Posted on 10/05/2017 11:43:03 AM PDT by NRx
...Given all of this, why do liberals keep losing the gun control debate?
Maybe it’s because they argue their case badly and — let’s face it — in bad faith. Democratic politicians routinely profess their fidelity to the Second Amendment — or rather, “a nuanced reading” of it — with all the conviction of Barack Obama’s support for traditional marriage, circa 2008. People recognize lip service for what it is.
Then there are the endless liberal errors of fact. There is no “gun-show loophole” per se; it’s a private-sale loophole, in other words the right to sell your own stuff. The civilian AR-15 is not a true “assault rifle,” and banning such rifles would have little effect on the overall murder rate, since most homicides are committed with handguns. It’s not true that 40 percent of gun owners buy without a background check; the real number is closer to one-fifth.
The National Rifle Association does not have Republican “balls in a money clip,” as Jimmy Kimmel put it the other night. The N.R.A. has donated a paltry $3,533,294 to all current members of Congress since 1998, according to The Washington Post, equivalent to about three months of Kimmel’s salary. The N.R.A. doesn’t need to buy influence: It’s powerful because it’s popular.
Nor will it do to follow the “Australian model” of a gun buyback program, which has shown poor results in the United States and makes little sense in a country awash with hundreds of millions of weapons. Keeping guns out of the hands of mentally ill people is a sensible goal, but due process is still owed to the potentially insane. Background checks for private gun sales are another fine idea, though its effects on homicides will be negligible: guns recovered by police are rarely in the hands of their legal owners, a 2016 study found.
In fact, the more closely one looks at what passes for “common sense” gun laws, the more feckless they appear. Americans who claim to be outraged by gun crimes should want to do something more than tinker at the margins of a legal regime that most of the developed world rightly considers nuts. They should want to change it fundamentally and permanently.
There is only one way to do this: Repeal the Second Amendment.
Something to think about, Bret Stephens ...
Revolution
The Beatles
You say you want a revolution
Well you know
We all want to change the world
You tell me that it’s evolution
Well you know
We all want to change the world
But when you talk about destruction
Don’t you know you can count me out
Don’t you know it’s gonna be alright?
Alright?
Alright?
You say you got a real solution
Well you know
We’d all love to see the plan
You ask me for a contribution
Well you know
We’re doing what we can
But when you want money for people with minds that hate
All I can tell you is brother you have to wait
Don’t you know it’s gonna be alright?
Alright?
Alright?
You say you’ll change the constitution
Well you know
We all want to change your head
You tell me it’s the institution
Well you know
You better free your mind instead
But if you go carrying pictures of Chairman Mao
You ain’t going to make it with anyone anyhow
Don’t you know know it’s gonna be alright?
Alright?
Alright?
Alright!
Hell, while we’re at it, do away with the 1st Amendment too. Actually eliminating them all will make things easier for Democrats.
liberals and anti-gun fanatics have a moronic view that no guns means evil stops- i posted the following in another forum- but since anti-gun folks think only militia and single shot guns should be allowed- I’ll repost this here
.
A typical idiotic utopian fantasyland dream- where the world is made up of only good people who always help and never hurt others because hell, we will have gun laws that ’prevent bad people from acquiring guns illegally’
.
Cripes- liberalism is a mental disease that portends that everything can be solved by creating more laws- that bad people will all of a sudden start to ’see the light’ and turn over a new leaf to never hurt others again
.
Evil exists- and you don’t make people safer from evil by taking their means of self defense away from them when the evil perpetrators are armed to the teeth- They- the bad guys – will ALWAYS be armed- whether it be with guns, vehicles, bombs- planes etc- and WE THE PEOPLE have an INALIENABLE RIGHT to Self Protection, and the RIGHT to them ost effective means possible to self protection- regardless of demented liberal think.the FACT is there is evil in this world- period- it’s a fact we have to live with- and one way to live with that fact is to make sure law abiding citizens can protect themselves against those FEW who cross the line and break the law – The overwhelming majority of gun owners live their whole lives as law abiding citizens- You can never stop the few who decide to cross the line from doing so no matter how many gun laws you have- but by enacting severe restrictions on legal gun owners- you ensure that law abiding citizens no longer have adequate means of self protection- AND you ensure that in times of foreign invasion, ordinary law abiding citizens are not able to effectively protect themselves and the nation. You know why America hasn’t been invaded more often? Because the enemy isn’t stupid- They know they would be walking into a hornet’s nest- We proved that armed citizenry is an effective means of securing AND holding onto our sovereignty-
.
