Is it time to get rid of the Second Amendment?

1. 77

   Anishpatposted 11 years ago

   Is it time to get rid of the Second Amendment?
   
   The right to bear arms, does it still make sense in today's world?
   
   

   replyreport
2. 82

   Attikosposted 11 years ago

   Good luck with that. To do it, congress or a constitutional convention would have to propose a new amendment, and then three quarters of the States would have to ratify it. Ain't gonna happen.

   replyreport
   1. 77

      Anishpatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with you. I don't think it's going to happen any time soon. However, I want to know why (or why not) do American's think that the 2nd amendment still make sense.

      replyreport
   2. 82

      Attikosposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      People have a natural right to the means of self-defense. In metropolitan areas, that is usually seen as dependence on the police. In less densely populated areas, it's having those means yourself. The 2nd forbids federal interference with the last.

      replyreport
   3. 64

      SportsBetterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Anishpat, Also if you make guns illegal, then make knives illegal or any object that might be able to kill someone.  Your argument that we need to reverse the 2nd can be a never ending argument.  People will always find a way around it.

      replyreport
3. 64

   SportsBetterposted 11 years ago

   This is all about leaving the people defenseless against the government.

   replyreport
   1. 77

      Anishpatposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Can a fire arm defend one against a government that is really motivated to get you if it wants to? I could be wrong but I see a huge mismatch of power right there. Should one also have a right to make a bomb?

      replyreport
   2. 64

      SportsBetterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I don't have an answer. The reason for the second amendment was so the people can defend themselves against the government. there was never a government that didn't do harm to their people.

      replyreport
   3. 61

      Agantumposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      A tired argument from a bygone era that never really was.  It is possible that some people in the past were just as misguided as some people today are. We will keep spouting these same old lines to avoid the thinking of new answers.

      replyreport
   4. 64

      SportsBetterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Well if you are to get rid of the second amendment it should also apply for government agents and police force.. Any laws the people must follow the government should follow also.

      replyreport
4. 72

   soconfidentposted 11 years ago

   I would say not, if anything its just going to make things worst. If anything you should only be allowed to own your firearm at home.

   replyreport
5. 53

   whonunuwhoposted 11 years ago

   Yes, it would be quite the feather in the cap of those who want total domination and control and weaken our national defense. After all a public without weaponry, is a people without a hope to defend against outside conventional forces from all borders. Because nuclear threat is unlikely to come to the worst scenario, the most likely attack would be from southern  and norther borders and involve gun to gun attacks. Weaken the United States once more and perhaps the last blow before we fall, when you start changing and excluding the constitutional rights of its citizenry.. This is what our enemy so desires. Because our world is in such chaos, history has shown how one nation will attack another weakened one in order to take its needed available resources and control the world in the process. Beware the changes that are brought about by careless acts, to be sorrowful, after all is said and done.

   replyreport
   1. 64

      SportsBetterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I agree.

      replyreport
6. 67

   Sue St. Clairposted 11 years ago

   It is not time to get rid of the second amendment or any of our other rights. Now is the time we need our rights more than ever.

   replyreport
   1. 64

      SportsBetterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Very good answer!  We are running out of rights every day.

      replyreport
   2. 85

      Express10posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      So true Sue! I'll give up my guns when criminals, terrorist, etc. give up theirs!

      replyreport
7. 68

   Bob Zermopposted 11 years ago

   No, it's there for a reason. Though (luckily) for now it seems almost ceremonial in the States, you can look at the Middle East and the modern history of South America to see how important arms are to prevent a forceful overthrow/takeover of the government. A democracy requires the people to have actual power and though you would hope the gov would represent the people correctly, the people need leverage to prevent someone like Hitler.
   
