Opinion Americans can't handle their guns. Time to repeal the 2nd Amendment.

Link (Archive)

Americans can't handle their guns. Time to repeal the 2nd Amendment.​

We must repeal the Second Amendment if we want this country to ever be safe again.

Whether it's killings by police, like the 60 bullets fired into Jayland Walker, or by civilians like in Highland Park, Illinois, Uvalde, Texas, or Buffalo, New York our national record on gun violence is an international embarrassment. It can't be reformed without doing away with guns entirely.

States like California and New York that have tried to set restrictive gun laws can do little when guns are trafficked in from other states. What's more – legislative attempts at restricting gun rights were recently shot down by a Supreme Court gone rogue.

We're way beyond what the framers ever had in mind for gun rights already. And for a selective originalist Supreme Court conservative majority, it's hard to justify glossing over the history behind the Second Amendment.

Much like we did away with the 18th (prohibition) when it no longer served us, it's time to do away with the archaic constitutional amendment holding Americans hostage in their own country.

It's time to say, "Hey, hey, ho, ho, the Second Amendment's gotta go."

The problem: Americans can't handle guns​

Americans can't handle their guns. There were a whopping 692 mass shootings in the United States last year, according to the Gun Violence Archive, which defines mass shootings as having "a minimum of four victims shot, either injured or killed, not including any shooter who may also have been killed or injured in the incident."

In 2021, more than 45,000 Americans were killed by firearms. And while we have just over 4% of the world's population, as of 2017 we had over 40% of the world's civilian-owned guns.

There have been 2,069 school shootings in America since 1970, according to the Center for Homeland Defense and Security's Naval Postgraduate School's K-12 School Shooting Database. But after every shooting, all we see from most Republican lawmakers is idle talk about "locking doors" and the ever-popular "thoughts and prayers."

Meanwhile, other countries tighten gun laws after mass shootings, including Canada, which still has relatively high gun ownership rates but much lower gun homicide rates compared with the United States.

America's only option is to take drastic action and reform our antiquated Constitution.

The solution: Get rid of these 27 words​

27 words.

"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." We are often reminded of the last 14 words of the amendment but completely overlook the first 13. But those 13 words provide critical historical context, which our cherry-picking "originalist" Supreme Court has glossed over in favor of expanding gun rights far beyond what the Founders ever envisioned for the Bill of Rights, and at the expense of American lives.

In 1791, when the Second Amendment was adopted, the Founders had one thing in mind: To protect the people against a standing army, specifically, the muskets of theBritish standing army of King George III. The Second and Third Amendments, meant to be read together, were about protecting the people from the tyranny of professional, full-time militaries (much like the one we have now). They were not intended to protect the people from one another. They were not intended to protect the people from AR-15-style weapons.

Our Constitution is "the world’s longest surviving written charter of government," according to the Senate's website, but it is far from immutable: "The Constitution has been amended 27 times, most recently in 1992."

In order to get rid of the Second Amendment we'd use Article V of the Constitution, which sets out two options: Congress, through a joint resolution passed by a two-thirds vote, or by a congressional convention after petitions from two-thirds of the state legislatures, could propose the amendment.

I am not the only lawyer to point to the obvious solution. After 14 students and three staff were killed at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland in 2018, none other than the late Justice John Paul Stevens called for repealing the Second Amendment in an opinion column in The New York Times.

It took five decades of campaigning for conservatives to get the constitutional right to abortion overturned in the Supreme Court. Repealing the Second Amendment may look like a long shot today, but if progressives and moderates show up in full force to vote the right people into office over the next couple of decades, nothing is impossible.
 
So, their attitude is, "If I can't handle a gun, surely some stupid hick farmer has no idea how to handle one either! As a matter of fact, if I was forced to handle a gun, I could do it way better than that idiotic, ignorant, bigoted Trumper!"
CLose, it's not "I can't handle" it's "I don't need"



But the arrogance, as you point out, does take over from there and rapidly builds to the conclusion: "anyone not living like me is subhuman and deserves nothing, enforced by law"
 
A) She doesn't even go here!
1657920321815.png
B) lol I would destroy this waif like a log-splitter before she laid a finger on anything of mine:
1657920377241.png
 
How are civil liberties a bad thing? Christ, I've heard of a punchable face, but this is a punchable opinion. A terrible first.
I often say Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Human Rights, and whatever other words people use are a bad thing; but not because having an established right/liberty is bad. But because without restraint, society races to the bottom on what should be allowed/is a right. What happens in your bedrooms eventually became "Schools need to teach your small children about masturbation." Why? Because gay rights are human rights, and these lunatics actually argue that being degenerates and bringing children into it is important.

No, Civil Rights, Liberties, whatever were a mistake... ... ... when gifted to people who cant handle them.
 
I often say Civil Liberties, Civil Rights, Human Rights, and whatever other words people use are a bad thing; but not because having an established right/liberty is bad. But because without restraint, society races to the bottom on what should be allowed/is a right. What happens in your bedrooms eventually became "Schools need to teach your small children about masturbation." Why? Because gay rights are human rights, and these lunatics actually argue that being degenerates and bringing children into it is important.

