Do you think our 2nd Amendment should be reconsidered?

1. 65

   ThompsonPenposted 11 years ago

   Do you think our 2nd Amendment should be reconsidered?
   
   With the recent tragic shooting on the East Coast, coupled with the shooting at the opening of the newest Batman, as well as the lesser heard of shooting in California on voting day, is it time we reconsider whether or not we should have the right to bear arms?

   replyreport
2. 82

   lrc7815posted 11 years ago

   Jeff, I keep asking myself that question but I come up with the same answer.  That gun didn't do the killing.  I just keep wondering why it keeps happening.  What is wrong in our world that make this the answer?  I wonder about our toxic bodies and brains (environment and food) and I wonder about our lack of parenting (due to the economy) and I wonder about the laws that prevent parents from disciplining children the way my parents did it.  I wonder and I wonder and I wonder and all I come up with is that is has to stop.  This is so painful it's almost impossible to think straight.  Thank God you are doing something with your grief by writing beautiful tributes and asking questions.

   replyreport
   1. 82

      lrc7815posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Nicole, I am sorry for calling you Jeff.  I was crying when I wrote teh comment and thought someone else asked the question.  Now that I've made a fool of myself, I will go back to my tears.

      replyreport
   2. 65

      ThompsonPenposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It's alright, I've done that myself Not to worry.
      At least there are people out there who can extend their love toward their fellow human being. It can't replace the tragic loss of life, but may help fill the hole of the gunman's lack of humanity

      replyreport
3. 61

   point2makeposted 11 years ago

   The framers of our Constitution could never have foreseen what the 2nd amendment would eventually evolved into. Whether you accept the interpretation that the 2nd amendment refers to "militias" or if your belief is that it refers to "all citizens" having the right to bear arms....no one could have predicted the mess the "right to bear arms" has become. We are a violent society which is, by some accounts, armed with 300 million handguns!!! It's frightening, it's insanity and it's absolutely heart breaking.  What will become of our people and our nation......the future does not feel quite so positive anymore after today.

   replyreport
   1. 77

      wba108@yahoo.composted 11 years agoin reply to this

      In the federalist papers, the founders referred to the 2nd amendment as a check of government power therefore I feel that it was meant for all citizens. It would be a useless for it to apply only to a government controlled militia.

      replyreport
4. 67

   hockey8mnposted 11 years ago

   No.  The individual that committed this crime is the lowest form of life.  No matter what you do, people like them will commit these crimes.  All the laws in the world would have never stopped what happened today.  It is despicable and the fact that the coward took their own life in the wake of what happened speaks highly of their character.  This person was not a law abiding citizen.  Law abiding citizens should absolutely have the right to bear arms.  Words can not even begin to describe what this sick individual did.  This person did not value life.

   replyreport
5. 0

   SassySue1963posted 11 years ago

   Gun control only removes guns from the hands of law abiding citizens. These guns were not his own. He did not purchase them. They were his mothers' and he murdered her to get to them. In China, there was also an attack at a school. The man used a knife. Our citizens own more guns than any other nation but we do not have the highest murder rate per capita in the world.
   I have to agree with IRC here. People kill people and if you remove the guns, they will find another way to do so.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      An AYMposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It's a lot harder to kill someone without a gun than it is with one.  Is there any legitimate reason his mother apparently needed to load up on guns like Hans Gruber was coming to town?

      replyreport
   2. 0

      SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      "loaded up" ? It is my understanding it was 2 handguns (glock and sig) and a .22 caliber rifle. They say the rifle was found in the car. Yes, I know they are 9mm handguns. I get that. But it isn't an arsenal.

      replyreport
   3. 0

      An AYMposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Why did she need more than 1 gun let alone any?  Why would a grade school teacher/mother need two handguns and a rifle?  It's not a weapons bunker, but it still strikes meas an unnecessarily large amount of weaponry that clearly didn't end well.

      replyreport
   4. 0

      SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      They are still investigating. There are all sorts of reasons that people feel the need to own a handgun. Sometimes something personal that occurs. Sometimes something they see on the news that isn't personal but they feel threatened.

      replyreport
   5. 0

      An AYMposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      There is no legitimate reason anyone would truly need more guns than they have hands.
      Because buying a lethal weapon out of fear/paranoia is reasonable and everyone should have the right to if they want to?

      replyreport
   6. 0

      SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It is possible she bought a handgun, didn't like it, so got a different type. It is possible something happened to someone she knew.  Not everyone has the same experiences in life. Neither you nor I have any idea, not her reasons, or for anyone.

      replyreport
   7. 0

      An AYMposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It's not the reason that matters.  It's the belief that we have the right to end life.  It's that with all our emotional outbursts, human mistakes, misinformation and bad decisions we think we have a right to own a [specifically] life-taking device.

