02-10-2018, 05:28 PM
(02-10-2018, 01:10 AM)pbrower2a Wrote: The militia clause could preclude people from having firearms if those people are unsuited due to moral turpitude, disloyalty, idiocy, or insanity. Thus "but not criminals", "but not the insane", "but not addicts", and "but not people with intellectual impairment" would be reasonable and minimal qualifications to any right to bear arms.
Such a compromise is not going to happen in this Fourth Turning, because so many on the left are against the fundamental right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of dissuading government over-reach. That is why they want to eliminate effective military weapons from civilian control, but aren't so focused on the weapons used by gangs for most of the gun crime in the US. It is also behind the focus on disarming veterans "victims of PTSD", the people best able to lead a civilian insurgency. In this kind of atmosphere any "common-sense" proposal is only a step towards civilian disarmament, and will not only be opposed, but will trigger a civil war.
Compromise is another era's business. This era, the choice is leave it alone or fight to the death.