Originally Posted By Dabob2 hightp, the courts have, while affirming the basic right to own a gun, said any number of restrictions are okay. So it's not an "absolute right." There are also restrictions on free speech (the famous "can't shout fire in a crowded theatre" thing), and etc. So mandating knowledge on how to use a lethal weapon safely would, I believe, easily pass constitutional muster. As for cop-killer bullets, I'm talking specifically about those designed for smaller guns that cop organizations themselves want to be unavailable.
Originally Posted By hightp Dabob, I agree with you, that there is no absolute right, and there can be restrictions, but how a 'test' would be administered would be an issue. There are always going to be Constitutional issues, especially where things like this are concerned.
Originally Posted By Dabob2 Well, that's what the courts are for. Not that I expect it to go there any time soon. I don't see anybody in Congress with the stones to introduce a measure such as I described, or at least not enough to even get it off the ground. I'm just saying *I* think it demonstrating proficiency and safety knowledge should be required. In practical terms, it just ain't gonna happen any time soon.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney >>>. All US citizens, provided they are of age, are entitled to vote. Poll taxes, the ability to read, etc, were all found to be unconstitutional because they prohibited people (in this case, blacks) from exercising their right.<<<< This is where my argument comes in. When the Constitution was written, not everyone WAS able to vote once they reached voting age. Only white, male landowners could vote. The Constitution, and therefore its Amendments, were written BY white, male landowners FOR white, male landowners. A lot has changed since then, yet still here we are, clinging (yes, I get the irony of this word) to this "right" for all people to have a gun. It is as outdated as was the right only for white, male landowners to vote. Why can't it be changed? Why shouldn't it be changed. "Slippery slope" is just an argument for the gun lobbyists to get what they want. We CAN change the Constitution. It has been ratified as recently as May 7, 1992
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 "I think there should be far more rigorous fire arm safety classes governed at the state level for anyone who wants a weapon. I think the course should be difficult and in part designed to weed out people that are likely to do something stupid. Of course that would be discrimination in some way I am sure" Dabob beat me to it, but they really should treat it like getting a driver's license. You need to prove that you are capable by taking a written and in-person test. Also, if your license expires, you need to take the courses again, like you do if you let your driver's license lapse for too long.
Originally Posted By DVC_Pongo I am not unsympathetic to your opinions here DyGDisney. I agree in essence with the racial frustration of having a constitution that may seem outdated or non applicable to African Americans for whatever reason. however... The supreme court, and the vast overwhelming majority of the people in the US disagree with you. Your argument basically says, "Since the whole damn Constitution was written by white land owners way back yonder, let's throw the thing out." The Constitution can be ratified. But the right to keep and bear arms is not an area that MOST people and the Supreme Court deems necessary to change. In other words, it still applies to everyone today, and is the collective opinion of the majority of Americans.
Originally Posted By DVC_Pongo >>>Dabob beat me to it, but they really should treat it like getting a driver's license. You need to prove that you are capable by taking a written and in-person test. Also, if your license expires, you need to take the courses again, like you do if you let your driver's license lapse for too long. <<< I agree with this totally, however, I fear that it would become like every other test that the government administers. The last time I was at the DMV renewing my license, the old man in front of me was having huge problems reading the numbers and letters in the little light box thing. The person behind the desk gave him chance after chance until finally with some combination of glasses on and glasses off squinting, and being told "No sir that is not a C, what letter looks like a C..etc..." the guy finally passed the vision screening. Go figure. "No sir that is not the thumb safe, now what other parts of the weapon could be a safety? Look at it and think it over, let me help the next guy and I'll be right back with you..." Just sayin...
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 "The last time I was at the DMV renewing my license, the old man in front of me was having huge problems reading the numbers and letters in the little light box thing. The person behind the desk gave him chance after chance until finally with some combination of glasses on and glasses off squinting, and being told "No sir that is not a C, what letter looks like a C..etc..." the guy finally passed the vision screening. Go figure. " Oh crap, that explains all of the accidents with seniors behind the wheel!! Seriously that is very dangerous for them to pass somebody through like that who should not be capable...sigh.