      replyreport
   8. 0

      SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      You have a right to defend yourself, your property and others' lives. What do you think you solve if only the criminals are armed? Gun laws only work for those who follow the law. Cases of lives saved are largely ignored by the media They still exist

      replyreport
   9. 0

      An AYMposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Yes they exist, I don't doubt that.  There are plenty of ways to defend yourself without a gun though.
      And I am of the opinion that no property is worth dying or killing over.  It's just stuff.

      replyreport
   10. 65

       Ralph Deedsposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       There are degrees of gun control, both in the types of guns controlled and in the control rules. Your comment is an over-generalization. As St. Thomas Aquinas said: "Never deny. Seldom affirm. Always distinguish."

       replyreport
   11. 77

       Kasmanposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Here's my thought and challenge.  I will give up the gun I depend on to defend myself and my family, if you can promise me that everyone else outside my door doesn't have one.  The black market is alive and well for the criminals.  Always will be.

       replyreport
6. 76

   flacoinohioposted 11 years ago

   I don't think the second amendment should be reconsidered.  Changing the second amendment would not prevent acts of violence or regulate mental instability.

   replyreport
7. 61

   Dennis AuBuchonposted 11 years ago

   I do not believe this amendment should be revisited.  Changing the concept placed in the 2nd amendment will not prevent the incidents.  We as individuals since our country began had the right to bear arms.  I do agree that something needs to be done but whatever it winds up being should not trample on the concept in the Constitution. 
   
   It does not matter what laws are in place there will always be individuals who will find ways to get around them if they are intent in their actions.  We need to find a way to prevent the access to the type of firearms for which regular individuals should have no need and that they should not have the capability to acquire.
   
   This is a great question and one which in the coming weeks and months will be debated on what action should be taken.  We must make sure that the actions taken is not one of overreacting.  Often times events take place where government overreacts.  Let us hope that such action does not take place but logical action through bi-partisan decisions.

   replyreport
8. 0

   An AYMposted 11 years ago

   Yes, but I felt like it should have been revised before regardless of recent events.  Everyone likes to imagine that we have to have guns because then only criminals will have the guns.  As though the only thing preventing crime in this country is because you can never truly know who might have a gun.  Crime happens regardless.  Though I am not familiar with the numbers associated, I would be willing to bet that the number of innocent people killed far far outweighs the number of legitimate violent criminals killed.
   
   We don't all need guns.  We shouldn't all have guns.  No one should have the default right to own a device that makes ending a life literally as easy as flipping a switch.  I'm more scared of people who own guns that believe they're going to go shoot up bad guys because they think life is like a movie.

   replyreport
   1. 0

      SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Anytime there is a tragedy such as this, those who wish to collect the guns of law abiding citizens stand up and shout. Do you know more innocent people die at the hands of drunk drivers than by guns? Do you want to revisit prohibition?

      replyreport
   2. 0

      An AYMposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      This incident changes nothing of my perspective.  I've always found guns childish and dumb.
      I'd rather less people drove because not everyone needs a car.  I'd like to visit people not feeling they should be entitled to everything/anything they want.

      replyreport
   3. 0

      SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      Here, as in the Oregon incident, the guns were stolen. If they'll steal them, then they'll get them illegally off the black market. No law would have prevented it.

      replyreport
   4. 0

      An AYMposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      No law works to 100% effectiveness.  I do belive things like this would be much less likely to happen.  How many people intrinsically know how to buy things off the black market?  Do we assume people are going to Google it or just walk around asking?

      replyreport
   5. 0

      SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

      It wouldn't surprise me about Google. You can learn how to make a home made bomb there. If someone is so inclined they will find a way to obtain what they want. Everyone likes to think we are immune to any gov't takeover as well. I don't know why.

      replyreport
   6. 0

      An AYMposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      If you could Google how to buy off the black market it would be remarkably easy for law enforcement to find it.
      Because why would the government possibly need or bother to?  Complacency is practically patriotic and we worship the military religiously

      replyreport
   7. 76

      flacoinohioposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      The black market is everywhere, look on the Internet, your local newspaper, public guns shows, anyone who conducts a private gun sale is technically part of the black market.  What weapon are we going to regulate next, knives, baseball bats, Buick's?

      replyreport
   8. 0

      An AYMposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      No, they aren't part of the black market.  The "Black Market" is the sale of specifically illegal goods.  You are only there if you sell illegal guns.
      I can't imagine someone killing 20 with a bat when you could stop it by simply tackling them.

      replyreport
   9. 80

      Mitch Alanposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      AYM, 22 poeple killed the same day as this brutal attack, but with a knife. Evil will find a way. And, it isn't about "need", but about our Constitutional Right. We are protected by a Constitution, not arbitrary "whims".

