The sad reality is that a significant number of Americans are simply unmoved by death -- witness the politicization of public health measures during the pandemic, for instance. Ironically, a fair number of these same people also claim the label of "pro-life."
another aspect of this is hard to ignore -- the people most passionate about this issue are the ones who have amassed arsenals. Frankly, it could be deadly for any GOP senators to change their minds and support new legislation on gun control.
another aspect of this is hard to ignore -- the people most passionate about this issue are the ones who have amassed arsenals. Frankly, it could be deadly for any GOP senators to change their minds and support new legislation on gun control.
Jan 6 pretty strongly argues against the claim that heavily armed private citizens are on the side of freedom and constitutional order.
I don't think any of the MOL gun nuts post here any more, but this is where someone would usually come in with specious arguments agains gun control. Which are the only arguments they have when you look at the 50 states ranked by gun deaths. The states with the lowest rates tend to be those with stricter gun laws, like NJ and MA. The states with higher rates tend to have more lax laws. Also gun deaths tend to rise in states that repeal some of their gun control.
Here are some of the arguments:
guns make people safer (this is the easiest to refute when the crime and violence data shows again and again that cities and states with more guns are not safer from crime than places with fewer guns)
gun death figures include suicide, so those deaths should be excluded (why? isn't a suicide by gun important to you? is it ok if someone dies by their own hand).
people who commit suicide by gun would have committed suicide by some other lethal method. (actually studies show most people who commit suicide impulsively. if they can't find a method at hand to do so, most of them do not go on to commit suicide).
there are gun deaths and crimes even in states with tight gun control. The old "if guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns" argument. (But data for a state like NJ shows that most guns used in crimes were bought legally in other states, typically PA or VA. So it's not "outlaws" buying guns on the black market. It's people without criminal records who shopped for guns legally in other states.)
I've argued with people here and on other social media many times saying I could respect an honest argument against gun control legislation. To me, an honest argument would acknowledge that more guns in circulation leads to more gun deaths. And if a person argues that despite the higher level of gun deaths associated with gun ownership, but that they believe those deaths are the appropriate trade off for the "freedom" to have firearms for personal protection and/or recreation, that's at least an honest coherent argument. But instead we get bogus claims that guns make law-abiding people safer, in the face of all evidence to the contrary.
The sad reality is that a significant number of Americans are simply unmoved by death -- witness the politicization of public health measures during the pandemic, for instance. Ironically, a fair number of these same people also claim the label of "pro-life."
I was always annoyed by the label "Pro-Life" because, I thought, no one is "Pro-Death".
The sad reality is that a significant number of Americans are simply unmoved by death -- witness the politicization of public health measures during the pandemic, for instance. Ironically, a fair number of these same people also claim the label of "pro-life."
I was always annoyed by the label "Pro-Life" because, I thought, no one is "Pro-Death".
Then COVID 19 came.
Right? Positions I would have dismissed as uncharitable and unfair caricatures have become mainstream.
I believe the US will have Medicare for All before it has meaningful gun control. And I don't think we'll have Medicare for All in the next 25 years.
yeah, you're probably right.
The problem is, though, that the longer we go without doing anything, the deeper our sicko gun culture becomes entrenched,(on what planet do open carry laws make any kind of sense?) making it that much harder for any kind of gun control to have any kind of useful effect.
Guns are one part of the culture war that the libs have simply lost. Maybe forever.
There was a time when I opposed gun control because the US Constitution explicitly protects the right to bear arms and the Constitution was, in my mind, a sacred document.
These days, I think the Constitution is a dangerous anti democratic fossil and the right to bear arms should be abolished along with the Electoral College and the Senate.
To clarify, my objection to the Senate is that it awards two votes to Wyoming and two votes to California. There probably is a need for such a body but there needs to be a different way of choosing its members.
There was a time when I opposed gun control because the US Constitution explicitly protects the right to bear arms and the Constitution was, in my mind, a sacred document.
These days, I think the Constitution is a dangerous anti democratic fossil and the right to bear arms should be abolished along with the Electoral College and the Senate.
You are right about the constitution, but even if you were not, the 2nd amendment talks about a militia (which we now call our armed forces). Because if they were talking about ordinary citizens outside of the context of the armed forces, that would mean that anyone has the right to own nuclear weapons too, now would it.
But anyway, this is not a rational argument to begin with. I think the fastest way to do something about guns is to repeal the 2005 (George W Bush) law that protects gun manufacturers from being sued (PLCAA). And the fastest way to do that is to pass the For the People Act (H.R.1) which will give us government that is more representative of the electorate. And the fastest way to do that is to kill or limit the filibuster.
You are right about the constitution, but even if you were not, the 2nd amendment talks about a militia (which we now call our armed forces). Because if they were talking about ordinary citizens outside of the context of the armed forces, that would mean that anyone has the right to own nuclear weapons too, now would it.
But anyway, this is not a rational argument to begin with. I think the fastest way to do something about guns is to repeal the 2005 (George W Bush) law that protects gun manufacturers from being sued (PLCAA). And the fastest way to do that is to pass the For the People Act (H.R.1) which will give us government that is more representative of the electorate. And the fastest way to do that is to kill or limit the filibuster.
You understand that the current SCOTUS (a product of the system where Wyoming gets the same number of votes as California) will almost certainly void any law that is passed?
The fact that gun control is a problem with no solution is just further evidence that the current version of the United States of America is non viable and needs to be replaced.
COLUMBIA, S.C. (AP) — A South Carolina senator has a proposal to make sure no federal law can ever seize guns — make everyone over 17 who can legally own a gun a member of a militia.
South Carolina’s constitution allows the governor to call up an “unorganized militia” of any “able bodied male citizens” between ages 18 and 45. State Sen. Tom Corbin’s proposal would automatically expand membership to everyone who is over 17 and could own a gun.
Supporters of the bill said if everyone is a member of a militia, then they all fall under the opening clause of the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution that starts “A well regulated Militia.” That way a federal law restricting weapons would not apply in South Carolina since almost all residents would be in the unorganized militia.
“That would prevent the federal government from ever confiscating any of your weapons. Because at the end of the day, the federal government cannot disarm a standing army,” said Corbin, a Republican from Travelers Rest.
You are right about the constitution, but even if you were not, the 2nd amendment talks about a militia (which we now call our armed forces). Because if they were talking about ordinary citizens outside of the context of the armed forces, that would mean that anyone has the right to own nuclear weapons too, now would it.
But anyway, this is not a rational argument to begin with. I think the fastest way to do something about guns is to repeal the 2005 (George W Bush) law that protects gun manufacturers from being sued (PLCAA). And the fastest way to do that is to pass the For the People Act (H.R.1) which will give us government that is more representative of the electorate. And the fastest way to do that is to kill or limit the filibuster.
You understand that the current SCOTUS (a product of the system where Wyoming gets the same number of votes as California) will almost certainly void any law that is passed?
The fact that gun control is a problem with no solution is just further evidence that the current version of the United States of America is non viable and needs to be replaced.
So we have two options: move to another country, or fix this.
I would like to hope that Joe Biden will be a much more transformational President than you expect him to be. And I'd like to do whatever I can do to help him do that.
And to be honest with you, I couldn't care less about trump or mtierney at this point. They will get what they deserve.
Anyway, the issue is not guns.The issue is the gun culture preventing us from doing anything about guns, of which my post is an example.
Actually, the issue is a broken political system that allows the minority of Americans who engage in the gun culture cult to hold the rest of us hostage. Real progress is impossible without major changes to that system. Anything short of that change is just an exercise in Titanic deck chair feng shui.
Is there anything else that will make a difference?