Second Amendment is from 1789. Thus the second amendment only applies to Muskets.

[CLAX1911]

So what you do personally should be the model for US policy?

it's not what I do personally nobody who's ever fired a 5.56 mm rifle took out Hiroshima.

You says you can't practice your second amendment rights and start testing some nukes?

there are limits to our Liberty the limits are very simple.

You never know when you're going to have to stand up to big tyrannical government. Can never be too ready, right?

a nuclear weapon wouldn't be useful for that.

A rifle would be even if you were memed into being scared of a particular rifle.

 

[braindrain]

Practicing on the range is for grunts. When was the last time grunts set policy or strategy?

“I spent a career carrying typically either an M16 or an M4 Carbine. An M4 Carbine fires a .223 caliber round which is 5.56 mm at about 3000 feet per second. When it hits a human body, the effects are devastating. It’s designed for that,” McChrystal. That’s what our soldiers ought to carry. I personally don’t think there’s any need for that kind of weaponry on the streets and particularly around the schools in America.

We’ve got to take a serious look—I understand everyone’s desire to have whatever they want—but we’ve got to protect our children, we’ve got to protect our police, we’ve got to protect our population,” McChrystal said. “Serious action is necessary. Sometimes we talk about very limited actions on the edges and I just don’t think that’s enough.”
_ Gen. Stanley McChrystal, 4-star general

Why do u refuse to answer the question. Do you think you not answering is in itself an answer

Or are you trying to claim you have as much time in uniform as McChrystal.

 

[braindrain]

Islamic extremist terrorist attacks are even less common a problem. Should we stop worrying about it?

I don’t worry about them and I bet the vast majority of Americans don’t either.

 

[ataraxia]

it's not what I do personally nobody who's ever fired a 5.56 mm rifle took out Hiroshima.
there are limits to our Liberty the limits are very simple.
a nuclear weapon wouldn't be useful for that.

A rifle would be even if you were memed into being scared of a particular rifle.

No one is saying you can't have a rifle.

But a mental asylum escapee with a large criminal felony history being left "free" to just go out and buy multiple assault weapons with high capacity magazine clips anytime he likes? Should be a problem.

 

[ataraxia]

Why do u refuse to answer the question. Do you think you not answering is in itself an answer

So are you trying to claim you have as much time in uniform as McChrystal.

It's OK to listen to doctors and scientists on medical matters. It's OK to listen to military specialists on military matters. We can't all be experts on everything.

You somehow think spending a lot of time practicing on the range makes to some kind of policy specialist. Why?

 

[braindrain]

Yes, they knew technology would change- in frequently very unpredictable ways. That's why they created a mechanism to change the Constitution- and that's why it's time to update or repeal the 2A. Modern technology has made it hopelessly obsolete.

And that is fine. If a new amendment gets enough support to pass then that is how our government should work.

How it shouldn’t work is people who know they don’t have enough support to change the constitution come up with some stupid idea that the 2nd only applies to the technology that was available then.

Hmmm what is the whole premise of this thread and what have you been defending.

 

[ataraxia]

I don’t worry about them and I bet the vast majority of Americans don’t either.

We are talking policy and strategy here. You don't have to worry about them because there are a lot of people in the Pentagon who do- because that's their job and area of expertise.

Would you like for those guys at the Pentagon to stop worrying about them too?

 

[ataraxia]

And that is fine. If a new amendment gets enough support to pass then that is how our government should work.

How it shouldn’t work is people who know they don’t have enough support to change the constitution come up with some stupid idea that the 2nd only applies to the technology that was available then.

Hmmm what is the whole premise of this thread and what have you been defending.

The argument is that we shouldn't be talking about repealing the 2A because it's unconstitutional. That's what's called circular logic.

The 2A has to go, and for the US to develop policies more in line with other modern developed nations around the world.

 

[CLAX1911]

No one is saying you can't have a rifle.

But a mental asylum escapee with a large criminal felony history being able to just go out and buy multiple assault weapons with high capacity magazine clips anytime he likes? Should be a problem.

Yeah it's a felony.

 

[ataraxia]

Yeah it's a felony.

Only if you catch them. How would you do that if people are screaming that even checking is an infringement on their rights?

 

[CLAX1911]

Only if you catch them.

So maybe focus on catching them instead of completely ignoring it?

How would you do that if people are screaming that even checking is an infringement on their rights?

The checkers are worse criminals than the people they are trying to allow to kill people.

 

[ataraxia]

So maybe focus on catching them instead of completely ignoring it?
The checkers are worse criminals than the people they are trying to allow to kill people.

So how are you going to catch them if even the act of looking for them at time of sale is being called unconstitutional?