      replyreport
   10. 0

       An AYMposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Are you referring to the incident in China, in which no one - not even the 85 year old woman who was stabbed - died?
       We're protected by a paper which has been amended over time. If guns were legally written out would you accept and not mind?

       replyreport
   11. 0

       SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       The Constitution has been amended. The Bill of Rights is just that. Protected rights that are mentioned first and specifically for a reason. There are any number of places that deny their citizens the right to arm themselves. You're free to try them.

       replyreport
   12. 0

       An AYMposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I would love to were I somehow immediately wealthy enough to allow easy travel.
       I just find it funny people act like the constitution is holy when we had to refine it to say "Hey guys, no slavery".  I don't believe morality should be  decided by law.

       replyreport
   13. 0

       SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       You keep confusing one with the other. The Bill of Rights has never been amended because it contains the guarantee of certain rights to every citizen. The rest of the Constitution has been amended. Every civilization has had slavery btw.

       replyreport
   14. 0

       An AYMposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       It doesn't guarantee rights to everyone, that's why we had to add amendments saying black people and women could vote.
       Why do we pretend it's infallible just so long as it fits with our personal opinions?

       replyreport
   15. 0

       SassySue1963posted 11 years agoin reply to this

       I said certain rights. The right to vote is not mentioned in the Bill of Rights. In fact, other than the amendments for women and blacks, it is not mentioned in the Constitution at all.

       replyreport
   16. 0

       An AYMposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       That's true.
       People still treat it as gospel if the issue is something they want.  Why is it the one factor for everything in this country?  It's hundreds of years old and times change but many have this reverence as though it should never be touched

       replyreport
9. 71

   lone77starposted 11 years ago

   No. Personally, I don't like guns, but the 2nd Amendment is not the problem.
   
   Criminals will not obey the laws, so if they get rid of the 2nd Amendment, it doesn't change what criminals do. Please pay attention to this simple fact.
   
   Someone wants the 2nd Amendment gone and their willing to kill people and use impressionable nut cases to do it. Just like 9/11 was an inside job. And the Corporate Party media has done a bang-up job demonizing anyone who dares question the official "conspiracy theory."
   
   With it now a felony in the USA to protest what the government is doing, when the president has a "kill list" including Americans, and when you can be detained indefinitely (forever) without charges, then you have to admit, America is not the same "land of the free and home of the brave" it used to be.
   
   Someone is killing America and they've been doing it for just about 100 years, starting with the private Federal Reserve Bank (Rothschild and Rockefeller), private income taxes and the Rockefeller Foundation -- all 3 started in 1913.
   
   They're using knee-jerk responses like this one to fuel their final destruction of the Constitution and everything that America stands for. Just realize that we're letting it happen. Ben Franklin warned us about this and most of us didn't listen too well.
   
   Can we change it? Yes! Stop focusing on the Corporate Party Media's scare tactics. Stop reacting. Start putting back the positive things that made America great. That won't stop criminals from doing bad things, including the CIA from creating Al Qaeda, mad gunmen, and drug cartels. But if we concentrate enough on the good and stop all of these Wars Against, then we have a chance.
   
   Mother Teresa once said that she would never attend an Anti-War Rally, but would gladly attend a Peace Rally. Anti-anything only creates more of the same. That's the law of attraction.

   replyreport
   1. 59

      RavenBikerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

      I agree with everything you said.  I would add that we as a society ought aught to be looking at mental health issues instead of limiting our freedoms and rights.

      replyreport
10. 77

    Kasmanposted 11 years ago

    No, and I honestly think it would take all day, week, year to explain why but here's a simple, yet lengthy answer.
    
    Has anyone looked into Switzerland lately?  They believe in a citizen militia, almost every single household has an automatic weapon and they train their people from childhood how to use it and have some of the lowest crime rates out there.  It's also the reason that they haven't been invaded very often.  Recently, while I was in New Zealand, I met a lady from Switzerland and she couldn't understand, given the fact that criminals can get guns no matter if the law abiding citizens are armed or not, why anyone would try to make it harder on the citizens to defend themselves.  They roundly rejected a major gun control referendum in February of 2011 citing that it's inconceivable to make it harder on the citizenry as crime rates would skyrocket when criminals realize that the citizens aren't armed. 
    
    Take for example also England.  When they had the riots going on there with the Occupy crowds destroying everything in their paths, they didn't have a choice in the matter.  They were caught up in the riots whether they wanted to be or not.  These people were victimized and terrorized because all they had to defend themselves with were baseball bats....(if they were blessed to have them at all).  Many bloody victims later, we look on with amazement and ask if they were better off with legal gun carry rights.
    
    By the way, I also had a big issue with buying a gun myself for a long time until some circumstances came up (which will remain a secret) that convinced me that I needed to be licensed, trained, and armed for mine and my wife's safety. 
    
