[W:87]A new Constitution. (1 Viewer)

[Faramir777]

What about redrafting the Constitution that's relevant for 2022 and not 1776. That takes into consideration the State of affairs of 2022 as opposed to 1776. The Constitution was written with the intention that our nation was to be governed by wealthy English descended landowners. A constitution which largely revolves around the fears of a monarchy which is something that I can comfortably say I'm not worried about anymore. What I am worried about is being shot when I go to the gas station.

 

[MamboDervish]

What about redrafting the Constitution that's relevant for 2022 and not 1776. That takes into consideration the State of affairs of 2022 as opposed to 1776. The Constitution was written with the intention that our nation was to be governed by wealthy English descended landowners. A constitution which largely revolves around the fears of a monarchy which is something that I can comfortably say I'm not worried about anymore. What I am worried about is being shot when I go to the gas station.

We have a Constitution that can be amended. If we can't even do that, then how likely do you think it is that we can, or will, draft another?

 

[nvflash]

What about redrafting the Constitution that's relevant for 2022 and not 1776. That takes into consideration the State of affairs of 2022 as opposed to 1776. The Constitution was written with the intention that our nation was to be governed by wealthy English descended landowners. A constitution which largely revolves around the fears of a monarchy which is something that I can comfortably say I'm not worried about anymore. What I am worried about is being shot when I go to the gas station.

I caution not to trade essential liberty for temporary security.

The Constitution is words on a page, rewriting it will not stop criminals from getting guns or shooting people, they don't care about your laws.

 

[Crovax]

What I am worried about is being shot when I go to the gas station.

Maybe go to a different gas station

 

[Faramir777]

I caution not to trade essential liberty for temporary security.

The Constitution is words on a page, rewriting it will not stop criminals from getting guns or shooting people, they don't care about your laws.

So we're going to tolerate a 45,000+ a year death rate from gun violence just in case we need to overthrow a basically benevolent (domestically) government? And insurrection by who for what reason? Are these future guns going to topple a government that would probably just be replaced with something worse? I raise the issue of firearms because it's a glaring flaw in the Constitution. I don't care if people want 50 caliber guns for protection and automatic rifles for "hunting". I don't care if most of the firearms in the country are owned by responsible individuals legally. 45,000 people die a year so gun owners can have a hobby. Ridiculous.

 

[Faramir777]

Maybe go to a different gas station

Juvenile.

 

[Slartibartfast]

I would wait about 10-15 years and then propose we do this. We need to wait out this current backlash movement first or else the country would be worse off.

 

[Rexedgar]

OP needs to visit the Gun Control forum………

 

[Crovax]

Juvenile.

About as juvenile as your fake fear of pumping gas

 

[MamboDervish]

So we're going to tolerate a 45,000+ a year death rate from gun violence just in case we need to overthrow a basically benevolent (domestically) government? And insurrection by who for what reason? Are these future guns going to top of the government that would probably just be replaced with something worse? I raise the issue of firearms because it's a glaring flaw in the Constitution. I don't care if people want guns for protection and automatic rifles for "hunting". I don't care if most of the firearms in the country are owned by responsible individuals legally. 45,000 people die a year so gun owners can have a hobby. Ridiculous.

One of the big problems is that the so-called "responsible gun owner" is suddenly not responsible at all if their gun is lost, stolen, misused by their child, or their depressed brother-in-law decides to eat a bullet. A lot of things would change dramatically if/when owning a gun begins to actually make the owner responsible for it.

 

[nvflash]

So we're going to tolerate a 45,000+ a year death rate from gun violence just in case we need to overthrow a basically benevolent (domestically) government? And insurrection by who for what reason? Are these future guns going to top of the government that would probably just be replaced with something worse? I raise the issue of firearms because it's a glaring flaw in the Constitution. I don't care if people want guns for protection and automatic rifles for "hunting". I don't care if most of the firearms in the country are owned by responsible individuals legally. 45,000 people die a year so gun owners can have a hobby. Ridiculous.

It's sad that people die by unnatural means, but you are more at risk of being killed by an SUV than you are an AR15. You're just blowing the whole thing out of proportion in you own mind.

 

[MamboDervish]

It's sad that people die by unnatural means, but you are more at risk of being killed by an SUV than you are an AR15. You're just blowing the whole thing out of proportion in you own mind.

One has nothing whatsoever to do with the other. Transportation is a necessity - owning an AR-15 is not. Trying to conflate transportation deaths with gun deaths is the worst kind of feeble horseshit argument imaginable.

 

[Faramir777]

It's sad that people die by unnatural means, but you are more at risk of being killed by an SUV than you are an AR15. You're just blowing the whole thing out of proportion in you own mind.

45,000 deaths from gun violence a year? Thats ALOT of people man!

 

[Faramir777]

It's a lot more likely if we at least talk about it.

 

[nvflash]

One has nothing whatsoever to do with the other. Transportation is a necessity - owning an AR-15 is not. Trying to conflate transportation deaths with gun deaths is the worst kind of feeble horseshit argument imaginable.

Your authoritarian instincts are showing.

 

[Lucky 1]

Stupid thread..............Next

 

[Faramir777]

Your authoritarian instincts are showing.

So you're up implying every benevolent society with gun restrictions is authoritarian?

 

[Faramir777]

Stupid thread..............Next

Oh, I apologize what would you like to talk about?

 

[nvflash]

So you're up implying every benevolent society with gun restrictions is authoritarian?

You prepose that the Right to Travel is essential liberty, but the Right to Self Defense is not.

What you do not prepose is that we take guns away form governments, the entity responsible for the MOST gun deaths in all of human history. When all the governments of the world are willing to give up their arms, then and only then should the people even entertain the idea of giving up theirs.

 

[Faramir777]

You prepose that the Right to Travel is essential liberty, but the Right to Self Defense is not.

What you do not prepose is that we take guns away form governments, the entity responsible for the MOST gun deaths in all of human history. When all the governments of the world are willing to give up their arms, then and only then should the people even entertain the idea of giving up theirs.

You're right to travel doesn't shoot bullets. I'm not concerned about my government shooting me. I believe my government is engaged in a lot of black projects and clandestine operations. Just because something is hidden doesn't mean you need to fear it. So any Utopia nobody would have guns, not even the government. But I'm putting this question into the context of reality the reality is is the government is not about to write out defense spending and its need for an army. Our government exist under very real accountability for use of weapons whereas a criminal or anyone for that matter on the streets is only accountable if they get caught and sent to prison for it.

You prepose that the Right to Travel is essential liberty, but the Right to Self Defense is not.

What you do not prepose is that we take guns away form governments, the entity responsible for the MOST gun deaths in all of human history. When all the governments of the world are willing to give up their arms, then and only then should the people even entertain the idea of giving up theirs.

 

[Lucky 1]

Oh, I apologize what would you like to talk about?

Hmmmm.........how about where you can get the very best fish tacos in the country. (and leave my gun rights and constitution alone)

 

[Faramir777]

Hmmmm.........how about where you can get the very best fish tacos in the country. (and leave my gun rights and constitution alone)

Hmmmm.........how about where you can get the very best fish tacos in the country. (and leave my gun rights and constitution alone)

Ah, you think this form is stupid because you don't like what we're talking about. But my concern is this is this. Is talking about it so stupid that you would ask me to kindly stop talking about it at gunpoint?

 

[Rich2018]

What about redrafting the Constitution that's relevant for 2022 and not 1776. That takes into consideration the State of affairs of 2022 as opposed to 1776. The Constitution was written with the intention that our nation was to be governed by wealthy English descended landowners. A constitution which largely revolves around the fears of a monarchy which is something that I can comfortably say I'm not worried about anymore. What I am worried about is being shot when I go to the gas station.

A Constitutional Congress.

It would go on for eternity, unless one side had an overwhelming majority.

 

[Lucky 1]

Ah, you think this form is stupid because you don't like what we're talking about. But my concern is this is this. Is talking about it so stupid that you would ask me to kindly stop talking about it at gunpoint?

 

[Bum]

So we're going to tolerate a 45,000+ a year death rate from gun violence just in case we need to overthrow a basically benevolent (domestically) government? And insurrection by who for what reason? Are these future guns going to topple a government that would probably just be replaced with something worse? I raise the issue of firearms because it's a glaring flaw in the Constitution. I don't care if people want 50 caliber guns for protection and automatic rifles for "hunting". I don't care if most of the firearms in the country are owned by responsible individuals legally. 45,000 people die a year so gun owners can have a hobby. Ridiculous.

Simply put, you do not want to redraft the Constitution, you want to delete the Second Amendment.
You can actually come right out and say that.