The gentrification of the second amendment.

Races for the Senate, U.S. House, etc. and other issues of national importance.
Bludgeon
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1291
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 2:27 am

Re: The gentrification of the second amendment.

Postby Bludgeon » Wed Apr 03, 2013 9:38 pm

pjbogart wrote:I think the best way forward is to propose a lot of different types of gun regulations in order to get feedback, particularly on the internet where people just say what's on their mind. Then we pass the legislation and start rounding up the guns... from all the nuts on the internet who were talking about how much they love guns.

It's hard to find criminals because they're always hiding, but the gun-nuts should be easy to track down.

Have you ever thought of joining up with the paramilitary, secret police organization of some rising fascist, national socialist state? Because I think it may be your calling. I mean, did you just channel the spirit of an officer of the Nazi SS, or did it only just seem like you did?

LOL.

(Fuck!)

Wow. Scary.

Igor
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1692
Joined: Tue Feb 26, 2002 11:48 pm
Contact:

Re: The gentrification of the second amendment.

Postby Igor » Wed Apr 03, 2013 10:25 pm

Henry Vilas wrote:My real problem with the Second is that two hundred years after it was ratified, the Supreme Court reinterpreted it to exclude the opening clauses.


Very true, however the first amendment also says "Congress shall pass no law" which has been ignored/expanded to a much greater extent than the 2nd.

pjbogart
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6555
Joined: Thu Sep 04, 2003 4:57 pm

Re: The gentrification of the second amendment.

Postby pjbogart » Wed Apr 03, 2013 11:01 pm

Bludgeon wrote:I mean, did you just channel the spirit of an officer of the Nazi SS, or did it only just seem like you did?


Drink!

I did, Budgie. The LIBERAL Nazis (is there any other kind?) And anyway, how do you know that the FBI, CIA, NSA, SSA, EPA, IRA and IPA aren't already collecting such data? They've logged your IP, Budgie. They've got a file on you. The only friends you have left are the Republican Party, the NRA and your dog.

Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Bludgeon
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1291
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 2:27 am

Re: The gentrification of the second amendment.

Postby Bludgeon » Wed Apr 03, 2013 11:38 pm

pjbogart wrote:
Bludgeon wrote:I mean, did you just channel the spirit of an officer of the Nazi SS, or did it only just seem like you did?


Drink!

I did, Budgie. The LIBERAL Nazis (is there any other kind?) And anyway, how do you know that the FBI, CIA, NSA, SSA, EPA, IRA and IPA aren't already collecting such data? They've logged your IP, Budgie. They've got a file on you. The only friends you have left are the Republican Party, the NRA and your dog.

Be afraid. Be very afraid.


Aw. I like my dog.

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21373
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: The gentrification of the second amendment.

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Apr 04, 2013 8:00 am

Igor wrote:
Henry Vilas wrote:My real problem with the Second is that two hundred years after it was ratified, the Supreme Court reinterpreted it to exclude the opening clauses.


Very true, however the first amendment also says "Congress shall pass no law" which has been ignored/expanded to a much greater extent than the 2nd.

Yes, rights often come into conflict with other rights. But if guns should be as unrestricted as speech (there are some reasonable restrictions), then why weren't arms mentioned in the First? And again, why were the two opening clauses put into the Second.

snoqueen
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 12787
Joined: Fri Feb 14, 2003 11:42 pm

Re: The gentrification of the second amendment.

Postby snoqueen » Thu Apr 04, 2013 8:39 am

Artie wrote:You were my biggest ally in advocating the removal of whatever puritanical booze regulations still exist. Bring on the freedom (and another six-pack after 9pm)!


Sure I was.

My whole system of reasoning is different from yours.

I would like to direct our laws toward creating a better society. Part of that is removing pointless laws (like bar time) because they just breed disrespect of the legal structure as a whole and waste time and effort.

Better gun laws would help create a safer society if we wrote them right. That's what people want, you know. We don't like either continual mass murders or the endless single murders and we want to at least make them harder to commit and (maybe more to the point) easier to prevent. Part of that is removing the coolness factor along with the drama-queen factor. "I must protect my family" is missing an essential phrase, which is "...from gun accidents and misuse," and when enough statistics and facts emerge people will gradually come to realize where the actual threat lies. Legislation won't do the whole job, but it's part of the effort. Freedom to collect and work with data will help too.

