Post by Tzalaran on Mar 27, 2009 10:40:35 GMT -6
To Jill F, and all the other people wanting to debate the intention of the founding fathers:
Thus reads the 2nd amendment:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Google the second amendment and read the wiki there (well cited and good information on most aspects of this amendment) for more of the philosophical beliefs at the time. let us not forget that this was in 1787, muskets and black powder weapons were the only firearms, and cannons were the most destructive force ever seen.
This amendment was written as a counter to the Continental Army, so that the government could not be taken over by a military coup, as was feared during the time when the federal government wasn't as strong, or firmly entrenched on the american persona as it is today. In those times, the threat of being against an armed populous was much more threatening than it is today. honestly, if the military decided to wage war on the people of this country, do you think hunting rifles or even assault weapons are going to do much damage against jets with bombs, or a naval bombardment against a coastal city? no, our technology has advanced beyond the point where a personal firearm can be a threat to the military, yet it is illegal to possess explosive grenades, artilery, non-industrial dynamite/other bombs, heavy machine guns, and other armaments that the military uses. So by the intent of the founding fathers, who believed that an armed population was the only counter to military coup, the outlawing of these modern tools of war would be a violation of the constitution's bill of rights.
We however know that these tools should not be possessed by the populous because of the penchant of children and some adults to "accidentally" allow regular firearms to discharge at times they really don't want them to, leading to accidental deaths each and every year. It is this safety precaution that disallows these weapons from being public commodities like hunting rifles, shotguns, and handguns.
To the hunters and sportsmen, who have never been a part of the gun control problem, there should be no infringement of their ability to purchase, use, maintain, or trade firearms and munitions. Their responsible use should be a model for other groups to follow, as respect for, and safety with, firearms is their primary focus.
Where we run into grey areas in the firearm debate is when gangs, criminals, and intolerance groups are brought into the equation. These groups are not following gun laws, and are outside the normal firearm market, purchasing their assault weapons on the black market and getting ammunition where they can. These black market weapons come from all over, and the ability of an assault weapon ban to remove those firearms is completely unknown. i personally do not believe that a ban on assault weapons would affect their sale on the black market, but i have no proof to back up that opinion other than logical deduction.
i think that everyone would agree that removing firearms from criminals and gang would be a good goal. the path to achieving that goal is not clear, but i've read no proposal that leads me to believe this administration believes in reducing the ability of law abiding citizens to own, maintain, and use their sport or hunting firearms is the proper method to eliminate weapons from falling in the hands of criminals.
The entire "Obama will take your guns" argument is horribly false, and is only used as a propaganda tool by the right wing media and their sycophants. The argument that the founding fathers intended us to have and maintain assault weapons and others of that ilk is counter to the evolution of law in this country, and there is difficulty providing an argument that the founding fathers foresaw the invention of weapons that could destroy entire cities at the push of a button. We have seen these weapons, and their effects, so we should rely on our own sense of right and wrong when regarding these grey areas.
as i hate to preach about a problem without proposing a solution of my own, i think we need to take a closer look at firearm manufacturers, and look closer into how their firearms reach the black market. we will not be able to prevent Chinese and Russian weapons from reaching the black market without some international cooperation, but by working with american firearm manufacturers and those of our allies, we should be able to reduce the overall quantity of assault weapons that reach the black market, and thereby reduce the number of criminals who are able to purchase these types of weapons that place the security of average citizens at risk. additional marking of each assault weapon for tracking purposes should be investigated with cooperation of the manufacturers, allowing us to close off the loopholes that allow assault weapons to fall into the hands of criminals, gang members, and terrorists. The black market of firearms is closely related to the black market for drugs, and as 60% of black market revenues come from Marijuanna, this would mean that profits from the pot trade can seem to fuel weapons trade.
It is only by dropping preconceived notions and propaganda that we will be able to find solutions to these complex issues, as more and more every situation we are finding is interconnected with multiple other problems. With broad vision and understanding, i'm sure we can compromise on allowing the sportsmen and women of this country to continue their time honored pastime while combating the ability of gangs and criminals to obtain assault weapons that they will use against innocent citizens of this nation.