   There have been many tragedies due to lack of gun control, and I'm willing to consider stronger permit controls, but the 2nd Amendment needs to stay. No questions.

   replyreport
   1. 64

      SportsBetterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Very well put. Great example.

      replyreport
   2. 53

      whonunuwhoposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Every time I see the photograph of the gunman, I look at a kid like the ones that I used to teach and wonder if a teacher did not do their duty in the best interest of such a kid. Did the parents really understand their child? It is heart breaking,

      replyreport
8. 79

   ii3rittlesposted 11 years ago

   Its already in the works. The amendments are already so broken. They want to do away with money, the rights to weaponry, freedom of speech and much more.

   replyreport
   1. 64

      SportsBetterposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Can't have a dictatorship with the Bill of Rights in place.

      replyreport
   2. 79

      ii3rittlesposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Exactly!

      replyreport
   3. 79

      Mitch Alanposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      All evil needs to triumph is for good men (and women) to do nothing...it is our Republic...We the People...stand and fight at the ballot box and by raising the issues within your realm of influence.

      replyreport
9. 85

   Express10posted 11 years ago

   As a single young woman I definitely want to continue to have the right to bear arms. At least I'll have a fighting chance if gun-happy criminal/insane cowards come near me with a gun and try to harm me or my loved ones.
   
   There are many laws that criminals break and gun laws is the tip of the iceberg. If some people choose not to own a gun, that's their right, but to want to take that right from those who are RESPONSIBLE, SANE, AND WELL-TRAINED is wrong. We should have the right to protect ourselves with the same level of force. Those who want to load up to harm others is definitely not an American right, but those who want to protect themselves (without going looking for a confrontation or fight) should continue to be able to do so.
   
   I'm certain that those who believe that no law abiding citizen (with proper training and permits) or criminal should have a gun, would wish they had one just before they meet their maker or experience a tragedy when it's them staring down the barrel in the hands of a crook, rapist, terrorist, crazy-person, or murderer.
   
   The second amendment still makes sense because the police are not private security for each citizen and because each individual is responsible for their own safety and that of their family. Guns have been a part of American life for well over a century there are many families who have been able to live to tell the story of surviving a life or death situation because they were law-abiding, well-trained, AND responsible gun owners...like my own father, his brothers, and myself.

   replyreport
10. 93

    peeplesposted 11 years ago

    It would really serve no purpose to get rid of our right to own guns. Since you used his picture I will mention, this guy was a scientist with the ability to make bombs. If guns were not available do you think he would have just given up or gone even further and made a bomb and killed hundreds? People who truly want to do bad will do it without guns. Also by taking away my right to own a gun is like grounding the wrong child. Most of us who own guns legally do nothing wrong with them.
    With that said the day we start changing our rights we might as well consider moving else where. Our rights are what make this a great country even when we are going through hard times.

    replyreport
    1. 85

       Express10posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Another thanks to you Peeples for pointing out more succinctly what I didn't This world is not a peace-filled place and there are times when deadly force is required just to survive.

       replyreport
11. 77

    junksellerposted 11 years ago

    There are many people who responsibly use firearms for hunting and self-defense. I don't really see the need to change that whether there is a second amendment or not.
    
    However, the idea of the citizen militia, makes much less sense in today's world than it used to. Back in the day, a firearm was a main element of a units combat capability. Modern military and police forces, however, with their high levels of training, tactics, equipment, weapons, and communications are vastly superior to any ad hoc citizen militia regardless of what weapons they may have.
    
    Also, if the government wants to hurt people it has no need to bang on doors. The government has significant control over all of the systems we rely on for our daily lives, including energy, utilities, water delivery and purification, food, and communications. Why would they bother strapping on their guns and kicking in someone's door, when they can just sit in their air conditioned control rooms and push a button that will black out people's lives?
    
