There is no idea like an idea whose time has come: It is time to amend the Second Amendment.

[2aguy]

The AR-15 is a copy of a weapon of war and it's black for a purpose. The point you refuse to accept is that they appeal to those who are trying to copy the military.

To narrow down the 'bad' element who buy AR-15's we could add that they will go to a range dressed in camo, and shoot at human silouette targets.

Those are now at least the highly suspected ones who at least are wanting to use their gun on another human being.

Is it normal behaviour for a young American man to want to pretend that he is a soldier with his AR-15?

Answer: What becomes the choice of a weapon for the majority, becomes the normal.

Are AR-15's the most popular weapon in America now?

Does the sale of AR-15's coincide with the mass shootings rate?

Moron.....they have pink AR-15s......

 

[Donald H]

There is something wrong with people who are brainwashed slaves/subjects of a shithole nation like Canaduh, that think that they have any wisdom at all to offer the free citizens of a nation like America as to how our nation should be run.

I can at least claim to represent Canada's statistics on mass shootings Bob.

And to the argument for owning guns, I can say that Canadians have lots of guns. But comparably very few military type/copies in the hands of civilians.

Canaduh and its subjects are pitiful cast-off relics of the same tyranny against which we Americans violently rebelled in order to establish our independence and sovereignty—a nation founded in cowering and groveling before the same tyrant whose ass we kicked to found ours.

Your assertion that Americans don't cower and grovel might have been taken to the extreme opposite, in that it's brought on a need to demonstrate an imagined threat, and that has led to America's continuous wars of aggression.


You're useful to the discussion Bob, even though you have never been able to contain your anger.

 

[Donald H]

Moron.....they have pink AR-15s......

Yes, they are made in pink and in my opinion that's to appeal to Klan trash such as MTG. In my opinion of course.

Mentioning the pink ones isn't helpful.

 

[Concerned American]

When Americans stop buying black AR-15's the slaughter of children in their schools will start to fall off.

Gee, maybe we should just buy pink AR's eh, duck? Moron

 

[LibertyKid]

You're finally on to something! Blaming the left is fine, as long as you're acknowledging that it is to do with 'a' culture in America that needs to be examined.

Can you acknowledge too that the adopted 'culture' is taking away your liberty?

Variable A: Urban Sub-culture of gangs and thugs not being called out by letists
+
Variable B: Narrative of "Mass Shootings" from the left
+
Variable C: Ignoring that the majority of Mass Shootings are committed by variable A
=
Leftist trying to change the 2A or other freedomes by whatever means they see fit.

The AR-15 is a copy of a weapon of war and it's black for a purpose. The point you refuse to accept is that they appeal to those who are trying to copy the military.

The AR is a weapon of defense, that can be used in war. Copying the military is not a "bad" thing. There are plenty of AR/Rifle owners who take certified tactical and self defense lessons by former military and or certified trainers, and I would advocate that owners do so.

To narrow down the 'bad' element who buy AR-15's we could add that they will go to a range dressed in camo, and shoot at human silouette targets. Some will even carry extra military paraphenalia for appearance sake! A few will even blacken their faces!

So. I belong to a rifle club. I have never seen someone come in with camo on their face for practice and target shooting.
Silhouette are one of the many types of targets. And so what if someone came in full military garb. If they aren't ex-military then they are try hards trying to cast an image, unnecessarily. This really supports nothing.

Those are now at least the highly suspected ones who at least are wanting to use their gun on another human being.

Conjecture, speculation, hyperbole and a strawman. These are the ones probably NOT going to commit a crime. They have a hobby, a passion, maybe a bit over zealous, but these are the ones I'd be least afraid of.

Is it normal behaviour for a young American man to want to pretend that he is a soldier with his AR-15?

Have you never played with a toy gun as a child. Have you never played good guys vs bad guys? What's the saying, as men age, the toys are the same, they just get more expensive. Again, your throwing out speculation and hyperbole. The data doesn't even remotely point to those you're stereotyping as culprits.
But you also excluded:
Old American Man
Middle Age American man
Young American Woman
Middle American Woman
Old American Woman

Are AR-15's the most popular weapon in America now?

Most. Popular. Rifle. And you can think the leftist for wanting to ban them and creating the demand.

Does the sale of AR-15's coincide with the mass shootings rate?

No. Most "Mass Shootings" are done by hand guns. And that's because the leftist politicians and media group ANY shooting with 3 or more victims as a Mass Shooting, which, as I have pointed out are done in your inner cities by urban gang bangers and street thugs.

