Gun Control & RKBA

Worktodo

(288 posts)

57. Gun debate a microcosm of our national psychosis

Sun Feb 12, 2017, 12:45 AM

Feb 2017

1. it's important to internalize that the wording and meaning of the second amendment is completely immaterial. It's a completely emotional issue for most people and beyond all fact or reason. (See also "Are pitbulls a dangerous breed or best dog ever?&quot

2. use 2nd amendment rights to help people understand the importance of their other rights. What use is a gun if you don't have your 1st, 4th, or 14th? What does the right to vote mean when a congressional district is gerrymandered?

3. equal protection under the law. Most rights are better protected within proximity of government. 2nd amendment is opposite. Why can people concealed carry in the grocery store but not the state house? It's outrageous.

4. Stop taking "the other side" in the gun "debate". There is no debate. That ship sailed four atrocities ago. As a prominent national issue this needs to go back in the cupboard so folks can win races. (Except for the points above. Rs are so hypocritical on gun issues.)

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

244 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Can you be a Progressive Democrat and still the support the Second Amendment? [View all] Berlin Vet Feb 2017 OP

Of course you can AJT Feb 2017 #1

OK so here's my thoughts. hollowdweller Feb 2017 #80

Some lever actions hold 7 (or so), yagotme Feb 2017 #189

Yes, but only if you can't read English DuckBurp Feb 2017 #2

The Founders and the SCOTUS disagree gejohnston Feb 2017 #7

Actually, I think you're wrong, but here's a Valentine anyway. DuckBurp Feb 2017 #56

what is the purpose of the wincest Feb 2017 #58

To enumerate some natural rights, yagotme Feb 2017 #190

Absolutely. pablo_marmol Feb 2017 #3

Thanks for the link. Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #4

You are most welcome! NT pablo_marmol Feb 2017 #5

Great Article Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #10

:-) pablo_marmol Feb 2017 #14

on the first, gejohnston Feb 2017 #6

Support the Second Amendment does not mean supporting Scalia's version of it. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #8

Can we support the Democratic party version? Obama's version? hack89 Feb 2017 #20

That was actually an echo of the Scalia version. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #23

So the party platform is RW on the 2A? hack89 Feb 2017 #65

You are asking for the ideal versus reality. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #68

So no state ever properly enforced the 2A? hack89 Feb 2017 #69

Heller created precedent. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #70

Of course not all men were actually equal hack89 Feb 2017 #74

Heller indeed has been an expansion of rights. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #77

That makes no sense hack89 Feb 2017 #78

The hysteria that drives sales will never stop. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #79

Can you name a single AWB that was ruled unconstitutional? hack89 Feb 2017 #82

What I said is that no regulations will be found reasonable. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #83

But that is not happening due to court rulings hack89 Feb 2017 #84

You avoided his. When and where has private gun ownership been strictly tied to militia membership? Marengo Feb 2017 #126

Prior to Heller, this concept of individual self-defense outside the home guillaumeb Feb 2017 #127

Oh, a smoke screen is it? Let's try again: When and where has a Federal court ruled that militia... Marengo Feb 2017 #128

More avoidance? guillaumeb Feb 2017 #129

Are you then arguing that voting is not a universal right.? hack89 Feb 2017 #132

What did Scalia mean by original intent? eom guillaumeb Feb 2017 #133

"The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed." hack89 Feb 2017 #134

It is obviously clear to gun owners and gun lobbyists. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #136

It is mainstream within the Democratic party. hack89 Feb 2017 #138

Was he a "hack" on Texas v Johnson, Maryland v King, Brown v Entertainment, Florida v Jardine... Marengo Feb 2017 #145

What happened to the rest of the Amendment? guillaumeb Feb 2017 #156

No - this is the version you can find in the Democratic party platform hack89 Feb 2017 #161

Intentionally or not, you redacted 1/2 of the Amendment. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #168

So how do you explain the party platform? hack89 Feb 2017 #169

Do I detect avoidance? guillaumeb Feb 2017 #170

Just pointing out that the NRA and Scalia are irrelevant hack89 Feb 2017 #171

Allow me to help you: guillaumeb Feb 2017 #172

So? It still protects and individual right. hack89 Feb 2017 #174

And the Constitution predates the Democratic Party. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #175

