I think this thread shows just how far down on the list gun control really is with Democrats

[krispos42]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=389x8941379

Given a choice to name one amendment that people could pick out of thin air if they wanted to, not a single person (as of posting) said "hey, I would change the Second Amendment to disarm people/save lives/lower the crime rate".

Look at the list... it's all about improving the political process that we use to make our laws, to overcome glaring deficicies like publically-financed election. Or about more equal rights (ERA, marriage equality, health care).

Despite the hyperbole and hand-wringing that goes on here, when given a chance DUers don't even mention civilian disarmament or making it harder to buy/own/sell guns.

We all know what the fundamental problems are with America, and it's not because rifles that have both pistol grips AND bayonet lugs are for sale.

[crim son]

1. I despise guns, however

the constitution if rather unambiguous, is it not, with respect to citizens' right to bear arms? It seems that the vehemence with which gun-lovers defend that right is equal to or greater than that expended by "prolifers" in the abortion debate. Perhaps we are picking our battles at this time or perhaps in our hearts we know this is a battle we will not win. I think of guns like I think of disease: they are a terrible thing but they are unavoidable because our forefathers never envisioned our modern world. IOW, you are being maybe too hopeful in your OP.

edited for crappy punctuation

[krispos42]

3. Given a chance to correct what they see as our forefather's oversight on this issue...

...DUers are instead electing to correct what they see as other, more important oversights.


I tend to equate the pro-lifer people with the anti-gun lobby... in both cases nobody is forcing them to either own a gun or get an abortion, but they simply cannot come to grips with the thought that somebody can simply walk into a building and get one, and fight hard to change that. "If you don't want one, don't have one" simply doesn't work with them.

[Tunkamerica]

8. well, there's one obvious difference there.

an abortion can't shoot me in the face.

[shadowrider]

9. You can survive a gunshot to the face n/t

[crim son]

15. Yeah, I was about to say something like that.

If I have an abortion, it doesn't affect the gun owner. The reverse is not true. It's like using the automobile analogy: it doesn't apply to guns, but don't let the gun enthusiasts hear that.

Outta here. It's a pointless debate, as I wrote above.

[cleanhippie]

18. You could not be more wrong.

If I have an abortion, it doesn't affect the gun owner. The reverse is not true.


Wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong,wrong.

Yes, if you have an abortion, it does not affect anyone else, and the same is true if I legally purchase a gun, it affects no one else. Not even a little bit.

[crim son]

22. Are you being deliberately obtuse

or are you unaware that people kill and maim people with guns every day? Maybe not you, but maybe you. Or maybe not you but someone else with your gun. Take a look at LBN.

I've never seen a gun enthusiast admit the veracity of any anti-gun argument and I'm not expecting you to be the first. It's just too damned hard not to respond to your ludicrous statement.

[cleanhippie]

24. Are you deliberately using false equivalencies ?

The first one you used I refuted in my earlier post, and now you state Or maybe not you but someone else with your gun

with MY gun? Really? I don't think so. I am willing to bet I use more precaution using and storing my gun than you do using and storing your car.


MY gun? wrong again.

[cowman]

27. That's becaise all you anti gun

crowd have are emotions and wringing of the hands, we have facts on our side and when confronted with these facts, the anti gunners usually resort to insults.

[spin]

17. Some will argue that an abortion is murder ...

I personally believe that it is a woman's choice.

My daughter ended up pregnant although she was on birth control. We sat down and talked. She had just broke up with the father and faced a difficult decision. I told her that I would support whatever decision she made, but it had to be her decision.

She decided to have the baby and the father chose to marry her. Just over a year later, she became pregnant again. Since she had had a very difficult time with the first baby (preeclampsia) that almost caused her death, her doctors advised her to avoid pregnancy for several years. She was once again on the pill which obviously failed despite the odds. She had another difficult decision and again decided to deliver the baby.

My daughter's first marriage ended in divorce but she found another husband. I now have two wonderful grandsons to enjoy and while everything ended up well, both my daughter and myself support a woman's right to chose.

[SteveM]

21. There is little ambiguity "with respect to citizens' right to bear arms."

The operative clause of the Second Amendment states "the people," and this has been taken in the rest of the Constitution as an individual right, not a "collective" right. (I see no real reference to a "collective right" anywhere in the Constitution.)