Meantime, there's only a little similarity between gun laws and alcohol laws. Drunk driving (abuse of alcohol that threatens innocent people) and certain uses of guns (we have to decide where to draw that line) are one of the similarities. You can't carry open alcohol in your car. That's against the law even if you aren't drinking it, let alone driving having drunk it. Can you carry a loaded weapon on the street even if you aren't shooting it, let alone hitting anybody with the bullets? I don't know. There needs to be a discussion of what is acceptable, safe, and appropriate in various contexts. All we're doing now is shouting at one another.

I do not do my reasoning on big generalities (like "the fewer laws and the less government the better regardless of the results") but on specifics like "what does this law do, how is it applied, what are our goals, who is affected, and where can we reach consensus?"

I also do not treat the constitution like an unchangeable religious text. It should be reviewed and revised regularly -- through the courts, through the legislature, and through the voters. Some countries actually do this at scheduled intervals, maintaining a dynamic constitution that responds to changing social and technological reality.

Donald
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 2502
Joined: Mon Mar 25, 2002 4:53 pm
Location: Madison
Contact:

Re: The gentrification of the second amendment.

Postby Donald » Thu Apr 04, 2013 9:23 am

I'm not too keen on this "gentrification" argument. Requiring people to be financially responsible for the mistakes they make with dangerous technology seems to be a reasonable cost of the technology which should be borne by the people who use the technology, rather than those who are the innocent victims of the technology.

I heard the same arguments in the 1970s and 80s when bonding and other forms of financial assurance for mining operations were strengthened. One interesting argument then was that the financial assurance requirements would put the little guys out of business to favor the multi-national corporations. Of course, that argument was bankrolled by the multinational corporations, but they'd find some salty ditch digger to make it seem legitimate.

I suspect a similar operation going on here. Of course in many states the gun manufacturers have made sure to get laws passed absolving themselves of most liability for the use of their product.

I'm sure the idea of "gentrification" will be a favorite one for the righties. The problem is they are very inconsistent in making the argument. Gentrification of hunting, if you can call "game ranches" as providing anything near a hunting experience, has been going on with right wing cheerleading for decades.

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21373
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: The gentrification of the second amendment.

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Apr 04, 2013 9:41 am

Donald wrote: Gentrification of hunting, if you can call "game ranches" as providing anything near a hunting experience, has been going on with right wing cheerleading for decades.

Case in point, Walker's "deer czar" calls hunting on public grounds communism. He's from Texas, where all hunting is done on private lands and is very expensive. He doesn't want the hoi polloi from participating in the hunt. Kinda like Merry Olde England when only royalty and the landed aristocracy could pursue game.

ouroborus4
Forum Addict
Posts: 174
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:01 am

Re: The gentrification of the second amendment.

Postby ouroborus4 » Thu Apr 04, 2013 9:49 am

I propose we pass a bill that requires all voters to buy insurance. That way, when they vote for the wrong person who does irreparable harm to the state/country, or worse, don't vote at all, we can have them be held financially accountable instead of the taxpayers. Or better yet, let's insure against voter fraud by having people purchase voter ID, renewable every few years. Wait, can't afford isurance/ID? Don't have time to get insurance/ID? Too bad, there is a cost to your choices for which you should be held responsible in order to have the privelage of your right. See how this works?

For the record, I am against voter insurance/ID, but I am also against gun insurance, or financial barriers to gun ownership other than the market price for the hardware. The same people who are so adamant about destroying the right to bear arms, are the same ones who put up a huge fit about barriers to voting. Yes, there are differences between voting and gun ownership, but what the anti-gun group seems to miss is that the pro-gun people hold this right to be as essential as all the other rights (voting included) to function as a free society and preserve the integrity of our country despite the risks and abuses we have seen lately.

Bludgeon is right that if you are being intellectually honest, you cannot say this is a good idea. You cannot pick and choose which rights to uphold because you don't like them. They are rights afterall. Listening to the anti-gun crowd is almost enough to turn me into a republican.

Henry Vilas
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 21373
Joined: Wed Sep 04, 2002 8:57 pm
Location: Name sez it all
Contact:

Re: The gentrification of the second amendment.

