By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - School Shooting in South Florida

deskpro2k3 on 14 February 2018

guys time out.. it's still to soon to talk about gun control. >_>



CPU: Ryzen 7950X
GPU: MSI 4090 SUPRIM X 24G
Motherboard: MSI MEG X670E GODLIKE
RAM: CORSAIR DOMINATOR PLATINUM 32GB DDR5
SSD: Kingston FURY Renegade 4TB
Gaming Console: PLAYSTATION 5
Around the Network
super_etecoon on 14 February 2018
Nighthawk117 said:
super_etecoon said:

Maybe that should be a clause added to the 2nd amendment the next time the Constitution gets changed...um, amended to better reflect the modern times in which we live.  While we're at it maybe we could also be a bit more specific about what kinds of firearms should be allowed, what their rate of fire should be, the number of bullets available in its clip, and also that each person attempting to participate in this not so well-regulated militia at least be given the proper pysch evaluation to know that he or she only intends to use said weapon in defense (and the occasional target practice/hunting, of course).

Super, the 2nd Amendment has never been changed or altered in our history.  So, why should we change it now? 

That's the dilemma.  

By the way, in what country do you live?

My country seems irrelevant to the discussion.  My point is that the 2nd amendment is by definition proof that the Constitution can be changed.  Some stoic white dudes 200 years ago couldn't fathom the technological advancements that were made in the 1800s, let alone the 1900s.



sundin13 on 14 February 2018
Ka-pi96 said:
sundin13 said:

There is no need to fall onto the greatest extreme of removing all guns. It is logistically impractical and politically impossible. Focus on more realistic goals which could actually have a strong positive impact. All the hyperbolic reactions do is gridlock debate...

Why not? I've never even seen a gun in my country. It wasn't until I went abroad and saw cops with guns and was like "wtf do the cops have guns for" that I actually saw one. How many shootings do we have? Not just the massacre kind of shootings, I mean the cops shooting black people ones as well? Yeah, we don't really have that. Why would anybody not want a society where you can walk down the street without having to worry about a single person having a gun, let alone actually being shot?

Why not? Well, I think I stated a couple of reasons. One is that it is logistically impractical. Two is that it is politically impossible. Three is that it deadlocks the debate. 

I won't argue whether or not it would be beneficial for the country, because I think that is a purely theoretical conversation. What we need now isn't theory, but practical solutions to real problems. I think there are plenty of practical steps that can be taken to have a strong impact on violence in this country. Let's start with those.

Like, I understand your reaction, especially coming from someone outside of the United States, but it simply isn't helpful to political discourse at this point in time. All it does is make gun owners clutch their guns and flinch at the words "gun control", even if the term is being used to argue for something they may support without the added baggage. 



Nighthawk117 on 14 February 2018
super_etecoon said:
Nighthawk117 said:

Super, the 2nd Amendment has never been changed or altered in our history.  So, why should we change it now? 

That's the dilemma.  

By the way, in what country do you live?

My country seems irrelevant to the discussion.  My point is that the 2nd amendment is by definition proof that the Constitution can be changed.  Some stoic white dudes 200 years ago couldn't fathom the technological advancements that were made in the 1800s, let alone the 1900s.

Yes, super, you are absolutely right...the US  Constitution can be changed....but don't bet on the the people of the US changing it anytime soon.



Medisti on 14 February 2018
Ka-pi96 said:
super_etecoon said:

Aha...I knew there was an important part of that amendment that needed to be stated.  Thanks for helping our foreign brothers and sisters understand the language that is used to allow hobbysists and enthusiasts the opportunity to possess weapons of warfare.

Yeah... it's not as if you could change the laws of a country to forbid people from owning "weapons of warfare". It's not like any other country has done exactly that before. Oh, wait...

Do you have any idea how difficult it is to repeal an amendment to the United States Constitution? The only situation I can remember where that occurred was Prohibition. It's simply not going to happen in today's politically climate.



Around the Network
Nighthawk117 on 14 February 2018
Medisti said:
Ka-pi96 said:

Yeah... it's not as if you could change the laws of a country to forbid people from owning "weapons of warfare". It's not like any other country has done exactly that before. Oh, wait...

Do you have any idea how difficult it is to repeal an amendment to the United States Constitution? The only situation I can remember where that occurred was Prohibition. It's simply not going to happen in today's politically climate.

In fact, the last amendment was ratified in 1992.



Medisti on 14 February 2018
Nighthawk117 said:
Medisti said:

Do you have any idea how difficult it is to repeal an amendment to the United States Constitution? The only situation I can remember where that occurred was Prohibition. It's simply not going to happen in today's politically climate.

In fact, the last amendment was ratified in 1992.

When was the last repeal of an existing one? Do you know? Or, was there ever any outside of prohibition?



Nighthawk117 on 14 February 2018
Medisti said:
Nighthawk117 said:

In fact, the last amendment was ratified in 1992.

When was the last repeal of an existing one? Do you know? Or, was there ever any outside of prohibition?

In all honesty, I am not aware of one being repealed outside of the prohibition one.



The_Yoda on 14 February 2018
super_etecoon said:
Nighthawk117 said:
Main article: Second Amendment to the United States Constitution

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.[92]

The Second Amendment protects the individual right to keep and bear arms.

Aha...I knew there was an important part of that amendment that needed to be stated.  Thanks for helping our foreign brothers and sisters understand the language that is used to allow hobbysists and enthusiasts the opportunity to possess weapons of warfare.

Can you further educate our foreign brothers and sisters on the definition of a militia?



Medisti on 14 February 2018
Nighthawk117 said:
Medisti said:

When was the last repeal of an existing one? Do you know? Or, was there ever any outside of prohibition?

In all honesty, I am not aware of one being repealed outside of the prohibition one.

You're right. I looked it up, and the 21st Amendment is unique for being the only one to repeal a prior amendment. So, given the divide on simple gun control, the nature of the United States's political process and how difficult it is to get an Amendment passed anyway, any discussion on banning guns outright is essentially a waste of effort.

That said, I don't see how a better background check system would infringe on anyone's privileges. It won't stop gun violence, especially since personal responsibility will be the deciding factor in if children or teens have access to their parents's guns, but it will certainly help curb it somewhat.