Conservatives and guns

[Sword of the Lord]

I'm a Conservative who is completely for the 2nd amendment myself, but I got to thinking... While we know that not ALL Muslims are bad, we are OK with measures taken against Islam, but at the same time, while we know that not ALL gun owners are bad, conservatives freak out with measures taken against them to prevent the crazies. Why?

 

[Vylo]

I'm a Conservative who is completely for the 2nd amendment myself, but I got to thinking... While we know that not ALL Muslims are bad, we are OK with measures taken against Islam, but at the same time, while we know that not ALL gun owners are bad, conservatives freak out with measures taken against them to prevent the crazies. Why?

For the most part, it's a kind of slippery slope thing. They don't want one thing to lead to another and then we have a government revolution USSR style and they can't do anything about it.

Me personally, I favor gun rights for most militaristic reasons, but I also favor regulation.

 

[cow451]

The voices that are heard are the extreme ones on each side. The extreme voices have some influence on the otherwise less crazy populace. A fire arm is a tool that should be regulated relative to its potential to harm the public. Every piece of machinery in a factory, every device in a hospital, etc. has some degree of regulation attached to it.

I happen to think firearms are under-regulated.

 

[JGG]

Prescription medicine. The medicine is available when needed, but you can't just go in and buy a case of OxyContin. You have to explain who you are, that you're allowed to buy it, and you're use for it is justified. Pharmaceuticals are regulated.

Unless it's Viagra. They'd prefer you not talk about the justification.

 

[cow451]

Prescription medicine. The medicine is available when needed, but you can't just go in and buy a case of OxyContin. You have to explain who you are, that you're allowed to buy it, and you're use for it is justified. Pharmaceuticals are regulated.

Unless it's Viagra. They'd prefer you not talk about the justification.

 

[Albion]

The voices that are heard are the extreme ones on each side. The extreme voices have some influence on the otherwise less crazy populace. A fire arm is a tool that should be regulated relative to its potential to harm the public. Every piece of machinery in a factory, every device in a hospital, etc. has some degree of regulation attached to it.

But very few of them are mentioned in the Bill of Rights. In fact, I can't think of a one--other than the right to bear arms--that is.

 

[RDKirk]

I'm a Conservative who is completely for the 2nd amendment myself, but I got to thinking... While we know that not ALL Muslims are bad, we are OK with measures taken against Islam, but at the same time, while we know that not ALL gun owners are bad, conservatives freak out with measures taken against them to prevent the crazies. Why?

In other words, if the first is morally acceptable by conservative standards, why isn't the second morally acceptable?

It's a good question, and the moral answer is not "2nd Amendment." A truly moral answer would be as valid in a country without a written bill of rights as it is in the US, and the Bill of Rights should be morally defensible by more than just the fact that a politically powerful group of men of that day wrote it down.

There are people who actually have a more consistent opinion on both issues--Bill Maher, for instance, who is perfectly willing to argue that everyone who believes that Islam is all bad and that guns are all bad, too.

 

[cow451]

But very few of them are mentioned in the Bill of Rights. In fact, I can't think of a one--other than the right to bear arms--that is.

The Founders didn't know about MRI's because they were covered by an HMO.

The Constitution is more than the Bill of Rights, you know.

 

[Albion]

The Constitution is more than the Bill of Rights, you know.

All right then. No other tools are protected by ANY part of the Constitution.

 

[cow451]

All right then. No other tools are protected by ANY part of the Constitution.

How long since you have read it?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I'm a Conservative who is completely for the 2nd amendment myself, but I got to thinking... While we know that not ALL Muslims are bad, we are OK with measures taken against Islam, but at the same time, while we know that not ALL gun owners are bad, conservatives freak out with measures taken against them to prevent the crazies. Why?

Er, because it can't be done?

Take the worst case of mass murder that you can think of and present what practical action or law you think might have prevented it.

 

[ChristsSoldier115]

Obama's current executive orders seem to be targeting mass shootings.. which.. um.. isn't.. number wise[??]... the least amount of gun deaths a year? I mean if you wish to stop gun deaths why go after the least common factor? I guess because the act is the most sensationalized?

 

[OldWiseGuy]

Obama's current executive orders seem to be targeting mass shootings.. which.. um.. isn't.. number wise[??]... the least amount of gun deaths a year? I mean if you wish to stop gun deaths why go after the least common factor? I guess because the act is the most sensationalized?

Hard to shed tears over a bunch of dead crooks.

 

[ChristsSoldier115]

Hard to shed tears over a bunch of dead crooks.

I guess. One of america's biggest problems is preventive measures. We don't build levees until after the area has been flooded before, regardless of the warnings.

 

[cow451]

I guess. One of america's biggest problems is preventive measures. We don't build levees until after the area has been flooded before, regardless of the warnings.

 

[OldWiseGuy]

I guess. One of america's biggest problems is preventive measures. We don't build levees until after the area has been flooded before, regardless of the warnings.

The massive flooding and levy failures happening now reminds me of something I suggested after Katrina. Reinforce those levies by actually turning them into geographic land features like isthmuses. Build them high and wide, plant trees, build parks, picnic areas, boat launches, etc. I would make sure they looked like a natural land feature that was always there.

 

[SnowyMacie]

The media, on both sides, blow up all gun-related legal issues as "THEY'RE TAKING AWAY YOUR GUNS!!!!!." The 2nd Amendment was taken from the English Bill of Rights, which has passed successful gun legislation, so I'm not sure why we couldn't do the same legally in the U.S.

 

[RDKirk]

The media, on both sides, blow up all gun-related legal issues as "THEY'RE TAKING AWAY YOUR GUNS!!!!!." The 2nd Amendment was taken from the English Bill of Rights, which has passed successful gun legislation, so I'm not sure why we couldn't do the same legally in the U.S.

I suspect that any state could write its own gun laws to be identical to Switzerland's and it would have passed muster under the Supreme Courts of the first 50 years of US existence, especially since the Court would not have even bothered hearing a suit of a state citizen against his own state in those days.

 

[Thunder Peel]

What I find interesting is that many on the left state that we should legalize drugs, prostitution and abortion because those things will happens regardless of the law, yet they believe that somehow restricting guns will magically work. More people are killed by drinking and driving, yet I don't see a ban on alcohol or cars coming down the pipe.

The 2nd Amendment guarantees the right to bear arms. You're free to hate guns all you want but you don't have the right to take them away from someone else. Millions of legal gun owners didn't kill anyone today, or yesterday, or the day before that, yet the left wants to punish them anyway.

 

[grandvizier1006]

To answer the OP, the NRA actually does have too much influence. I don't think they "control the mass shootings", but I do wish there was more than one pro-gun group. Maybe a moderate one that isn't so lobbyist-loving. It just gives gun owners like my family--we own guns for hunting--a bad name when some redneck says "well, if ya wanna prevent more shootin's, jest bring armed guards to the schools!" Often, the NRa says this to try to help and keep things secure, which is very nice, but do you have to traumatize a bunch of people by waving guns around right after they have just survived a mass shooting? And the Georgia bill which permitted guns to be carried in govt. Buildings and churches...ugh, that was reprehensible.