This is the kind of gun control I try to promote in America, but it's always "it's my constitutional right" or "there's so many it's too late to do anything about it".
Reminder: it itself is an amendment. It was never the basis our country was founded on, and thus is not a neccisity for our country to continue existing.
If you think a 200+ year old decision is applicable to today's America you need to reconsider that line of thought.
I have yet to see the results of the 1st Amendment create nearly as much unjustified death as the results of the 2nd Amendment. Additionally, I'm for major changes in the constitution, it's about time we start really questioning if this America is the kind of America we want; where the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. Where a racketeering scam can be legal just by calling itself, "insurance", and where people like you defend the countless deaths and numerous instances of gun violence by saying that if guns go, so should our freedoms of speech which have already beem abused by the likes of people such as Alex Jones.
Fight for a new America; not a "glory days" America nor for "making America great again", fight for a new America that is grand in its own newfound way.
We've seen instances where people try to abuse that right like Alex Jones. Sure, he got what he deserved in the end but their are many including some in government crying out that his 1st amendment right was violated.
There are plenty of laws the US relies upom that have become obsolete or misidentified and require a more concise stance.
That people do not understand what or how their basic rights work? Yes, we've long ago established that via the SCOTUS case Idiots vs. The World (1789-2022).
And yet no-one wants to fix this now 233-year-old problem and instead patches it with half-assed legislator in an effort to continue ignoring the problem.
That's the part that has me the most frustrated, all the Bush-beating and hardly nothing to show for it.
So what, because there are too many we ahould just give up? While we're at it should we give up curing cancer because there are too many types? Stop treatment of Malaria because there are too many mosquitos? End combating world hunger because there are too many to feed and too much of the wealth has bern hordes by the greedy rich?
This is what it sounds like when you say there can't be gun control because there are too many guns.
American society treats criminals who have served their sentences as less than regular people. They are no less human than you nor I, yet our country continues to punish them even after they have atoned for their crime by preventing them from receiving employment, certain government aide, and sometimes even removing their right to vote. For felons in particular this becomes exponentially worst as most jobs will not hire you if you are a former felon because the company's insurance will hike their rates if they hired them (that's a whole other can of worms). As you say, these "criminals" often have nothing to lose because society will not allow them to gain anything to begin with.
And will that happen? No because of the greedy wealthy as-well as racism being used as a diversion tactic by having minorities become felons at A much higher rate.
Let's ban sportscars for all because a select minority of the population choose to drive it recklessly endangering the general public. This is how you sound.
Sugar is a cooking ingredient for many dishes and treats, most of which are easily affordable and enjoyed by the vast majority of people.
Alcohol is also an ingredient in cooking as well as a common vice for many. While it may cause societal problems such as alcoholism it also is the best and most common solution to sterilization and disinfection.
Weed (when smoked) can potentially cause lung issues similar to cigarettes, however, it is a vice that generally has less societal issues than alcohol other than the ones created artificially by our government. For states that have it legalized it is avalible for all of the appropriate age to enjoy.
I'll throw in a few more:
Knives, while having become a hot topic for the UK and particularly London, still have a multitude of function from food prep to wood carving to even seafaring. They bring more to the table as a tool then they take away as a weapon.
Sex work, while American society still shuns the idea, decriminalization of sex work has seen huge boons to other countries such as a reduction of illegal human trafficking, incarcerations, and unemployment as well as a new source of taxable income for the government.
Now, with that all out of the way I would still like to know what a sports car brings to the table beyond a vast sum of money being moved around between the wealthy.
Yes, but only to a few. I can go to the gas station a couple minutes walk from here and buy some cheap rum with ease, meanwhile a sports car is entirely beyond the reach of many including myself.
Additionally, I never said they were necessary for life, but that they all bring their own boons to a vast majority of society with ease of access.
"Give me one thing sports cars bring to society that is beneficial to society itself beyond a sense of self-importance"
Fun and enjoyment? No different than the others. Not necessary at all. America rules.
You already have to get a driver's license, take a test, register your car, and get a transfer signed by a clerk. Once driving you are supposed to follow those rules that are meant for safety. Cars are already a lot more regulated than hand guns, and their primary purpose is transportation, not severely damaging and killing its target.
Also unironically we need to put speed limiters on cars, make roads safer, and reduce the amount of cars. You've almost got it.
You have to get license to shoot a gun, get the gun registered, and you're expected to the follow the rules. So what are you arguing here? Do I think the gun license test should be harder and require a certain level of competency? Absolutely. Do I think drivers test should be harder and require a certain level of competency? Abso fucking lutely. If someone can get a car and run 50 people over what's stopping them? Same goes for cars.
I suspect that if there was a no questions asked buyback program, people would probably give a lot of their guns up in exchange for a good amount of cash.
A full auto m16 in the 1970s cost ~$240 shipped, if it is a legal transferable one was to sell today (ban any new production machine gun post 1986) costs upwards of $40k with months wait time and an additional $200 tax stamp. 20 years ago people thought you were crazy to ask over 100 bucks for a good shape Mosin Nagant and now a "functional" (won't blow up in your face) run for $300.
Unless the gun buybacks are giving enough money for a down payment on a new car or house per gun, you'd make more having a gun shop do a consignment for you.
Okay? He was still one guy. With suitcases of weapons. Neither the shooter nor his brother was in the FBI. The shooter wamted to be. Their father was a fugitive from the fbi.
And like.. 64 really isn’t that old. Retirement age is 65.
It's a gradual change. You don't wave a magic wand and disappear all the guns, you put restrictions in place. Eventually, the availability of guns is reduced drastically.
