Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Bipartisan Senate group proposes ‘no fly, no buy’ gun measure
(11-30-2018, 11:59 PM)Bob Butler 54 Wrote: It seems to me that we have an old compromise, and a way to change it, and the old compromise is called the Constitution.  It favors the old.  Blue fanatics are not willing to abide by it.  They keep moving the conversation here and elsewhere to prohibition, which hasn't worked, to infringement, when the old compromise specifically forbids infringement.  The response has been for the red to also refuse compromise, and to stick to the old compromise, which favors them and which the blue do not have the numbers to change.

I don't see that as changing soon, and on his good days neither does Eric.  On bad days, he and others spend valuable political capitol anyway.

I try to shift the conversation to ways of changing things for the blue that do not involve breaking the Constitution, but the blue fanatics keep not taking these steps and keep pushing breaking the Constitution.  The red fanatics seeing this have no reason to shift away from the old compromise.

Sports media no longer shows streakers, no longer gratifies one type of unlawful attention seeker.  News media could do the same, not gratify those seeking publicity through violence.  We could do much more to break the media's place in today's spiral of violence.

The Constitution as interpreted does not guarantee the right to own or carry weapons to those questionably sane.  It does, however, guarantee due process.  If the blue want prohibition in that area, they should seek to define and implement a due process.  That much could be and perhaps should be done.

That does not mean that Prohibition is necessarily going to succeed.  Historically, it hasn't.

But the blue fanatics will not move to doing what they can within the Constitution to stop the bloodshed.  They insist on focusing the conversation on breaking it.  The blood, it seems, is on them.

The blood is entirely on the hands of the red fanatics and the gun lobby. It is their blood money that the red politicians pay attention to. The blue side has always been willing to pass what laws can be passed, however watered down. If you were aware of politics today, not just those of 240 years ago, you would know this. I don't know how what blues are doing now could be any MORE "due process."

Your use of the word prohibition as usual is obfuscating. In Prohibition, it was illegal to own liquor as well as to make it or even drink it. Places selling it had to have people at the door let you in through a peep hole ("speakeasies"). This has been largely true of our drug laws as well. Banning military assault rifles for civilian use only extends to banning their sale, not their possession, and it does not shut down gun stores. There is no proposal to confiscate these weapons of war, let alone all the handguns and rifles.

And by the way statistics are clear that the assault weapons ban of 1994 reduced mass shootings 37%, but they have gone way up since its unnecessary expiration in 2004. Opinions differ on this, according to what I read. But the articles not supporting this stat did not cite it, but evaded it, while pointing out various provisos and exceptions. This article makes the case clearly regarding mass shootings. https://www.huffingtonpost.com/john-a-tu...40352.html

[Image: 2016-04-20-1461173878-6982193-MassShooti...-thumb.jpg]

Some of us, I have no idea how many, would be in favor of a gunless society. I would. Most developed countries are already virtually gunless. The United States, especially in its red states and counties, has a sick obsession with guns, to its severe detriment. However, the question is how to get there. Forced confiscation of all guns now would lead to violence. That would have the opposite effect to the intention of the law. Some day, if and when American society reaches consensus, which is way more than majority vote, it might work. Yes it would take repeal of the long, long outdated 2nd Amendment. That would take passage in 3/4 of the states. Meanwhile gun possession has been declining, even as gun laws have gotten more permissive thanks to the NRA and red-state politics.
"I close my eyes, and I can see a better day" -- Justin Bieber

Keep the spirit alive;
Eric M
Reply


Messages In This Thread
RE: Bipartisan Senate group proposes ‘no fly, no buy’ gun measure - by Eric the Green - 12-01-2018, 03:10 PM

Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  Buy Passport,Driver License,Age & ID Card,(Whatsapp:.......: +1 (551) 239-2904) Visas huunnjh655 0 135 03-01-2024, 08:43 AM
Last Post: huunnjh655
  Buy Real and Fake Passports, ID Cards, Driving Licenses, SSN, Birth Certificates, Dea dominicadomi 0 41 02-22-2024, 08:26 PM
Last Post: dominicadomi
  House passes bill to expand background checks for gun sales HealthyDebate 49 7,148 11-22-2022, 02:22 PM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  Hawaii bill would allow gun seizure after hospitalization nebraska 23 11,680 06-08-2022, 05:46 PM
Last Post: beechnut79
  Young Americans have rapidly turned against gun control, poll finds Einzige 5 2,133 04-30-2021, 08:09 AM
Last Post: David Horn
  2022 elections: House, Senate, State governorships pbrower2a 13 3,849 04-28-2021, 04:55 AM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  Kyrsten Synema (D - Az) brings a cake into the Senate to downvote min. wage hike Einzige 104 26,908 04-22-2021, 03:21 AM
Last Post: pbrower2a
  Hawaii Senate approves nation’s highest income tax rate HealthyDebate 0 765 03-12-2021, 06:46 PM
Last Post: HealthyDebate
  House of Delegates Passes Sweeping Gun-Control Bill stillretired 6 1,924 03-10-2021, 01:43 AM
Last Post: Kate1999
  Biden faces bipartisan backlash over Syria bombing Kate1999 0 708 03-09-2021, 07:01 PM
Last Post: Kate1999

Forum Jump:


Users browsing this thread: 3 Guest(s)