No, Civil Rights, Liberties, whatever were a mistake... ... ... when gifted to people who cant handle them.
If you want to live in a country without civil liberties, feel free to move to one. Yeah things aren't perfect here. And who's to say who can/cannot handle them? Best not to give ammunition to leftards who would remove your rights just because you said you didn't approve of certain lifestyle choices.

Both wanting to restrict freedom of speech and wanting to restrict 2A are terrible opinions and should be ridiculed whenever possible.

Unfortunately we're getting to the point where I'm starting to think that while the Founding Fathers had some good ideas, they just don't work out in the end.

But yes you stupid Americans, keep blathering about your nonexistent "freedoms."
Fun thought experiment for you kiwis. Replace any reference to guns in this article with alcohol and then think about how well prohibition worked.
But I need muh heckin' rainbow cocktails and white claws! How am I supposed to create a party atmosphere without them?
 
Última edición:
When I was a kid, I seem to remember the prevailing argument in favor of gun control was that the police were the good guys and would handle anything that you might need self-protection for. But the last few years have proven that you can't trust them. On both sides of the political spectrum you could point to so many cases in the last few years where cops have had atrocious behavior and cannot, as a whole, be trusted, at least with your life.
 
Oh, and forgot to post this earlier:

Number of guns I own : 1
Number of guns I have immediate access to through family : 4
Number of times I've killed someone with any of those guns: 0

Shut the fuck up about "can't handle it" and take a powder.

When I was a kid, I seem to remember the prevailing argument in favor of gun control was that the police were the good guys and would handle anything that you might need self-protection for. But the last few years have proven that you can't trust them. On both sides of the political spectrum you could point to so many cases in the last few years where cops have had atrocious behavior and cannot, as a whole, be trusted, at least with your life.
Incredibly ironic how leftist policy has created the very strawmen they used to laugh at pro-gun people for using to justify the need for personal armament:

"What, you think out of the blue a mob of 40 people will attack your house, the police won't respond and the DA won't charge them? So you need a machinegun to fight them off and keep them from coming back for revenge? Does that sound likely to you?"

30 years ago? No, but...

Have you looked out a window at a BLM or ANTIFA "protest" lately? That's EXACTLY what's happened.
 
Fun thought experiment for you kiwis. Replace any reference to guns in this article with alcohol and then think about how well prohibition worked.
Difference being that one of these things can be easily used to minecraft the government officials that come knocking trying to confiscate it.

Not saying you COULDN’T do it with a bottle, but it WOULD be significantly more challenging.
 
Oh, and forgot to post this earlier:

Number of guns I own : 1
Number of guns I have immediate access to through family : 4
Number of times I've killed someone with any of those guns: 0

Shut the fuck up about "can't handle it" and take a powder.


Incredibly ironic how leftist policy has created the very strawmen they used to laugh at pro-gun people for using to justify the need for personal armament:

"What, you think out of the blue a mob of 40 people will attack your house, the police won't respond and the DA won't charge them? So you need a machinegun to fight them off and keep them from coming back for revenge? Does that sound likely to you?"

30 years ago? No, but...

Have you looked out a window at a BLM or ANTIFA "protest" lately? That's EXACTLY what's happened.
Y U want to shoot peaceful protesters, you Nazi chud???

It's funny how the people who say "you don't need a gun, just call the police" are the kinds of people who also say "the police are racist, we need to make them illegal"
When I was a kid, I seem to remember the prevailing argument in favor of gun control was that the police were the good guys and would handle anything that you might need self-protection for. But the last few years have proven that you can't trust them. On both sides of the political spectrum you could point to so many cases in the last few years where cops have had atrocious behavior and cannot, as a whole, be trusted, at least with your life.
That's the argument I grew up hearing. Of course I knew it was bullshit but good luck changing your family's opinions on anything.
African Americans can't handle their freedom, time to reinstitute race laws
Ironically the first gun control laws in the US were levied against black people. More ironic that the South became worse for them in many ways after the end of the American Civil War.
 
after seeing the shitwhos that the last school shootings were, maybe abolishing the ATF and FBI would be a better idea, they work less than black people...
 
If you want to live in a country without civil liberties, feel free to move to one. Yeah things aren't perfect here. And who's to say who can/cannot handle them? Best not to give ammunition to leftards who would remove your rights just because you said you didn't approve of certain lifestyle choices.

Both wanting to restrict freedom of speech and wanting to restrict 2A are terrible opinions and should be ridiculed whenever possible.

Unfortunately we're getting to the point where I'm starting to think that while the Founding Fathers had some good ideas, they just don't work out in the end.

But yes you stupid Americans, keep blathering about your nonexistent "freedoms."
I'm not about to start the "I'm gonna move" shit, it's not perfect, but I can admit we have it better than most. But we've also reached a point where rights/liberties have come to be whatever a bunch of idiots want, and that's non-sustainable to be functional in the long term. And since all their idiocy is done under the guise of rights/liberties, they were a mistake, because we let too many idiots have a say.
 
Also:

Much like we did away with the 18th (prohibition) when it no longer served us, it's time to do away with the archaic constitutional amendment holding Americans hostage in their own country.

Can I just point out just how retarded the argument of "We removed an amendment before" is? Why did we repeal the 18th? Because Prohibition

Didn't

Fucking

WORK.


So what makes this idiot think that banning something this time will do the trick?
 
Atrás
Top Abajo