Skip to main content

View Diary: The three schools of thought regarding guns on Daily Kos. (126 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  I don't support getting rid of all guns (6+ / 0-)

    But I don't think we can properly regulate firearms with the 2nd amendment in place. So I do favor repeal.

    We were not ahead of our time, we led the way to our time.

    by i understand on Sun Jan 20, 2013 at 12:58:32 PM PST

    •  Why do you believe that firearms cannot be (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Adam B, Sylv

      properly regulated?   Is it because of Heller?

      Keep in mind that Obama could change the makeup of SCOTUS if he gets to make 1 or 2 more appointments.

      Washington and Colorado said that you've got to legalize it. Hope the DOJ respects that.

      by pistolSO on Sun Jan 20, 2013 at 01:02:17 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Here's the problem (4+ / 0-)

        We can't point to Scalia's comments in Heller as some silver bullet (pun intended) that will make it "easier" to regulate guns, and for one reason: Scalia himself, who has had no problem doing a fast 180 on anything he has said or written previously and then simply saying, "That was then. This is now. I'm older and wiser, so suck on it, liberals!"

        It's why I was disheartened when reading that the only SCOTUS justices Obama might have a chance to replace is Ginsburg and (maybe) Kennedy. Nino could stay another 10 years, and I frankly don't see him going out any way but feet first, like William O. Douglas. ("I'll just listen to how the Chief votes, and then vote the other way.")

        "If you're going to go down with the ship, make it a submarine." - Wayne Shorter

        by Oliver Tiger on Sun Jan 20, 2013 at 01:27:30 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  @pistolSO: you misrepresented group #1 (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        a2nite, pistolSO

        I'm sure your intentions are good, but your description of those who favor repeal does not fit with my observations.

        I've written some of my thoughts about repealing the Second Amendment (2A), here: http://www.dailykos.com/...  This diary is also linked on most comments I've made since Sandy Hook. You might start with it, before making false generalizations about us. Many other members of (or contributors to) the DailyKos group RASA have offered their thoughts, here: http://www.dailykos.com/... (Click on "Published" to sort in reverse-chron, some of the oldest diaries have a broader focus on repeal of 2A. There are more than 300 diaries, from a wide variety of viewpoints.)
        Among the many great diaries, you might enjoy that of the 80 year-old, ex-Air Force pilot, entrepreneur/ manufacturer/ employer, Myles Spicer, and especially his moving comment, here: http://www.dailykos.com/...

        "At my age (80), I will never see the Second repealed, but we do things for generations behind us. I will always work to make America better in those things I personally value and espouse. This happens to be one."
        Many reasons have been offered for repealing 2A, not just that it is archaic and dangerous, but that it is ambiguous, unclear, foments unnecessary strife, dampens meaningful reforms, weakens the Constitution, distracts us from other pressing matters, etc. etc. etc.

        I would say "repealed or meaningfully amended" -- not severely amended. E.g., some have suggested simply adding four words at the end of 2a: "by the Federal government" -- thereby making gun-control a states-rights issue. Others favor complete repeal.

        I and others emphatically reject that notion that repeal is "so that most of the guns in this country can be made illegal"!!! This is nonsense!!! This is right-wing fear-mongering at its worst, its the line that the black-helicopter, tin-foil hat crowd tries to spread. Ditto with your line: "Generally, their goal is to completely rid America of guns and they want this to happen now or within the next decade" -- that's complete nonsense!! Sure, maybe some of our members feel this way, but certainly not most. (We have a big tent, including many members who own guns and intend to legally keep them, for safety, hunting, gun-clubs, socially, target-practice, collecting, inheritance, investment, etc.)

        decade (which would be the amount of time it would take to get a Constitutional Amendment done).
        My own guess, stated in my diary, is 20-30 years, assuming a ground-swell of support grows, but that's just a guess.
        Some even want to call an Article V Constitution Convention to circumvent Congress (an Article V Convention has never be called in the history of this country).
        "Some" -- that's a Fox News trick. On what basis do you write this? What % of those who favor repeal of 2A support this? As my own diary points out, a convention has never worked. That's an intra-group strategy question the answers to which would emerge over several years.
        Their models of gun laws are Japan and the UK.
        Again, says who? I vaguely recall mention of the UK and Japan, and there were a couple recent diaries describing life there, but even those two didn't suggest these laws are a model for the US. (E.g., most British police still don't carry guns, and I've not seen a single proposal of this for the US.) I've seen more discussion of Australia's laws as a possible model.

        In short, of your description, these parts seem to describe this group reasonably well (for a short paragraph on a complex issue):

        1. The 2nd Amendment Repealers.  Their philosophy is that the 2nd Amendment is...  
        so that the 2nd Amendment has be either completely repealed or amended...  
        Generally, their goal is to ...
        and they want this to happen...    
        Their models of gun laws are...
        We are a big tent and I'm reluctant to try and offer an alternative that speaks on behalf of others, without their input.

        (RASA peeps: will someone create a shared Google Doc for collaborative effort to write e.g. a 100-word mission-statement? E.g., as a start, perhaps: "The 2nd Amendment Repealers. Our philosophy is that the 2nd Amendment has be either completely repealed or amended in order to enact meaningful regulations on guns and gun-violence. Generally, our goal is to reduce gun-violence, and to permit meaningful regulations on guns, at the city, county, state, and/or federal levels. We would like this to happen ASAP, but are also prepared to work for decades. Our models of gun laws are based on the American experience, drawing on other nations, reality, and objective science." That's a bad start, but I'm on work deadlines! :-)  Thanks!)  

        Join us at RASA: Repeal or Amend the Second Amendment. (Repeal will not ban guns, just help regulate them.)

        by Sharon Wraight on Mon Jan 21, 2013 at 08:13:11 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Thanks Sharon & please see koNko comments (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sharon Wraight

          Below esp towards the end. Repealing the 2nd amendment DOES NOT mean banning guns. That is a severe leap.

        •  I did ask if I got any details wrong (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sharon Wraight

          so I welcome the correction.

          I do get the gist that some of RASA want the 2A repealed because they believe that SCOTUS has made effective gun control measures impossible.  But I have read from other Kossacks(and their diaries have been reposted to RASA) that their goal is a near total ban on guns hence the references to the UK and Japan.   I was trying to reconcile those in a general description of the group, but perhaps I was too inaccurate in how I described RASA.

          As to my word choice of severely, I will accept that it wasn't neutral enough in tone.

          http://www.merriam-webster.com/...

          : rigorous in restraint, punishment, or requirement : stringent
          So I should have said stringent.   Meaningful implies the need for the 2nd Amendment to be amended.

          I also accept that I should have qualified that some(meaning less than a majority) of the RASA members want a substantial reduction in the amount of guns personally owned by civilians from now to 20 years from now.

          And I know that oldpotsumggler for one is someone that wants an Article V Convention called.   I probably should have replaced that some with "a minority of members".

          I will close that I do agree that our disagreements are on method and timeframe and degree of to which guns should be restricted.

          Washington and Colorado said that you've got to legalize it. Hope the DOJ respects that.

          by pistolSO on Mon Jan 21, 2013 at 01:24:10 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  Rec'd for dialogue, which I appreciate. (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            pistolSO

            Thanks for your friendly conversation.

            I do find it interesting that many people somehow associate 2A repeal with a ban on guns (hence my sig-line correcting this misapprehension).

            some of RASA want the 2A repealed because they believe that SCOTUS has made effective gun control measures impossible.
            If I had to guess, I'd say 75%, but that's mere guesswork.
            But I have read from other Kossacks(and their diaries have been reposted to RASA) that their goal is a near total ban on guns hence the references to the UK and Japan.
            I welcome their voice. I'd guess that's at most 15%?
            And I know that [username] for one is someone that wants an Article V Convention called.
            We have over 100 members, I can't speak for any one, nor whether they are floating a trial balloon or making a strong argument on suggested strategy.

            Cheers!

            Join us at RASA: Repeal or Amend the Second Amendment. (Repeal will not ban guns, just help regulate them.)

            by Sharon Wraight on Mon Jan 21, 2013 at 02:53:31 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

    •  If we wanted to be "strict constitutionalists" (6+ / 0-)

      we could argue that the 2nd Amendment only applies to single-shot muzzle loaders...so you can have as many muskets as you like, but assault weapons are a no-no.

      And of course the 2nd Amendment says nothing about ammunition, leaving a way open to at least control the size of the magazines used in semi-automatics, and perhaps how much ammunition can be possessed by a single person -- that could at least cut down the body count a bit.

      "If we ever needed to vote we sure do need to vote now" -- Rev. William Barber, NAACP

      by Cali Scribe on Sun Jan 20, 2013 at 01:02:49 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  New York may also have set up another model (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        coquiero, greengemini, Sharon Wraight

        too with their first in the nation background checks on ammunition purchases(an idea that I would love to see Massachusetts adopt).