Ok. hack89 Feb 2017 #182

Whole lotta comma's in there, yagotme Feb 2017 #191

Two interdependent clauses, and one modifies the other. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #197

I was referring to the original text you quoted. yagotme Feb 2017 #199

A displaced modifier? guillaumeb Feb 2017 #200

Sometimes, when you read something Yoda-like, yagotme Feb 2017 #203

And with you also. eom guillaumeb Feb 2017 #204

Are you seriously trying to argue that... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #154

When and where has a Federal court ruled that militia membership is a prerequisite for the private.. Marengo Feb 2017 #135

More avoidance. I understand that you cannot answer without guillaumeb Feb 2017 #137

When or where has a Federal court ruled that Militia membership is a prerequisite for the private... Marengo Feb 2017 #139

In reality, what is understood is that your position stands utterly unsubstantiated as you... Marengo Feb 2017 #146

Your question has nothing to do with open carry, or concealed carry, or supposed self-defense. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #147

God God, what a comedy. You're going hide behind THAT? Where's the evidence I asked for? Marengo Feb 2017 #149

The post, and my responses, concerned Heller. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #150

What do you mean by "dishonest redaction"? Marengo Feb 2017 #151

That should be obvious. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #152

Can you provide evidence that it is otherwise? Marengo Feb 2017 #153

Do you read the Amendment and decide for yourself what words really matter? guillaumeb Feb 2017 #155

All that really matters is the SC's decision, and in Heller a majority agreed the 2nd protects... Marengo Feb 2017 #158

Even Stevens and Breyer Indicated It Was An Individual Right Rucker61 Feb 2017 #218

Where does it say that the 2A was limited to whites only? hack89 Feb 2017 #131

Hate to break it to you, but you have been misinformed gejohnston Feb 2017 #21

Well, someone IS misinformed. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #24

From the link in #3 discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #26

So using your link, we can infer that the original intent was that possession of firearms guillaumeb Feb 2017 #31

The original intent... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #32

SO, reading your second statement, we can infer that Amendments can be amended? guillaumeb Feb 2017 #34

Are you also in favor of... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #36

You discounted my sarcasm and irony. eom guillaumeb Feb 2017 #40

Sorry about that chief discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #63

The purpose of the BoR... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #37

And that Second Amendment included two clauses. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #39

"Merely" prefatory? Straw Man Feb 2017 #60

Your attempt ignores the actual written wording of the Amendment. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #67

Why is it that somehow with you pro-restriction folks there is always a need for a "need"? discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #73

I referred to a literary need. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #76

I get that. We "gun-nuts" are just sensitive on that word "need" discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #87

Understood. I could have been clearer also. eom guillaumeb Feb 2017 #117

Wrong -- YOUR attempt does. Straw Man Feb 2017 #115

I feel we've discussed this before but thanks the exchange discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #72

A nice response. And polite as well. Something that is occasionally lacking in this venue. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #75

As to the points you raise and a thanks again for the polite exchange discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #86

Since you raised the points: guillaumeb Feb 2017 #89

Point by point discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #105

And yet the gun lobby is rapidly pushing to allow gun owners to carry everywhere. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #108

I think it's rather obvious what my preferred list of restrictions would cover discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #109

We both understand that a respectful dialogue is possible, guillaumeb Feb 2017 #116

Voting has nothing to do with it gejohnston Feb 2017 #44

Other states like Utah... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #64

Utah and Wyoming have something of a rivalry gejohnston Feb 2017 #118

Free white women, as a group, were universally prohibited from posessing firearms? Marengo Feb 2017 #207

Not explicitly. But neither were non-whites explicitly named. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #211

Free white women could not, and did not, possess firearms? Marengo Feb 2017 #212

When you start with original intent... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #213

My interpretation depends on a reading of the actual Amendment. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #214

Perhaps you can resolve the mystery discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #215

I am asserting that, in my opinion, guillaumeb Feb 2017 #220

Again I ask: discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #221

I believe in a complete and literal interpretation. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #223

Why Is Your Version Not Supported By History? Rucker61 Feb 2017 #224

Money talks. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #225

Some History Rucker61 Feb 2017 #227

This message was self-deleted by its author discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #226

Ignoring the question isn't an answer. To clarify: discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #228

Blame the Waite Court Rucker61 Feb 2017 #222

Where was militia service a prerequisite for the private ownership of firearms by free citizens? Marengo Feb 2017 #216

