.

But you bring up the First Amendment. We do limit your First Amendment rights if what you are saying causes immediate danger to others. There's no reason we can't limit the Second Amendment to create something closer to a well regulated militia.

 

[analytika]

That's a tall claim. That the Founders anticipated modern weaponry.

Yeah, I mean, what evidence do we have that they were forward thinkers who incorporated lasting, adaptive, flexible ideas into their design?

The Constitution is a natural rights document. It did not seek to grant rights, but simply to recognize the inalienable rights of free men. The 2nd Amendment didn't create a right to keep and bear arms, that right is inherent and inalienable. The bill of rights is a partial enumeration of rights, which the Founders explicitly said they included with no intention to disparage or diminish other rights retained by the people.

Technological progress in rifles and handguns -- which again has been incremental not revolutionary -- cannot alienate that which is inalienable.

The idea that the government has the power, let alone the responsibility, to decide who should be armed, with what weapon, in what situations, is utterly abhorrent to the philosophy of the Founders. It's a perversion of the American experiment, badly polluted by positive rights thinking and the rise of far left radicalism. The modern left finds an armed populace threatening to its conception of governmental supremacy, and its "enlightened" plans for the people and the economy.

 

[florduh]

Yeah, I mean, what evidence do we have that they were forward thinkers who incorporated lasting, adaptive, flexible ideas into their design?

No. What evidence do you have that the Founders conceived of automatic weapons or Hondas. That's the tall claim I find dubious.

The 2nd Amendment didn't create a right to keep and bear arms, that right is inherent and inalienable.

It is? A mentally ill sociopath has the inherent right to own semi automatic rifles? How about a wife beater? Or let's take a healthy, sane person. Do they have an inherent and inalienable right to park at Tank or F-15 in their driveway? After all they will need such weapons to provide an effective check against a well armed tyrannical government. Of course, the Founders couldn't imagine a world with heavier-than-air flight.

The idea that the government has the power, let alone the responsibility, to decide who should be armed, with what weapon, in what situations, is utterly abhorrent to the philosophy of the Founders.

We literally do that now, and it isn't abhorrent. It's perfectly rational. Like I said, you can't buy an F-15. You can't strap a fully automatic machine gun to your back and go to Wal-Mart.

The modern left finds an armed populace threatening to its conception of governmental supremacy, and its "enlightened" plans for the people and the economy.

That whole statement sounds nuts to me, sorry to say. First of all, no one wants to "disarm the populace". This is a nonsense NRA talking point. The most evil Dem politician only supports SOME increased gun control, not disbanding the Second Amendment. The absolute worst I've heard from ""leftist" politicians is a semi-auto ban. Not a ban on all handguns, rifles, shotguns.

And what are you talking about with "threatening government supremacy"? No one backs gun-control measures to "ensure governmental superiority". They back them because they are tired of seeing a dozen plus school children ended in a few minutes, several times per year. They find the fact that America is the only civilized nation that deals with this... embarrassing.

And I hate to break it to you... even if we provide easy access to Semi-autos... the Government is Already Superior! As I said, they've already decided you can't own the weaponry that would provide an effective check on their power.

We've already decided to limit what arms the populace can carry. Now we're just arguing over degrees.

 

[pakalolo]