Originally Posted By gurgitoy2 Seriously, DVC, that example you gave made me think of the Simpsons with Marge's sisters, Patty and Selma, working for the DMV and passing anybody with a pulse through...they even gave a license to that old, wrinkled guy with the coke-bottle glasses! Funny, but so wrong...especially to hear it's a real-world scenario too!
Originally Posted By piperlynne Guns are dangerous they kill people, lets get rid of them? Well. . Knives are dangerous, they kill people. What about poison, cars, fists, martial arts training, and on and on and on? I am not for changing the constitution to remove the 2nd amendment. That law WAS put in there for a purpose. Not just to have a protection force. But I believe, also, so that people had a way to protect themselves if their government was unable or unwilling to do so. (Home Protection). Its one of the fundamental rights. And those laws about white, male slave owners? They didn't take AWAY their right to vote, they added other people to that fundamental right. The fact is . . many many things are readily available and lethal that are not necessarily granted by the constitution, but we still have them. People that are irresponsible and leave their weapons or any other lethal object out for children to discover and play with, should be help accountable for the tragic results. People that intentionally inflict harm on another person should be help accountable as well.
Originally Posted By RoadTrip What is the number one cause of gun deaths in the United States? Criminals being shot during the commission of a crime? Accidental gun related deaths of children? Gun used to kill another family member? No, the number one cause of gun deaths in the United States is suicide. That is really sad. On the other hand, you take guns away and there are many other ways to off yourself if you are so inclined.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney >>>Your argument basically says, "Since the whole damn Constitution was written by white land owners way back yonder, let's throw the thing out."<<< I'm not saying that at all, nor am I saying all guns should be illegal. What I am saying is that this gun law passed without my permission, therefore it is FORCED on me without representation so I'm going to go start a group of people to protest......
Originally Posted By DVC_Pongo Oh. That works, and is also one of your rights, under the Constitution.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney Kidding, kidding!!! Don't get in an uproar!! What I really meant to say was this: I'm not saying that at all, nor am I saying all guns should be illegal. I am saying this whole "slippery slope" argument is ridiculous. They say they don't want to go against the Constitution. Well, when that law was written, we didn't have AK-47's or other semi-automatic weapons, machine guns, cop killer bullets, etc. What we had were rifles where you load the bullet, put in the powder, shoot, repeat. No one could go into a school and take out 15 people in a couple minutes. Also, our country as a whole was a moral place (agree or not, this is what I think). This whole "Don't mess with it 'cause it's in the Constitution" attitude makes me sick!
Originally Posted By DVC_Pongo I think one reason the "founding fathers" whatever you want that to mean, wrote the 2nd amendment the way it is written is that they didn't want the citizen at large to be unable to protect himself or herself from ANY form of tyranny, ANY form of tyranny, ANY FORM. The most basic human right you have is the right to protect yourself. Food, Water, Shelter...and of course protection from those who want yours. and now that I re-read... >>>this gun law passed without my permission<<< What gun law is that exactly?
Originally Posted By piperlynne >>I think one reason the "founding fathers" whatever you want that to mean, wrote the 2nd amendment the way it is written is that they didn't want the citizen at large to be unable to protect himself or herself from ANY form of tyranny, ANY form of tyranny, ANY FORM. The most basic human right you have is the right to protect yourself. Food, Water, Shelter...and of course protection from those who want yours. << Dang it DVC, you said what I meant to say much more eloquently and concisely that my meandering.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney >>>>>>this gun law passed without my permission<<< What gun law is that exactly?<<< I meant the second amendment, not a gun law. I just worded it wrong.
Originally Posted By DyGDisney Obviously we are going to disagree on this so I guess I'll have my opinion and you have yours. Hopefully none of us will ever be in the position this family is in right now.
Originally Posted By DVC_Pongo Well not owning a gun is a good way to prevent it and be 100% certain it won[t happen.