Free white women could not, and did not, possess firearms? Marengo Feb 2017 #230

But SCOTUS precedent... sarisataka Feb 2017 #27

There are no cases prior to Heller v. DC. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #35

So there was no precedent sarisataka Feb 2017 #50

No, the collective right of "the people", as opposed to wording such as guillaumeb Feb 2017 #66

Fourth Amendment sarisataka Feb 2017 #88

The term "the people" refers to the theory. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #90

You are avoiding the question sarisataka Feb 2017 #91

A collective right is not an absolute right. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #96

The only right that is arguably collective sarisataka Feb 2017 #99

Good points about the right of assembly. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #100

A GOP dominated Court is unfortunate sarisataka Feb 2017 #102

Good for your state. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #103

no it doesn't gejohnston Feb 2017 #42

Like Scalia, you ignore what you cannot explain in the individual vs group argument. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #43

Group rights simply do not exist gejohnston Feb 2017 #45

Again you reiterate Scalia's nonsensical excuse for scholarship. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #47

You haven't read any of the links, gejohnston Feb 2017 #48

You have always been a good debater, even if I don't agree with your premise... tortoise1956 Feb 2017 #120

We must agree to disagree on this. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #123

Where free white women as a group prohibited from owning firearms? Marengo Feb 2017 #140

In Plymouth, well before the Second Amendment, it appears that free blacks could own guns HoneyBadger Feb 2017 #180

An interesting article, but how does it relate to the Second Amendment? guillaumeb Feb 2017 #184

You seem reluctant to address this point discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #185

Provisions for an army had a 2 year limit. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #186

A 2 year limit does not preclude a standing army discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #187

My point about the army goes to original intent. guillaumeb Feb 2017 #188

Your point about the army is a conclusion you've drawn discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #206

As your "scholarship" is so superior, please provide an example of a Federal court ruling... Marengo Feb 2017 #143

So 200 plus years isn't precedent? ileus Feb 2017 #122

Other than Heller v. DC, what SCOTUS precedent guillaumeb Feb 2017 #125

When and where has a Federal court ruled that militia membership is a prerequisite for the private.. Marengo Feb 2017 #141

So you'd argue befor heller no individuals owned firearms? ileus Feb 2017 #148

Interesting question. trc Feb 2017 #9

Assault Weapons Ban Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #12

Same as 1994? yagotme Feb 2017 #192

CT and NY Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #198

The thrust of my post was on a national AWB, yagotme Feb 2017 #201

Old Liberal female here who supports the Second Amendment. democrank Feb 2017 #11

Mental Health Issues Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #13

Re. mental health issues, "progressives" reward lip service, ignore *complete* malfeasance. pablo_marmol Feb 2017 #16

Sorry, Berlin Vet, for my not-so-clear attempt regarding "mental health issues" democrank Feb 2017 #22

Out of the 4 you list, yagotme Feb 2017 #193

A progressive Democrat sarisataka Feb 2017 #15

Should Say It Often Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #17

I just can't wrap my head around the fact, yagotme Feb 2017 #194

I have to ask HAB911 Feb 2017 #237

Precrime is a regressive fantasy- all of us have to trust *everyone* we interact with friendly_iconoclast Feb 2017 #239

The very idea of "earning" or "qualifying for" trust is anti-rights n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #240

LOL! HAB911 Feb 2017 #241

YMMV discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #242

Agreed. yagotme Feb 2017 #243

As GE has mentioned, UBCs can only aspire to create very slight improvement. pablo_marmol Feb 2017 #18

Yes. Nt hack89 Feb 2017 #19

I don't agree with your last point about requiring guns to be in a safe, doc03 Feb 2017 #25

what would you recommend if there are children in the home? Phoenix61 Feb 2017 #29

on my to buy list once the grandkids are created gejohnston Feb 2017 #49

You could secure most of the guns in a safe. If you want doc03 Feb 2017 #51

My grandfathers M92 Winchester carries 13 rounds. It was built in 1911. oneshooter Feb 2017 #81

Sure you can. democratisphere Feb 2017 #28

Personally, I would like to make handguns illegal Phoenix61 Feb 2017 #30

If someone is shot and killed... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #33

No, but criminals aren't going to have Phoenix61 Feb 2017 #41

What's the purpose of having laws... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #167