Postby Henry Vilas » Thu Apr 04, 2013 9:54 am

Right now, one cannot sue a gun manufacturer for making a faulty firearm, even if great harm ensues. Do you think that restriction is a good law?

wack wack
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 3217
Joined: Mon Jan 20, 2003 5:32 pm
Contact:

Re: The gentrification of the second amendment.

Postby wack wack » Thu Apr 04, 2013 10:17 am

ouroborus4 wrote:Yes, there are differences between voting and gun ownership, but what the anti-gun group seems to miss is that the pro-gun people hold this right to be as essential as all the other rights (voting included) to function as a free society and preserve the integrity of our country despite the risks and abuses we have seen lately.

Bludgeon is right that if you are being intellectually honest, you cannot say this is a good idea. You cannot pick and choose which rights to uphold because you don't like them. They are rights afterall. Listening to the anti-gun crowd is almost enough to turn me into a republican.


I think the anti-gun group understands what the pro-gun group thinks about "essential rights," and disagrees.

You're completely missing another demographic: gun owners who support reasonable change.

Including "Bludgeon" and "intellectual honesty" in the same sentence is... amusing.

rabble
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7651
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: The gentrification of the second amendment.

Postby rabble » Thu Apr 04, 2013 10:42 am

ouroborus4 wrote: Listening to the anti-gun crowd is almost enough to turn me into a republican.

Show of hands. Who thinks the snake eating its own tail is not Republican?

Bludgeon
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 1291
Joined: Tue Apr 06, 2010 2:27 am

Re: The gentrification of the second amendment.

Postby Bludgeon » Thu Apr 04, 2013 7:32 pm

Where was I? Oh yeah, coming back to Stebben and his way-too-many-slices post:
Stebben84 wrote:
Bludgeon wrote:What people in financial crisis can often not afford is the addition of another monthly bill and mandate that over time will cost tens/hundreds of times more than the weapon itself.

Kind of like a car, right? But wait, a car is a luxury not a right, and guns are a right and not a luxury, but they cost money that some can't afford. Ugh, I'm confused. Since when should a right cost money? There's the license and training and ammo. Oh, ammo that won't be used often.

Comparing cars to guns, discussing the gentrification of rights (and leaving aside the injustice of our automobile policies): you're right, the two are similar.

Now - why is it therefore, that the lower a person's income is, the more likely she or he is to not be able to afford driving? Do not lower income people tend to constitute the majority of those who ride the bus? They do - it's no coincidence. Whether you call driving a car a right or a privilege, access to personal auto vehicles has demonstrably been gentrified. Further, its well established that much of the financial disincentive connected to a person's decision to buy and drive a car is explicitly intended to discourage use.

People who dislike the second amendment and disagree with the right to bear arms are merely feigning to pretend (yes fake pretending) that the purpose of this legislation has anything to do with defraying the cost of weapons related injuries; the real intention is to price you out of the market of exercising your own right, and everybody knows it.

rabble
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 7651
Joined: Tue Jun 10, 2008 7:50 pm

Re: The gentrification of the second amendment.

Postby rabble » Thu Apr 04, 2013 7:57 pm

Bludgeon wrote:People who dislike the second amendment and disagree with the right to bear arms are merely feigning to pretend (yes fake pretending) that the purpose of this legislation has anything to do with defraying the cost of weapons related injuries; the real intention is to price you out of the market of exercising your own right, and everybody knows it.

Man, that was beautiful.

kurt_w
Forum God/Goddess
Posts: 6044
Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 3:11 pm
Contact:

Re: The gentrification of the second amendment.

Postby kurt_w » Thu Apr 04, 2013 8:53 pm

rabble wrote:
Bludgeon wrote:People who dislike the second amendment and disagree with the right to bear arms are merely feigning to pretend (yes fake pretending) that the purpose of this legislation has anything to do with defraying the cost of weapons related injuries; the real intention is to price you out of the market of exercising your own right, and everybody knows it.

Man, that was beautiful.

You never know with those people. They might only be appearing to feign pretending. If you think their feigning to pretend is done sincerely, you might be in for a surprise.

But the really sneaky ones only act like they're appearing to feign pretending. It's Potemkin Turtles all the way down.


Return to “National Politics & Government”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests