Skip to main content

View Diary: "You'll Shoot Your Eye Out, Kid" By Joe Biden (26 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  um, ok (0+ / 0-)

    kind of pie in the sky, considering we can't even get single-payer going.

    Although, that really wouldn't be much of a problem then, medical bill wise, would it?  And settlements won't bring back loved ones anyway.

    This is getting all Rube Goldberg-y to be a reasonable method of the goal of violence abatement, considering the deplorable priorities we have that healthcare is not a right in the first place.

    I'll stipulate if healthcare WAS a right in the same way that gun ownership is currently a right, there'd be a basis for a grand debate worthy of consideration by all.  But as it stands, perversely as most might see it, healthcare is not a right, and is not afforded the same level of consideration without a compelling public need that outstrips the Constitution as it stands.

    I see a very beautiful planet that seems very inviting and peaceful. Unfortunately, it is not.…We're better than this. We must do better. Cmdr Scott Kelley

    by wretchedhive on Mon Jan 21, 2013 at 08:58:40 PM PST

    [ Parent ]

    •  The right to not be killed or injured by another (0+ / 0-)

      Takes precedent over the right to own a gun.

      There is a compelling state interest to prevent death and injury of innocent people, and the supreme court has set many a precedent in which that compelling interest is allowed to put limits on a right (the most commonly noted: not falsely yelling fire in a theater).

      •  two different things (0+ / 0-)

        you have a right not to be harmed by malicious intent or willful negligence, but that does not afford you the right to proactively deprive the liberties of those who take reasonable care to avoid such harm in an absolutist manner without due process.

        The right to own a firearm is, and has always been, throughout the history of our country, affirmed.  Seeking to utterly nullify the 2a is political suicide.

        You cannot point to someone with a car and say that you believe they will drive in a reckless manner that may injure you or someone else even though the car is capable of being used irresponsibly or dangerously.

        Also, "innocent" is a red herring.  what does that have to do with anything?

        I believe in limits, I just don't agree with, nor the justifications that you present as the reason for yours.

        I see a very beautiful planet that seems very inviting and peaceful. Unfortunately, it is not.…We're better than this. We must do better. Cmdr Scott Kelley

        by wretchedhive on Mon Jan 21, 2013 at 09:31:36 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site