    If we rewrote the second amendment for modern times it should say that we all have the right to be computer hackers and that part of our defensible property is private information.

    replyreport
12. 0

    Old Empresarioposted 11 years ago

    No, because Colorado has always been a den of angry gunslingers going back to the old wild west days. The violent culture there has not changed in so short a time, although the technology and media coverage has increased considerably. Regional cultures do not change so quickly. Colorado is still the same savage land that it was in the 1870s as far as I am concerned. People there still think you solve your problems by walking into a saloon and blowing people away. Just because it became a state and has a lot of places to ski now does not mean that it is some civilized place.

    replyreport
    1. 82

       Attikosposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       You mean to say the Californication of Colorado is only skin deep?

       replyreport
    2. 0

       Old Empresarioposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I think there are pockets here and there in every place. But some voices are louder than others. Colorado is also a military garrison state: NORAD, NORTHCOM, US Air Force Academy, Fort Carson, and three air force bases, Lockheed...

       replyreport
    3. 79

       Mitch Alanposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Your remarks would make one believe that you think the citizens of Colorado, and Aurora specifically, are part of the problem...A monster, who decides to kill innocent people is not an indicator of a community as a whole.

       replyreport
13. 79

    Mitch Alanposted 11 years ago

    If you make illegal the ownership of arms to the citizen, then only the criminal will be armed...and the government as well will be emboldened to strip evermore freedoms from We the People.

    replyreport
14. 0

    CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years ago

    No, banning the Second Amendment is not the solution. The solution is not stripping freedoms from law-abiding citizens.
    
    Taking this ill-conceived thought to the logical conclusion, should we also outlaw cars, because some people drink and drive? More people die from automobile accidents in this country than die from guns, but I bet you would never consider giving up your wheels...would you? Should we also outlaw cell phones, too? God knows they lead to auto accidents and deaths as well.
    
    In fact, I think part of the problem is the government will not allow the public to police its own population. This wacko probably never got a spanking in his whole pathetic life, because the State would have considered it child abuse. I also wouldn't be surprised if this nut-job came from a single-mother house hold (80% of the prison population of the U.S. comes from single-mother homes), and was a product of the public school system. Garbage in...garbage out.
    
    You see folks, I am not at all surprised by this...but I am surprised it doesn't happen more than it does.
    
    This poor sap is just a product of the poor standards instituted by his government. Since there are no moral absolutes, who is to tell him he's wrong? If God doesn't exist, why should he ultimately care what he did? If evolution is true, he was just exercising his right to be top dog, by predating on the weaker sheep. If he looks at his own country as an example, he can see them shooting up people who cannot defend themselves overseas.
    
    I think all this guy needed was a spanking when he was young and an education in morality. The State wouldn't let his parents spank him when he was young or teach him the 10 Commandments in school, now they will try to invoke the death penalty on one of their own creations.
    
    I think we should diminish our standing army by 90% and train our people to be citizen soldiers. I trust "Joe Public" with guns more than our corrupt government and warmongering military.

    replyreport
15. 74

    dappledesignsposted 11 years ago

    strip law-abiding citizens of their rights while we 'hope' that criminals don't get their hands on newly illegal weapons? No thank you. So if the 2nd Amendment was at some point retired, criminals and crazies would all of sudden start following the laws?
    
    I do think there are several people out there that act irresponsibly with their 'rights' and I am a firm believe that a person kills a person not a gun kills a person. Those who are irresponsible obviously feel that the right is theirs with no consequence. Even if we were to get rid of every gun in the entire world, those with criminal minds would find a solution and devise another form of weaponry.
    
    Harsher punishment for those who do wrong is what is needed, not stripping the 'good law-abiding' citizen of their rights for another persons deeds.

    replyreport
16. 72

    lone77starposted 11 years ago

    There are many suspicious things about this case and the Corporate Party media (which has a vested interest in stripping citizens of all rights) isn't saying anything about the anomalies.
    
    One local reporter is a font of wonderful, investigative journalism:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jeW_-Kq7vA
    
    Both Bush and Obama have accelerated the erosion of the Constitution and Bill of Rights, but it's been going on for a hundred years or more.
    
    We need to restore our liberties, not erode them more.
    
    Responsible people should be able to protect themselves from criminals. The police can't always help. Sometimes they're too busy. I saw that happen in L.A.; called 911 and got a volunteer who said that he'd take a note, but couldn't promise anything.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       CJ Sledgehammerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Right on, LoneStar!!!

       replyreport