KylieDog said:
sc94597 said:
KylieDog said:
sc94597 said:
No I get your point and the point of my post is that Americans disagree with your sentiment, otherwise it would be repealed through constitutional means. In fact, if there was any point it could've been repealed it was in the 1950's, before any of these mass shootings occured. Almost 60% of Americans supported total gun prohibition then. Today only about 26% do.
|
...and there you go, the constitution protects things bad for the public
|
If it was bad for the public people would agree and support such an amendment. All power is derived from people, and in order to do this one must trust the people make reasonable decisions. Otherwise, we might as well go back to monarchies or oligarchies. If anything though the constitution protects people from mob rule, because a majority can't vote away the rights of a minority to the federal or governments.
|
...but you aren't protecting a minority, you're putting lethal things into the hands of masses when it is proven more and more as time goes on that the masses are not responsible.
|
No offense but I'm glad that you don't have any power. The people need weapons to be able to resist their government if the need ever arises. All tyrants strip the people of firearms before abusing them. The American government is currently a farcical misrepresentation of the intents of the founding fathers and I shudder to think what would happen if the people were entirely unable to resist their will. I am a firm believer in the decentralization of power as it makes it difficult for corrupt individuals to misuse theirs. You do realize that if guns were banned that criminals would still have access to them and if not, they would simply use explosives or other weapons.