        I can imagine thought that SCOTUS may find a way to make ammo part and parcel of the 2nd Amendment, although Scalia's words in Heller do point to ample room for reasonable regulation under the 2nd Amendment.   I kinda hope that this current Court stays out of questions on the legality of ammo bans though.

        Washington and Colorado said that you've got to legalize it. Hope the DOJ respects that.

        by pistolSO on Sun Jan 20, 2013 at 01:08:46 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  If ACA had lost, they'd jump in (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          pistolSO, Sharon Wraight

          But now that they have a Chief who is "unreliable", I'm wondering if the current Court might shy away from this. A lot depends on what the lower courts do with the upgraded assault weapons ban, which will no doubt be challenged in court.

          "If you're going to go down with the ship, make it a submarine." - Wayne Shorter

          by Oliver Tiger on Sun Jan 20, 2013 at 01:29:55 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  I would prefer repeal (0+ / 0-)

      but don't think it's a practical solution to focus on. I'd rather figure out what works, and do what we can in the near term.

      "Let's do this!" - Leeroy Jenkins

      by AaronInSanDiego on Sun Jan 20, 2013 at 01:42:33 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  RE: repeal. The last and only amendment to be (5+ / 0-)

        repealed was Prohibition which had a fairly short run at any rate.  I note some think the amendment on term limits for POTUS should be repealed but amending the Constition is a fairly monumental task (remember the ERA?)

        I am also loathe to try to repeal an amendment with so much case law behind it because there is a chance for unforeseen consequences of such an action.  I am also unwilling to open the hood on the Bill of Rights for fear some of our present "statesmen" may take the opportunity to tinker further with some other provisions they consider to be nuisances.

        I believe, even if it were practical, we are better off as we are now than we would be if we were to begin repealing the Bill of Rights piecemeal  

        •  I'd love to see them bring the ERA back anew, btw. (10+ / 0-)

          Surely the bulk of states that ratified it before would do so again, and even if it didn't pass, it would be another nail in the GOP coffin, since they'd bear the entire brunt of opposing its passage.  Provide yet another thing to keep women voting Dem.

          •  It would be a total restart of the process... (3+ / 0-)

            given the sunset clause in the original amendment, but it would still be worth a shot. While that means we'd need 38 states to ratify it now (I do not hold with the argument that the 35 states that ratified before the original deadline passed would not need to do so again) it's still possible that this could be achieved. Of course, to actually get it ratified would require it to pass the House, which in the current climate is about as likely as an individual being hit by a micro-black hole, but it would certainly cement the GOP as the anti-woman party that we all know and (don't) love. The prospects after 2014 however, if we can take back the House, would be really good.

            Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory, tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat. Sun Tzu The Art of War

            by Stwriley on Sun Jan 20, 2013 at 06:41:32 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  My issues exactly entlord! (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          entlord

          And what I'm constantly commenting on. We have been asleep at the switch when it comes to the erosion of our rights. I want people to think hard about letting the current bunch of jokers mess around anymore.

          "The scientific nature of the ordinary man is to go on out and do the best you can." John Prine

          by high uintas on Sun Jan 20, 2013 at 05:16:07 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Too true... (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Ahianne, entlord

          after all, we've never bothered to repeal the 3rd Amendment either, even though it's essentially moot at this point. No military officer is going to show up and demand to quarter soldiers in your house and we all pay for a "standing army" that would have made the Founders run screaming for their muskets to disband it (i.e., we pay in a practical, collective sense for things that are expressly forbidden at an individual level) and yet the 3rd stays intact. So the idea that we'll somehow repeal the 2nd Amendment is at best a pipe-dream.

          I'll have to agree as a gun-owning kossack that the vast majority of us are of the "type 2" outlined by the diarist; those who like our guns just fine but know that reasonable restrictions on the 2nd Amendment are the only solution to the madness of the right-wing, anti-government, gun-nut impulse that wants any gun at any time for any person to be the only interpretation of the 2nd Amendment that holds sway.

          Strategy without tactics is the slowest route to victory, tactics without strategy is the noise before defeat. Sun Tzu The Art of War

          by Stwriley on Sun Jan 20, 2013 at 06:01:24 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Join us! :-) nt (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      i understand

      Join us at RASA: Repeal or Amend the Second Amendment. (Repeal will not ban guns, just help regulate them.)

      by Sharon Wraight on Mon Jan 21, 2013 at 12:49:45 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site