Is it time to talk about guns?

The original question was about prudent gun laws. It took a month and 452 replies before anyone suggested repealing or amending the 2nd Amendment to the US Constitution.

When it comes to legislation, whether Federal law, State law, or local ordinance, the "shall not be infringed" language will always be problematic for those who don't like the status quo. Sure, "well regulated" is in there, but it's introductory language, and the clear point of the 2nd Amendment is to limit government authority. The internally conflicting language will usually be decided in favor of limiting government authority, and all such legislative attempts will be challenged through litigation, most often with an ultimate finding of legislative over-reach.

Anyone who is serious about legislation isn't serious about restricting the right to keep bear arms, unless he or she is willing to apply some effort to amending the Constitution. If you aren't ready to get the ball rolling on that in a serious way, it's just another "somebody oughta" - hot air, bar talk.

 

That and I expect they would be met with a lot of resistance. Nobody wants to see it come to the point the founding fathers envisioned for which the amendment was added.

 

Well guns are way too easy to get for those that shouldn't have them (obviously) , however--would we want to be like Mexico where citizens in the main , aren't allowed to have guns? Cartels run that country and what can citizens do about it? Damn near nothing , except run--hide or go along to get along by taking the payoffs they offer. Or get killed.

 

Too late. There are zillions of AR15's in circulation.

 

Great parody about fictional people! LMAO

But if we're going to discuss the topic honestly, the reality is, and there have been plenty of posts on here from left wingers professing the belief, that firearm ownership and possession should be made so difficult that it's impossible in a practical sense to use any for self-defense. That way they can claim out of one side of their mouths that they don't want to infringe on the second amendment itself, all while making it easier to carry out nefarious activities.
"Someone" posted on here (and many jumped on the bandwagon) that there should be laws requiring firearms in people's homes to be locked up somehow (making it challenging to grab quickly in a home invasion scenario). I've even seen suggestions of laws to require them to be unloaded when locked up, even some to require ammo to be locked up separately! And even... to allow enforcement officials to enter anyone's home at will to check for compliance!!
Leftists... "We don't want to take your guns" "c'mon man. We're all about this 2nd amendment thing. I even went hunting myself once, so there"
(shhhh... we just want to make it so painful that most people will give it up voluntarily)

 

Good point. There's more firearms than people. But it wouldn't surprise me if in today's fear-based society there are now more people who don't own any firearms than those who do. I could be wrong. Most people I know own more than one. Gunfire is common around where I live. Gotta keep proficient and the tools sighted-in. Gotta teach the little kids proper operation and safety. Gotta keep the critters at bay. And lean meat in the freezer. Most people have at least a rifle, a pistol, and a shotgun. But go to some areas and only the criminal element is armed because the geniuses in charge thought it would help prevent crime to restrict legal firearm ownership! I have a very modest collection of only eight total; I have friends with much larger collections. So the totals aren't spread out evenly.

 

So... The problem is not enough people have massive amounts of guns.


Seems legit.

 

I think we could have sensible gun laws to keep guns out of the hands of idiots who think they can attack our government when they don't get their way in an election. Another group which should not have guns is the fanatical who think they have a right to force their Christian religion on others, as in abortion laws. President Biden and the Democrats in Congress should enact laws which would turn DC into a state, and Puerto Rico from a territory into a state. That would give Democrats an additional 4 seats in the Senate. Donald Trump insulted the people of Puerto Rico by tossing rolls of paper towels to them, after a devastating storm. I think the people of Puerto Rico would be receptive to this new plan of representation. And while we are at it, Democrats can restructure the Supreme Court, because Trump's appointees might be leaning toward the extreme, and Thomas has conflict of interest, after his wife attended Trump's January 6th riot. This is not just about Republicans rioting at Congress. This is about Republican idiots running down the street like Kyle Rottenhouse to enforce the law whenever he takes the notion.

 

Sensible gun laws. Yeah, maybe if we passed them in 1960. That horse done lef' the barn and took the cow and goat with him....

 

Well I'm trying hard not to be part of that problem but damn these ammo costs have me thinking of limiting the assortment of calibers, this way I can just grab a skid or two for the bulk discount

In other news, the Colt SAA is coming along nicely though slowly. Part of the dragging issues seem to have been related to close tolerances and shoddy finish-work. I think I've done ok at slicking up the action a bit with my harbor freight diamond file and hoping that it will help reduce carbon fouling from causing drag on the hand assembly which seems to be what might be leading to the cylinder binding once things warm up, still have to bring it out for a spin to be sure which may be soon as I see .45LC going for as low as 1.05 a round per 500ct.

 

Yeah these prices are nuts. I used to think $8.99/20 was high so got dies, primers, powders, and projectiles. The LC isn't a "popular" caliber now so won't benefit from mass production the way others will. Save your brass, it could save your ass. And working up a load is an interesting experience. My shotgun machine I've had since 13-14, kinda mind-boggling when I think of it. I don't remember any "anti-gun" sentiment from those days when seemingly pretty much everyone had them. Guessing some parents failed to train their kids on their utility and operation, opening up room for fear.

 

If made states, I can see DC as blue, but PR may not. They are sensible freedom-minded people less likely to fall prey to being told what to do even if promised free stuff.

 

Telling people how to run their affairs within their own private environs is overreach. Any government requiring someone can't rest a shotgun on the wall within their own private structure they own is guilty of dictatorship. It happens, but hopefully not in the US.

And if you had livestock and crops being damaged by predators, you'd have a different take.

 

I grew up in the 1950s and there wasn’t a lot of anti-gun sentiment because the gun landscape was very different. We didn’t have the plethora of purposely lethal paramilitary weapons pushed by gun manufacturers and 2nd amendment nuts. Consequently we didn’t have mass shootings by weapons of mass destruction that have found their way into nook and cranny of society. Look and other countries, eh, that have modest limits on firearms and their much lower level of gun deaths. When I was growing up the only person I knew who died from a gun was the president of the gun club I worked for who killed his wife and then committed suicide. There wasn’t a precedent for mowing down innocent people with an AR 15. It’s not that people are more mentally ill now, it’s that everyone has access weapons whose only purpose is to kill people….lots of them.

 

"Other countries", you mean like Mexico, where firearms are so highly regulated?
No gun violence there... Hmmm

 

Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. - Benjamin Franklin