If your local police were confiscating unregistered guns, yagotme Feb 2017 #195

No, if you support the NRA interpretation of the 2nd amendment you're a RW nutjob SecularMotion Feb 2017 #38

"There is not one Progressive or Liberal organization that supports weakening gun regulations." wincest Feb 2017 #59

Not progressive, not liberal SecularMotion Feb 2017 #61

what is your defination wincest Feb 2017 #62

Can we at least agree the 2A protects and individual right? Nt hack89 Feb 2017 #71

As long as you agree that the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. SecularMotion Feb 2017 #92

I have never believed otherwise hack89 Feb 2017 #93

Now you're just being delusional SecularMotion Feb 2017 #94

One issue has broad support hack89 Feb 2017 #95

Correct HAB911 Feb 2017 #238

Very few people are progressive, moderate or conservative on all issues. Kaleva Feb 2017 #46

Yes RoadhogRidesAgain Feb 2017 #52

As originally written, or as demagogued by the NRA et al? Zambero Feb 2017 #53

Yes, and it's not even difficult. HassleCat Feb 2017 #54

I'm sure this has been said a thousand times... sagetea Feb 2017 #55

Gun debate a microcosm of our national psychosis Worktodo Feb 2017 #57

No fuck all gun humpers!!! gopiscrap Feb 2017 #85

This is going to to be a difficult time for you, isn't it? hack89 Feb 2017 #98

i accept your offer wincest Feb 2017 #244

Reason For This Post Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #97

I checked your website and found no mention of guns SecularMotion Feb 2017 #104

ARC Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #106

Did you ask them the same question? SecularMotion Feb 2017 #107

No Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #110

Do they know you're using the name of their organization to pimp gun rights on DU? SecularMotion Feb 2017 #111

Feel Free Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #113

Are you attempting to silence that poster with a threat? Sure appears that way to me. Marengo Feb 2017 #142

He might be asking if... discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #112

I See Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #114

Some posters here, yes. yagotme Feb 2017 #196

Yes... Mike Nelson Feb 2017 #101

Post removed Post removed Feb 2017 #119

You can't be a progressive and NOT support the 2A. ileus Feb 2017 #121

yes, especially if you consider that the Bill of Rights protects civil liberties. aikoaiko Feb 2017 #124

yes bluecollar2 Feb 2017 #130

In theory, yes. Reality is a tougher proposition. Paladin Feb 2017 #144

Depends. Can we agree on a definition for "Progressive Democrat" TXCritter Feb 2017 #157

Thanks Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #159

OK, an actual answer to your strategy question TXCritter Feb 2017 #160

Thanks for your response Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #165

Yes but now there's two of us TXCritter Feb 2017 #173

What Other Federally Protected Rights Rucker61 Feb 2017 #217

Yeah, and I'm as progressive as it comes but I'm like Scalia on this, a strict constructionist... brush Feb 2017 #162

Re: "...there is no regulation to keep them out of the hands of the mentally unstable." discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #163

How do the mass killers get them then, all thru the gun show loophole? We both know that's not true. brush Feb 2017 #164

- $$$ not being spent to keep the database updated, discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #166

They have to be adjudicated first. hack89 Feb 2017 #208

The founding fathers used handguns for more than target shooting HoneyBadger Feb 2017 #177

Oh, I forgot, those one shot jobs, right, certainly not full-auto uzis or even glock semi... brush Feb 2017 #179

Sure, if you are part of a well regulated militia. Nt HopeAgain Feb 2017 #176

License & registration MedusaX Feb 2017 #178

Thanks Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #181

A license good in every state in the union? Sounds good. hack89 Feb 2017 #183

heck yeah!!! samnsara Feb 2017 #202

Depends on what you call "support." Warpy Feb 2017 #205

So self defense is not a valid reason to own guns? Or recreation? hack89 Feb 2017 #209

what are military style weapons? wincest Feb 2017 #210

Sorry, but you've been conned re. "military style weapons". pablo_marmol Feb 2017 #219

Of course you can discntnt_irny_srcsm Feb 2017 #229

In paragraph #1, yagotme Feb 2017 #231

I'm Confused Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #232

No, if the conviction is actually registered in the system, yagotme Feb 2017 #233

You've got it right. Straw Man Feb 2017 #234

Thousands? Berlin Vet Feb 2017 #235

Not all turn aways are for criminal reasons, yagotme Feb 2017 #236