”I ask, Sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people. To disarm the people is the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
George Mason
Co-author of the Second Amendment
during Virginia’s Convention to Ratify the Constitution, 1788
.
”Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.”
George Washington
First President of the United States
.
”The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand arms, like laws, discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe, and preserve order in the world as property. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside … Horrid mischief would ensue were the law-abiding deprived of the use of them.”
Thomas Paine
.
”The constitutions of most of our States assert that all power is inherent in the people; that … it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; … ”
Thomas Jefferson
letter to Justice John Cartwright, June 5, 1824. ME 16:45.
By all means, try to repeal it. I am serious, this is a big step forward for the NY Times. They are proposing repealing the Second Amendment which IMPLIES by the process outlined in the Constitution. The problem is, of course, that 2/3 of the states will not ratify such an amendment and the NY Times proposed amendment of repeal of the Second Amendment will GO DOWN IN FLAMES.
What the NY Times really means is, “yo, some judge out there, just end this.”
Stephens is a globalist open borders pussy.
That will never happen. To repeal the Second Amendment, it would require a new Amendment to the Constitution—and that means 2/3 majority vote in both sides of Congress on the language of the Amendment and 38 state legislatures to pass the Amendment. An extremely tall order indeed.
Agree. After you take away the 2nd amendment then the 1st amendment and rest of the Bill of Rights will go into the dustbin of history shortly thereafter.
The 2nd amendment ultimately guarantees and protects the rest of the Bill of Rights, including the 1st amendment, from being taken away!
It’s about time somebody made that call publicly!!!!
I encourage the Democrat party to adopt this as a platform plank at their 2020 convention. Even sooner, if possible.
‘Bout damn time.
That'll never work because the United States Constitution has very specific language on how to add Amendments--one that even Lefty judges won't touch.
Because progs are irrational ideologues.
Let’s do this logically. In numerical order. Take away the First Amendment. No more HuffPO, Vox, NewsWeak, AP, Reuters just the government newspaper and that’s it. No more Jimmy Kimmel or Stephen Colbert. No more NFL games because they too are political (now). Let’s try that for a month and then see if we all agree freedom and liberty is better than tyranny.
He is actually arguing for a full on repeal of the 2nd amendment, which would itself require a constitutional amendment. Fair enough. Let the debate begin.
As for repeal of the Second Amendment... it will be a no go.
The author is wrong on this point.
The 2nd amendment is NOT about "national security," it is about "free state," or state security.
When the Framers said "necessary to the security of a free State," they meant to protect the states' sovereignty from federal encroachment. They were not talking about the "state" as the federal entity being protected from foreign invaders. That was the role of the Navy.
-PJ
I agree.
It took us years, but all we had to do to end the scourge of drug addiction was outlaw drugs.
Why can’t we learn from that?
To go down in flames, it would actually have to get off the ground. A full repeal would go nowhere in recordtime. Personally, I hope that the Democrat party runs on this issue. We haven’t ever seen a major U.S. political party commit mass political suicide.
Come and get them, NYSlimes.
Repeal? They want a full blown civil war on their hands, then be my guest. This is a country founded by rebels with guns. If a lefty or RINO can’t deal with that, then F them! MOVE!
Absolutely! No more of this pu$$$y footing around! Get down to what you really want! Then when your ilk loses without even your opposition working up a sweat to make sure you lose, meditate (if you can) upon the possibility that a wider reality exists outside of your urban cloister... I’m all in favor of open debate and the teaching moments that such debate will open up. The ‘rats will never do it though. They still remember what feinswine’s assault weapons ban did to them in 1994. It ended their dynastic congressional majority as all of the normals saw the fascists underneath the smiling nanny faces.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.