As for the "militia clause," this was/is in reference to the Articles which enumerate the powers of the federal government, among which are the provisions authorizing militia "necessary for the security of a free state." The Articles give the federal (central) government powers (authorizing militia), the Bill of Rights recognize the rights of the people of the U.S., specifically enjoining the federal government from infringing them. Though to some the sentence structure is awkward, it was common at that time, and in any case prevented the federal government FROM INFRINGING the right of the people to bear arms. Some have since argued that this Amendment did not prevent the states from infringing that right, but the Fourteenth Amendment (1868) defines a U.S. citizens, and PREVENTS ANY STATE from infringing upon the rights of U.S. citizens. The 14th grew out of the rise of Jim Crow legislation which sought to disarm the newly-"freed" black population.

I am struck by your comparison of the debate over RKBA and reproductive rights. In both instances, prohibition is used as a public policy strategy. As with alcohol, drugs, gay lifestyles, tobacco (the newest prohibition), etc., the strategy is doomed to failure.
Prohibition is based on culture war wherein a thing or practice is condemned, and ipso facto the user of the condemned thing is morally condemned and threatened with government sanction (jail). This is why there are dug-in, teeth-grinding, spittle-flying battles: One side knows it is hated by the other, and wastes no opportunity at getting back.

Gun are not a disease. They are a tool, even if a tool to enable the criminal and thug to have his/her way with others. If there is a "disease," it lies with those elements of our population who have "gone feral," and seek to take what they can from the greater (and despised) population. Accordingly, the greater population has the right to arm (individually) in self-defense.

Rather than choose your battles, try examining the motivations for your feelings and leave open your mind for possible change. I learned over 40 years ago my prohibitionist attitude toward drugs was destructive and distracting. But I didn't give up the battle; I saw I was on the wrong side.

BTW, the founding fathers knew that advances in arms were taking place and on the horizon.

[proteus_lives]

29. You've got it back-wards.

"It seems that the vehemence with which gun-lovers defend that right is equal to or greater than that expended by "prolifers" in the abortion debate."

We are the pro-choicers. The pro-lifers, anti-marriage/LGBT crowd and the anti control types are the ones who are cousins to each other.

[Jamastiene]

2. A person should have that right, plain and simple.

Other than a few who feel very strongly about gun control, I'd say most people would rather see laws dealing with violence enforced better and violent offenders punished justly a little more often than not. Let law abiding citizens have their guns.

[rawtribe]

4. I'm all for culling the herd.

Go second amendment.....

:bounce:

[ProgressiveProfessor]

5. Isn't it more of a Darwin like activity than active culling

Breaking into occupied homes in areas which support firearm rights is sort of asking for it in many ways.

There is no en masse killing in the street which I would think of as culling.

[rawtribe]

6. You're correct

The culling is handled by our military.

Darwin hit my family this year when my, responsible gun owning, cousin used a gun to take his life.

I guess I'm a little hypersensitive.

Go 2nd amendment.

:banghead:

[one-eyed fat man]

12. Would you have felt better if he had jumped off a bridge?nt

[east texas lib]

14. My cousin inhaled R-22 (a common refrigerant) to take his life.

Does the method used matter more than the end result of such an action?

[cleanhippie]

19. So you balme the tool he used?

If he jumped off a bridge would you be hypersensitive to bridges?


I'm sorry to hear that you suffered a loss, you have my condolences.

[spin]

20. My sincere sympathy ...

I can totally understand your position on firearms. I hold different views as a firearm may have saved my daughter's live when she stopped an intruder breaking into our home. Fortunately no shots were fired, She drew down on him and he ran.

But as I said, I can understand your hatred of firearms.

[PavePusher]

23. "The culling is handled by our military. "

Excuse me?

Please explain what you mean by this, as I really hope I'm taking it the wrong way...

[east texas lib]

26. You'll encounter that attitude here from time to time, PP...

Pay no mind, they'd never have the stones to make those statements face to face. And thank you for your service to our country.

[PavePusher]

28. No thanks needed...

all I do is help keep the aircraft flying.

Please, thank the guys who are targets. They are the ones who really deserve it.

[slackmaster]

25. I lost a cousin last year too, rawtribe. I know it's tough.

Mine had a congenital heart problem catch up with him, at age 49.

[proteus_lives]

30. So your cousin's death justifies the removal of other's rights?

Explain.

[Jim Sagle]

7. I'm not a gun guy, but I think you're right.

In fact, I think the Dems would be smart to shitcan gun control as an issue once and for all. All it does is make them look weak and elitist. Which may be intentional - just another way to deliberately lose.

[RC]

10. Facts in the gungeon? What next, sensible posts by both sides?

Ya sure, just wait...

[aikoaiko]

11. I noticed the same thing. nt

[X_Digger]

13. You're not the only one to notice that..

I was waiting for the usual suspects to chime in there. :)

[spin]

16. I followed that thread with interest ...

and noticed the same thing.