 

[braindrain]

We are talking policy and strategy here. You don't have to worry about them because there are a lot of people in the Pentagon who do- because that's their job and area of expertise.

Would you like for those guys at the Pentagon to stop worrying about them too?

So now you think the pentagon sets domestic policy. Odd.

And since you and not anyone at the pentagon was claiming all you need for self defense is a small handgun it’s time to back up how you came to that conclusion. What is your experience level or knowledge base that allows you to make that determination.

That you refuse to tells everyone all they need to know.

 

[ataraxia]

So now you think the pentagon sets domestic policy. Odd.

I can't tell if you are purposely trying to confuse my analogy of terrorism policy with gun policy, or you are just confused. The point is you know as much about terrorism policy as you do about weapons policy.

And since you and not anyone at the pentagon was claiming all you need for self defense is a small handgun it’s time to back up how you came to that conclusion. What is your experience level or knowledge base that allows you to make that determination.

That you refuse to tells everyone all they need to know.

I just quoted someone from the Pentagon saying you don't need AR15s with high capacity magazine clips for personal defense. If you are OK with that, then we agree and our debate has come to a happy resolution.

 

[CLAX1911]

So how are you going to catch them if even the act of looking for them at time of sale is being called unconstitutional?

Give everybody access to the NICS database. Require all agencies to report all violent offenders to the database. Take it out of the hands of the incompetent criminal organization (FBI)

 

[ataraxia]

Give everybody access to the NICS database. Require all agencies to report all violent offenders to the database. Take it out of the hands of the incompetent criminal organization (FBI)

Maybe. Sounds like good suggestions. Maybe we can talk some more about such measures in another thread.

But I'm glad we agree something should be done, and whatever that is, it's not the first slippery step to Communist tyranny.

 

[CLAX1911]

Maybe. Sounds like good suggestions. Maybe we can talk some more about such measures in another thread.

But I'm glad we agree something should be done, and whatever that is, it's not the first slippery step to Communist tyranny.

There's lots of things that can be done that could be amicable to both sides.

I'm not sure that's something the powers that be want

 

[ataraxia]

There's lots of things that can be done that could be amicable to both sides.

I'm not sure that's something the powers that be want

Yeah, agreed. "The powers that be" include the NRA and gun manufacturers. Might hurt sales.

 

[CLAX1911]

Yeah, agreed. "The powers that be" include the NRA and gun manufacturers. Might hurt sales.

That's not power government is.

I don't think any non gun control solution is acceptable because it'll prove that gun control isn't necessary.

 

[ataraxia]

That's not power government is.

Power comes in all sorts of forms:

US gun control: What is the NRA and why is it so powerful?

The National Rifle Association plays a central role in the contentious issue of US gun control.

www.bbc.com

I don't think any non gun control solution is acceptable because it'll prove that gun control isn't necessary.

I can't quite understand what this means. Can you give an example of a non gun control solution?

 

[CLAX1911]

Power comes in all sorts of forms:

The NRA is powerless and a joke.

I can't quite understand what this means. Can you give an example of a non gun control solution?

Well I have you an example earlier and the NICS database.

But how about enforcement.

 

[ataraxia]

The NRA is powerless and a joke.

Maybe now some of its power has diminished. Used to be extremely powerful. Now, it's just that the power has shifted to other groups, not that there is no power.

Gun rights groups set new lobbying spending record in 2021 - OpenSecrets News

With mass shootings becoming an increasingly common facet of American life, gun rights groups spent a record $15.8 million lobbying in 2021.

www.opensecrets.org

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2022/05/26/nra-uvalde-shooting-trump-cruz-gop/

Enforcement.

How are you going to enforce if even the act of looking is being called unconstitutional?

 

[element94]

Yeah, I don't though. When people say they're my enemy, I believe them. When my enemies tell me what they want to do to me, I believe them.

As a nation, we seem to have lost the art of compromise. We have to get back to that since it was relatively successful for over 200 years. We have enough enemies outside of the country that we can't afford to have internal battles weaken us. You can't always get everything you want but neither can anyone else.
What specifically have your enemies said they wanted to do to you?

 

[CLAX1911]

Maybe now some of its power has diminished.

In my lifetime they have been nothing.

How are you going to enforce if even the act of looking is being called unconstitutional?

Enforcing laws that already exist requires whatever you mean by looking is unconstitutional?

If you're only solution is to screw with the most law abiding demographic that's just ridiculous.

 

[Disputatious71]

So how are you going to catch them if even the act of looking for them at time of sale is being called unconstitutional?

Same way we catch other criminals, just don't let them out after they are processed. That is like kicking the hornets nest