 

[WinterBorn]

I realize this proposal is stirring up a proverbial hornet's nest, and the idea has about as much of a chance as catching a cloud with a fishnet. Nevertheless, I believe it is time to at least start the conversation. Think of this conversation as planting a seed. There is an old saying: "There is no idea like one whose time has come." I think this idea is just that – an idea whose time has come. And that idea is to amend the Second Amendment.

It is indeed a pressing concern to address the issue of gun violence in the United States, particularly when it comes to school shootings. While the Second Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms, the changing landscape of American society has led to calls for re-evaluating and amending this constitutional provision. The proposed "2A v.2" offers a nuanced approach to addressing this issue, allowing states to regulate guns as they see fit while still preserving the right to own firearms for specific purposes.

First, it is crucial to acknowledge that the context in which the Second Amendment was written has evolved significantly. The original intent of the framers was to ensure the ability of citizens to form a well-regulated militia, as a check against potential tyranny. However, as former Supreme Court justice John Paul Stevens pointed out, the National Guard now serves the purpose of a militia, making the original rationale for the Second Amendment less applicable to modern society.

Second, the proposed "2A v.2" amendment balances the need for individual rights with public safety. It respects the right to own single-shot bolt action rifles for hunting, self-defense, and sustenance purposes, as well as the right to own handguns at the state level. These provisions acknowledge the cultural and historical significance of gun ownership in America, while providing a framework for states to enact regulations that reflect the values and needs of their citizens.

Third, by allowing cities the right to ban handguns, the proposed amendment recognizes the unique challenges urban areas face when it comes to gun violence. The density and diversity of city populations can contribute to higher rates of crime, and localized handgun bans may be an effective way to address this issue. This proposal also respects the principle of local control, empowering cities to implement solutions tailored to their specific circumstances. Note that in the old west, many small towns required residents, when entering the town's borders, to turn in their guns to the local sheriff's office, yet no one complained about the second amendment. Since the NRA has become such a central force in opposing any regulation of arms, which, in my view, their efforts make it difficult for states and municipalities to regulate arms as the see fit, as they see are needed for their state's circumstances, circumstances with vary, not only from state to state, but from region to region, I feel this is an idea whose time has come.

Finally, the proposed "2A v.2" amendment maintains the spirit of the Second Amendment while adapting it to address the modern reality of gun violence. It offers a flexible framework for states and cities to develop regulations that protect public safety without infringing on individual rights. By updating the Second Amendment in this way, the United States can work towards reducing the devastating impact of gun violence while still respecting the constitutional rights of its citizens.

Also note that since I am not an expert on rifles, my view on single-shot bolt action versus semi automatic rifles is not solidified in my proposal, and I remain open to arguments presented by experts on their reasoning for continuing to allow for semi-automatic rifles. Also note that the amendment allows states to allow for semi-automatics--remember, a constitutional amendment is not a ban whatsoever, it is just being amended to allow states more freedom to regulate without interference from, what I personally view as, second amendment radical groups such as the NRA. Obviously, the NRA and it's hard core believers will oppose this idea, and I expect that.

What argument I reject is the one that goes; "if you ban guns only criminals will have guns". I reject it given that since the stern regulation, the hurdles placed on the path to owning a fully automatic machine gun have vastly reduced crimes for that particular weapon, there are very view crimes committed with them. Remember, 'I am not an expert" and if my reasoning is faulty, I invite your arguments to the contrary, and, of course, that goes for this entire proposal. The details, I'm asserting, are subject to negotiation, but I do feel the time has come for an amendment to the second amendment, one that will allow states and cities more freedom to regulate arms as they see fit, for the needs or their states and municipalities.

In conclusion, although the idea of amending the Second Amendment may seem like a difficult conversation to initiate, it is essential to plant the seed of change in order to address the pressing issue of gun violence in the United States. The "2A v.2" proposal offers a balanced and nuanced approach that respects individual rights, public safety, and local control. By engaging in this conversation, we can explore potential solutions and work towards creating a safer society for all.

*So, ladies and gentlemen, "fire away" (with your affirmations, discussions, and debate/counter arguments. Sorry, I couldn't resist the pun ).

Humbly tendered,
Rumpole

**************************************************************​

*Caveat: rude comments, "TLDL" comments, snarky and lazy retorts, disingenuous comments, ad nauseum, will be ignored.

You are welcome to try and amend the US Constitution. The methods are simple.

 

[Concerned American]

Mentioning the pink ones isn't helpful.

Neither is mentioning black ones, moron.

In my opinion of course.

Yeah, Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one--some are just shittier than others. Maybe you should go wipe yours, duck.