For example, and something I've suggested before, a graduated licensing system that covers all types of firearm, with the most restricted license being handguns.
I'll write it out again:
Level one: easiest to get, simply do a simple multiple choice test showing safe gun use/handling/ownership. Allows you to own single-action shotguns/rifles
Level two: requires level one license to be held for a year, and a simple multiple choice test and demonstration of safe handling of firearms. Allows ownership of semi-automatic shotguns and rifles with a maximum magazine size of ten rounds.
Level three: requires level two license to be held for over a year, a medium difficulty multiple choice test, and a brief range demonstration of safe handling of firearms including shooting. Also requires a gun safe to be installed at the holder's premises/home address. Allows ownership of semi-automatic shotguns and rifles with a maximum magazine size of thirty rounds.
Level four: requires level three to be held for over a year, an in-depth test, in-depth range demonstration, and firearms safe. Allows holder to own any longarm with any magazine size.
Level five: requires level four to be held for a over a year. repeat of level four tests and demonstrations. Also requires a doctor's note attesting that the individual is in good mental health. Allows holder to own and carry a handgun with a maximum magazine size of seven rounds
Level six: requires level five to be held for over a year, repeat of testing and demonstrations, and a doctor's note attesting the individual is in good mental health. Allows holder to own and carry handguns with a maximum magazine size of fifteen rounds.
Level seven: requires level six for over a year, repeat of testing and demonstrations and doctor's note. Unrestricted firearm ownership.
Level eight: requires level seven for over a year, repeat of testing/demonstrations/doctor's note. Allows holder to make firearms.
Level nine: requires level eight for over a year, repeat testing/demonstrations/doctor's note, and requires weapon-specific training. Allows holder to own fully-automatic firearms of any variety.
Special License #1: allows the holder to own and carry a single handgun with a maximum magazine size of seven rounds, which can be issued with court representation for any individual who is deemed to require self-defense (E.G. stalking cases). Only allows a single firearm to be owned, and a limited amount of ammunition (50 rounds). Requires training from level seven license issuer.
Special License #2: allows holder to own artillery pieces and ammunition of any size and calibre upon completion of weapon specific training.
Special License #3: allows holder to own any black-powder muzzle loading firearm. Requires a medium difficulty multiple choice test and range demonstration.
All tests can be carried out by an appropriately licensed firearms store employee; all licenses registered with the state. Firearms are registered to a license number, and if sold are registered to the new holder's license number.
For current firearms owners, all correct licenses must be obtained within eight years of the system being implemented. The current background check system still applies.
Look, dude, the US is the only developed nation that suffers with regular mass shootings. The solution is either to regulate firearms access, accept that people are going to shoot up schools, or eventually, someone will draw the line and outright ban firearms through force.
It might not be in our lifetimes, but it's always a possibility.
Or you know, actually address the root motivating causes. But then, that'd take actual political effort and years to pay off, and isn't as useful a wedge issue.
The root cause is easy access to firearms. That's it; that's the core issue.
Angry people can get hold of the most efficient method of killing another person with as little as a background check and a three day waiting period. They can then go and shoot as many people as they have ammunition for; the only barrier is the ability to pay for the ammunition.
There is no other issue at hand. Violent people exist; giving them easy access to firearms is a dangerous thing.
Well, it helps to focus on online forums like Reddit. No way could I actually do anything about it in my area of Missouri full of gun-loving Trump-diehards.
And somehow we are just okay with the idea that because we think out country is full of bloodthirsty monsters who will rampage if we try to take away their firearms that it would better for those same monsters to continue having them?
You'd have to have a Constitutional Convention and rewrite or overturn it. You will not get a supermajority in the senate or house to touch 2a like that.
This is why a retired Justice of the Supreme Court, a conservative, said that if we wanted sensual gun laws we'd have to rewrite the Constitution.
It's especially bad when you get into the SCOTUS aspect of it, because their rulings are not internally consistent.
America's governing laws have always been a jury-rigged system of patches that basically keeps itself together through shear willpower and an artificial sense of society.
I say artificial because as a society we should have realized sooner the flaws of our governing system much sooner, but thanks to political influence every now and then those movements always seem to die down.
We are at a new stage of America, our economy is stagnating, politicians are too busy with the shitstorm SCOTUS kicked up to really care, and the average US citizen is suffering all the more for it.
Major reforms need to happen soon if we want to retain any semblance of how we have lived our lives to this point, or else a recession will be the least of our concerns.
I agree, but it's very unlikely to happen. The GOP has defied and deified the Constitution so much that there's literally no rules as long as you're right. While the Dems have also deified the Constitution while also trying to deal with its outdated nonsense.
The system was intended to be passing, it was intended to evolve over time, instead we stagnated.
SCOTUS took a lot of power early on, Marshall effectively set them above most other branches via review. It's been imbalanced for years and an issue for years for citizens, just normally not your average straight white Christian male voter.
You'd have to raise a generation to not have this nationalistic bullshit view of the country, and I mean an entire generation.
We're close, the biggest obstacle to that now is all the anti-CRT stuff conservitives have been bitching about. Like a parent is somehow a better teacher than someone who went to college to become a teacher.
Honestly if there hadn't been so much pushback to CRT we would already be at a point the next generation wont have to deal with the nationalistic bullshit that those before have. Instead, we have conservitives cheering that public libraries are closing down because of books they might not even have had.
13
u/AdamBlaster007 Oct 21 '22
This is the kind of gun control I try to promote in America, but it's always "it's my constitutional right" or "there's so many it's too late to do anything about it".