Thus reads the 2nd amendment:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
Google the second amendment and read the wiki there (well cited and good information on most aspects of this amendment) for more of the philosophical beliefs at the time. let us not forget that this was in 1787, muskets and black powder weapons were the only firearms, and cannons were the most destructive force ever seen.
This amendment was written as a counter to the Continental Army, so that the government could not be taken over by a military coup, as was feared during the time when the federal government wasn't as strong, or firmly entrenched on the american persona as it is today. In those times, the threat of being against an armed populous was much more threatening than it is today. honestly, if the military decided to wage war on the people of this country, do you think hunting rifles or even assault weapons are going to do much damage against jets with bombs, or a naval bombardment against a coastal city? no, our technology has advanced beyond the point where a personal firearm can be a threat to the military, yet it is illegal to possess explosive grenades, artilery, non-industrial dynamite/other bombs, heavy machine guns, and other armaments that the military uses. So by the intent of the founding fathers, who believed that an armed population was the only counter to military coup, the outlawing of these modern tools of war would be a violation of the constitution's bill of rights.
We however know that these tools should not be possessed by the populous because of the penchant of children and some adults to "accidentally" allow regular firearms to discharge at times they really don't want them to, leading to accidental deaths each and every year. It is this safety precaution that disallows these weapons from being public commodities like hunting rifles, shotguns, and handguns.
To the hunters and sportsmen, who have never been a part of the gun control problem, there should be no infringement of their ability to purchase, use, maintain, or trade firearms and munitions. Their responsible use should be a model for other groups to follow, as respect for, and safety with, firearms is their primary focus.
Where we run into grey areas in the firearm debate is when gangs, criminals, and intolerance groups are brought into the equation. These groups are not following gun laws, and are outside the normal firearm market, purchasing their assault weapons on the black market and getting ammunition where they can. These black market weapons come from all over, and the ability of an assault weapon ban to remove those firearms is completely unknown. i personally do not believe that a ban on assault weapons would affect their sale on the black market, but i have no proof to back up that opinion other than logical deduction.
i think that everyone would agree that removing firearms from criminals and gang would be a good goal. the path to achieving that goal is not clear, but i've read no proposal that leads me to believe this administration believes in reducing the ability of law abiding citizens to own, maintain, and use their sport or hunting firearms is the proper method to eliminate weapons from falling in the hands of criminals.
The entire "Obama will take your guns" argument is horribly false, and is only used as a propaganda tool by the right wing media and their sycophants. The argument that the founding fathers intended us to have and maintain assault weapons and others of that ilk is counter to the evolution of law in this country, and there is difficulty providing an argument that the founding fathers foresaw the invention of weapons that could destroy entire cities at the push of a button. We have seen these weapons, and their effects, so we should rely on our own sense of right and wrong when regarding these grey areas.
as i hate to preach about a problem without proposing a solution of my own, i think we need to take a closer look at firearm manufacturers, and look closer into how their firearms reach the black market. we will not be able to prevent Chinese and Russian weapons from reaching the black market without some international cooperation, but by working with american firearm manufacturers and those of our allies, we should be able to reduce the overall quantity of assault weapons that reach the black market, and thereby reduce the number of criminals who are able to purchase these types of weapons that place the security of average citizens at risk. additional marking of each assault weapon for tracking purposes should be investigated with cooperation of the manufacturers, allowing us to close off the loopholes that allow assault weapons to fall into the hands of criminals, gang members, and terrorists. The black market of firearms is closely related to the black market for drugs, and as 60% of black market revenues come from Marijuanna, this would mean that profits from the pot trade can seem to fuel weapons trade.
It is only by dropping preconceived notions and propaganda that we will be able to find solutions to these complex issues, as more and more every situation we are finding is interconnected with multiple other problems. With broad vision and understanding, i'm sure we can compromise on allowing the sportsmen and women of this country to continue their time honored pastime while combating the ability of gangs and criminals to obtain assault weapons that they will use against innocent citizens of this nation.