 

[Donald H]

Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one--some are just shittier than others.

You're my personal one, and you're completed devoted!
Stay with me!

 

[Concerned American]

The AR-15 is a copy of a weapon of war and it's black for a purpose. The point you refuse to accept is that they appeal to those who are trying to copy the military.

To narrow down the 'bad' element who buy AR-15's we could add that they will go to a range dressed in camo, and shoot at human silouette targets. Some will even carry extra military paraphenalia for appearance sake! A few will even blacken their faces!

Those are now at least the highly suspected ones who at least are wanting to use their gun on another human being.

Is it normal behaviour for a young American man to want to pretend that he is a soldier with his AR-15?

Answer: What becomes the choice of a weapon for the majority, becomes the normal.

Are AR-15's the most popular weapon in America now?

Does the sale of AR-15's coincide with the mass shootings rate?

How about this one duck? Looks Canadian to me.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Mentioning the pink ones isn't helpful.

A brainwashed subject/slave of Canaduh, presuming to tell Americans how to run our country, isn't helpful.

 

[task0778]

The Violence Project publishes the most comprehensive mass-shooting database. The federal ban became effective on Sept. 24, 1994. In the preceding decade, the Violence Project database shows that 25 mass shootings resulted in 156 total fatalities. Assault weapons were used in six of those shootings with 36 fatalities. During the ban, 33 mass shootings resulted in 173 total fatalities. Assault weapons were used in seven shootings with 42 fatalities. In the post-ban decade, 46 mass shootings resulted in 328 fatalities. Assault weapons were used in eight shootings with 70 fatalities.

The Violence Project database also shows that there were more mass shooting fatalities in the decade during the federal ban (173) than in the decade before the ban (156), which contradicts the DiMaggio study’s “main message.”

Mass shootings with assault weapons also did not spike once the ban expired. Such shootings increased from six (pre-ban) to seven (during the ban) to eight (post-ban) during this 30-year period. The post-ban increase is the continuation of an existing trend.

Mass shootings and fatalities did increase in the decade following the federal ban’s expiration, but that increase is mostly from incidents involving non–assault weapons. Pre-ban, 19 mass shootings with non-assault weapons resulted in 120 fatalities. During the ban, 26 such shootings resulted in 131 fatalities. Post-ban, 38 non-assault-weapon shootings resulted in 258 fatalities.

This all suggests that banning “assault weapons” does not affect mass shootings.

Mass Shooting Data & Research | The Violence Project

Explore the most comprehensive mass shooter database in the US. Get in touch to learn more about our Mass shooting data and research.

www.theviolenceproject.org

Mass Shootings Increased During Federal 'Assault Weapons' Ban

A widely cited study used to push for more state 'assault weapons' bans is flawed and does not show that the 1994 federal ban saved lives.

thefederalist.com

What all this means is that if an assault weapons ban was enacted, you might get less shootings by an assault weapon but the shooters would simply find another weapon to shoot people with that is legal. IOW, it doesn't make any difference what kind of gun you get shot with, you're still dead.

 

[Donald H]

Variable A: Urban Sub-culture of gangs and thugs not being called out by letists
+
Variable B: Narrative of "Mass Shootings" from the left
+
Variable C: Ignoring that the majority of Mass Shootings are committed by variable A
=
Leftist trying to change the 2A or other freedomes by whatever means they see fit.

The AR is a weapon of defense, that can be used in war. Copying the military is not a "bad" thing. There are plenty of AR/Rifle owners who take certified tactical and self defense lessons by former military and or certified trainers, and I would advocate that owners do so.

So. I belong to a rifle club. I have never seen someone come in with camo on their face for practice and target shooting.
Silhouette are one of the many types of targets. And so what if someone came in full military garb. If they aren't ex-military then they are try hards trying to cast an image, unnecessarily. This really supports nothing.

Conjecture, speculation, hyperbole and a strawman. These are the ones probably NOT going to commit a crime. They have a hobby, a passion, maybe a bit over zealous, but these are the ones I'd be least afraid of.

Have you never played with a toy gun as a child. Have you never played good guys vs bad guys? What's the saying, as men age, the toys are the same, they just get more expensive. Again, your throwing out speculation and hyperbole. The data doesn't even remotely point to those you're stereotyping as culprits.
But you also excluded:
Old American Man
Middle Age American man
Young American Woman
Middle American Woman
Old American Woman

Most. Popular. Rifle. And you can think the leftist for wanting to ban them and creating the demand.

No. Most "Mass Shootings" are done by hand guns. And that's because the leftist politicians and media group ANY shooting with 3 or more victims as a Mass Shooting, which, as I have pointed out are done in your inner cities by urban gang bangers and street thugs.

You've added a lot to the discussion!

Of note: Acknowledging that they come to ranges all dressed up in camo costumes.
in your opinion, that's not a bad thing.

The AR is a weapon of defense, that can be used in war. Copying the military is not a "bad" thing.

There are plenty of AR/Rifle owners who take certified tactical and self defense lessons by former military and or certified trainers, and I would advocate that owners do so.

You personally haven't seen one with a blackened face.

I commend you for defending that which you maintain is good and right. I just don't agree.

 

[Concerned American]

Of note: Acknowledging that they come to ranges all dressed up in camo costumes.
in your opinion, that's not a bad thing.

Now you have a problem with peoples' choice of dress? How fascist of you duck.

I commend you for defending that which you maintain is good and right. I just don't agree.

That's your problem duck. You don't agree with anything American--you don't know why and you can't articulate it if you do, but you don't agree. Moron.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I just don't agree.

No American gives as hit whether you agree or not. You're from Canaduh. Any opinions that you may have about how America should be governed are completely irrelevant, and of no value at all.

 

[Donald H]

No American gives as hit whether you agree or not. You're from Canaduh. Any opinions that you may have about how America should be governed are completely irrelevant, and of no value at all.

Noted and taken into consideration.

 

[Donald H]

We all need to stay on the topic of amending the 2nd. amendment. So far I haven't heard any reason why that could help reduce the number of mass shootings.

I think it totally ignores the 'culture' that's been bred, of ................................
Everybody has heard it enough times by now.
Some alternative ideas are needed for rectifying the problems.

 

[BackAgain]

All Canada should immediately ban gun ownership. That, of course, includes their Mounties. (Defund Canadian police!)

Oh, and also their armed forces. Obviously no citizen of Canuckistan can be trusted with guns.

Make Canada a gun free zone.

 

[LibertyKid]

You've added a lot to the discussion!

Of note: Acknowledging that they come to ranges all dressed up in camo costumes.
in your opinion, that's not a bad thing.

The AR is a weapon of defense, that can be used in war. Copying the military is not a "bad" thing.

There are plenty of AR/Rifle owners who take certified tactical and self defense lessons by former military and or certified trainers, and I would advocate that owners do so.

You personally haven't seen one with a blackened face.

I commend you for defending that which you maintain is good and right. I just don't agree.

That's fine, you don't have to, as long as your opinion is based on data.
In essence what you're doing is stereotyping gun enthusiasts as potential culprits.
That is no different than seeing black men approaching, where dark clothing, wearing hoodies, and immediately fearing for your safety when in fact, at that moment, those men have done nothing to harm you.
Data and stats don''t support your conjecture. But, your entitled to your opinion.

 

[LibertyKid]

We all need to stay on the topic of amending the 2nd. amendment. So far I haven't heard any reason why that could help reduce the number of mass shootings.

I think it totally ignores the 'culture' that's been bred, of ................................
Everybody has heard it enough times by now.
Some alternative ideas are needed for rectifying the problems.

What do you mean. Amending the 2A isn't going to stop the vast majority of mass shootings which are done by CRIMINAL gang bangers. That's statistical data. You change the 2A to ban or restrict fire arms you are doing nothing but putting the banned fire arms in the hands of criminals, who won't adhere to the laws.

The 2A was meant to equip the citizens to protect themselves from tyranny, foreign and domestic. It is not meant to stop shootings. You want to stop shootings, ask what the city of Chicago is doing to stop them. That's where you start, because cities like Chicago are where most of the shootings occur.

 

[Donald H]

What do you mean. Amending the 2A isn't going to stop the vast majority of mass shootings which are done by CRIMINAL gang bangers. That's statistical data. You change the 2A to ban or restrict fire arms you are doing nothing but putting the banned fire arms in the hands of criminals, who won't adhere to the laws.

Fwiw, I agree. No ban can ever be effective.

The 2A was meant to equip the citizens to protect themselves from tyranny, foreign and domestic. It is not meant to stop shootings.

It might be said to increase the number of shootings?

You want to stop shootings, ask what the city of Chicago is doing to stop them. That's where you start, because cities like Chicago are where most of the shootings occur.

Americans big cities and shooting are synonymous.
That's true of big cities in all countries, but of course to a much lesser degree.
I've tried to offer a possible explanation for the problem in America, but it's being totally rejected.

And my offer have done nothing but increase the level of anger in people like you Liberty.

What is producing the background anger? IN some twisted way of thinking, can the anger be shot with a gun?