    I know many people who didn't believe in even owning a gun until they've been robbed at gunpoint and victimized and then decided they didn't want to be a victim again.  A close friend of mine told me I was nuts for buying a firearm and being legally licensed until he and his family were threatened on the front porch of his house. All he asked these people to do was to turn the music down (in a decently nice neighborhood by the way) Not too long after that, someone began shooting in one of his windows of the room where his baby normally slept.  Suffice it to say, he's been asking my advice alot lately on how to shoot and has even gone to the range with me.  He now owns a 40 caliber pistol and feels a lot safer because of it.

    replyreport
    1. 71

       Alastar Packerposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       Switzerland is a great example, Kasman. That's the main reason Hitler stayed his hand from occupation and the country remained free.

       replyreport
11. 71

    Don Fairchildposted 11 years ago

    Stop Stop, why do we insist on blaming the guns! 
    How about locking up repeat criminals so they can't get a hold of guns. 
    How about putting unstable people away in hospitals so they can't use guns.  How about teaching our kids that violence is an unacceptable practice in our society instead of watching it every day on television. 
    Once you outlaw guns they will simple start using illegal weapons or weapons that are not currently illegal like knives or worse.
    
    Tens of thousands of people die on the road in the US every year due to traffic accidents, do you think we should outlaw cars and trucks because they kill innocent people.....
    
    Just lock up the criminals and don't let them out, I would gladly pay an extra tax to build more penitentiaries.
    
    Don't get me wrong, these and other tragedies are very disturbing and I fear for the integrity of our society.  But asking to change a Constitutional amendment is not going to make this problem go away.  Just get rid of the criminals and mentally ill people.

    replyreport
12. 80

    ZipperConstantineposted 11 years ago

    What will we have to fight back with if our country is invaded?  If you think this can't happen then you are a dreamer.  Just look around you at all the unrest happening all around the world.  If we are invaded on our own soil, we must have a means of defending ourselves and our families. Our military will not be able to be everywhere.   I am not an extremist just an average person who believes our forefathers knew what they were doing when they wrote the Constitution.
    
    If it is not guns it will be bombs.  There will always be a way if someone wants to kill.

    replyreport
13. 77

    wba108@yahoo.composted 11 years ago

    No, I feel that its a societal issue and that guns are just tools that can be used or misused!
    
    The 2nd amendment is an important Constitutional freedom. Despotic governments often institute gun control and render the citizens helpless ie. NAZI Germany, Soviet Russia ect.... I feel the right to bear arms does provide a last ditch deterrent to a government seizure of power.
    
    If the poeple feel they need to change the Constitution, they should do so in the prescribed manner.

    replyreport
14. 39

    Borsiaposted 11 years ago

    Virtually everyone I hear calling for an end to gun ownership and denouncing CCW permits have never been faced with a violent crime themselves.
    I owned a business in a bad area for over 25 years and worked for another for another 8.
    I started carrying a gun after the second day. I hadn't even opened for business and was just cleaning the building the first time. 2 men with clubs came in the front door and closed it behind them. I was upstairs where I had most of my belongings stored. Among my things was my pump action hunting rifle, but no bullets.
    But a pump action gun makes a sound that is unmistakable and in an empty warehouse it echoed as though there were loudspeakers.
    The 2 would be robbers were climbing over each other trying to get the bared door they had just closed open and ran into the street, almost getting hit by a passing car.
    Over the next 30+ years I was saved by the gun I carried 5 more times, but never fired a single shot. But had I been unarmed I would be lucky to be alive and certainly would have lost thousands of dollars and been beaten.
    As to what kind of guns we should or shouldn't have? I can tell you that when the LA riots were happening only a block away and there were National Guard soldiers at every major intersection I was happy that I had my Mini-14, which the media would call an assault rifle, especially given my 2, 30 round magazines.
    That same media who gives endless press to every shooting fell virtually silent only a couple of weeks ago when a would be mass killer in a mall killed himself after firing only a few shots when he saw armed citizens had him in their sights.
    They don't say a word about the million or so crimes that are thwarted every year by private citizens with guns, rarely do they fire a shot.
    As to the "assault" guns? They are simply semi-automatic (they fire 1 shot or each trigger pull). I can change magazines in my standard pistol in 3 seconds, I can reload my revolver in about 5. So arbitrary laws regarding the style of guns doesn't mean much and there are many shooting sports that use these type of guns. Not everyone who owns guns and loves to shoot is interested in hunting.
    Finally I will point out that in states that have liberalized CCW laws to allow average citizens permits the crime rates have dropped dramatically, especially violent crimes, with no increase in shooting incidents.
    So no I wouldn't change the 2nd or how it is interpreted.

    replyreport
    1. 0

       An AYMposted 11 years agoin reply to this

       http://scienceblogs.com/deltoid/2003/08/18/0818/
       
       I don't believe the majority of Americans are running businesses in bad neighborhoods.

       replyreport