Gun control discussions in the wake of the Newtown, CT deaths

[Moderator]

Some very good observations ther Ms. Mod.

But perhaps the main thing we should be doing to shut down the majority of numerous criminal activities between the two countries would be to protect the border.

And ways to do help with that situation would be to legalize some of the drugs that are being trafficked and to put into place real immigration policies that people can live with, e.g. making it easier to get work visas, in other words removing the reasons for crossing the border illegally.

[Todash]

the proverbial "elephant in the room" in all of this is that the spirit of the second amendment is not limited to protecting ourselves from bad guys, but also the potential need to confront a government that has gone bad. This is the reason they're not supposed to keep records.

Then please do tell me what the founders meant by "well regulated." Not just regulated, but well regulated.

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.

[Todash]

A first step might be to stop putting restrictions on them from doing so.

Restrictions which effectively hamstring the ATF's ability to enforce laws were introduced by former Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-KS) who was provided the language for the restrictions by the NRA. As quoted by Rep. Tiahrt, "I wanted to make sure I was fulfilling the needs of my friends who are firearms dealers. NRA Officials were helpful in making sure I had my bases covered." Congress passed the amendments introduced by Congressman Tiahrt and that legislation is now known as the Tiahrt Amendments.

My mouth is hanging open. I had not heard about that. I am disappoint, Kansas. I am disappoint.

[exzel]

And ways to do help with that situation would be to legalize some of the drugs that are being trafficked and to put into place real immigration policies that people can live with, e.g. making it easier to get work visas, in other words removing the reasons for crossing the border illegally.

Perhaps. But just becasue some don't like our existing laws, doesn't dismiss our government officials from following and enforcing them, until they are changed. Oh wait...

[Todash]

And second amendment proponents come from both political parties. It just seems to me one party is more keen on defending our constitutional rights than the other.

This is a slight hijack, but I'm gonna have to agree with hoss on that one, assuming you are referring to Republicans. (Read spoiler contents for my hijacky rationale, or feel free to skip if you don't want to be distracted from the topic at hand.)

Show Spoiler

Opposition to gay marriage, anti-abortion stance, Christian-only symbols and such on public/government property, the "let's kill 'em quick" mentality of capital punishment proponents (those pesky Sixth and Eighth Amendments) ... Generally the only Constitutional right that is regularly and vocally championed by the Republicans I know, and I know a lot of them, is the right to bear arms. (Sometimes I hear about religion, but that is often because they feel that removing religion from school's official activities, which to my mind is perfectly reasonable since school is an extension of the government, is discriminating against them. I think that is just because no matter who you are, it's hard to have something taken from you that you've always had, even if not having that thing--in this case, primarily Christian symbols as an official part of public school--is the right way to be.)

Each of us has rights that we feel particularly passionate about. You will find some members of both major parties willing to restrict the rights that are not important to them. Since we are being honest here, I am going to say that although it is a *small* faction of the party--which you can see from ... some survey out there that I'll try to dig up if someone really wants it--the people who would like to really intensely cripple the Second Amendment are probably mostly Democrats. In other words, only a small minority of Democrats think no one should have guns, but the people who think no one should have guns are likely to be Democrats. Each party has its extremists. (I might be wrong. If most of the people who are totally anti-gun are actually Green Party or something, I apologize and freely admit that I just *assumed* it would be Democrats. But I know it's a minority of Americans, either way.)

Here's the difference, though: While I personally know Republicans (and/or Independents who often vote Republican) who do not agree with their party's stance on civil rights, abortion, etc., those stances ARE the face of the party right now.

The only ones I know who are really staunch about defending every possible liberty above everything else are Libertarians. And frankly, while I admire their adherence to principals, I find them overall to not be a particularly practical group of people. Their ideas would work okay in small groups where there's not much requirement for cooperation but are a little too "wild wild West" to be practical in society, I think.

Okay, hijack over.

[Moderator]

Perhaps. But just becasue some don't like our existing laws, doesn't dismiss our government officials from following and enforcing them, until they are changed. Oh wait...

Sounds like material for a new thread. However, on this one re gun control laws, have you done much research into the opinions from the law enforcement side of this? I haven't done what I would say is a lot but so far the ones I have read are all in favor of tightening up the laws and adding restrictions to the types of guns and ammunition that are available as a way of promoting the general safety of the public at large and law enforcement officers who are exposed to this much more often than the average citizen.

[Todash]

FYI: I just found out earlier this week something really interesting about immigration from my husband, who found it out from a coworker who was originally from Ethiopia and has been waiting the required three years as a resident before beginning to quality for citizenship. Off-topic, I know, but there is SO much that those of us who were born here take for granted and don't even realize about the immigration process. It's very interesting. I'll post about it Monday, probably.

[exzel]

Yes conservatives care. You're so right about that. Don't infringe rights unless it's for gay marriage or a woman's uterus.

Explosive death sticks, not a problem. Gays getting married or abortions...huge societal woe.

Just my opinion. Doesn’t mean I am necessarily correct.

And perhaps before people start tying so-called "gun nuts" to the republican party, here is something interesting to wrap your head around.

• VaTech - Wrote hate mail to President Bush and to his staff, registered democrat.
• Columbine - Both too young to vote but both families were registered democrats and progressive liberals
• Fort Hood - Registered democrat, on Homeland Security advisory task force aimed at advising the Obama transition team.
• Colorado Theater - Registered democrat, staff worker on the Obama campaign, linked to the Occupy San Diego group.
• Connecticut School Shooter - Registered democrat.

[kingricefan]

My head hurts..........there's so much to consider in this debate.

[shipwreked]

Then please do tell me what the founders meant by "well regulated." Not just regulated, but well regulated.

"proper working order", I would think? Context being written by people recovering from having recently succeded ousting a controlling government.

I do not believe this refers to the national guard. If say some administration decided 4 years is not enough and the constitution and bill of rights thing needs to be done away with, such a regime would be in violation of their vow to protect and sustain this government and they would be in control of the national guard.