Orlando

[Psycho Bass Guy]

But do I believe that you have to deplete the species so that man can live utterly safe from a statistical point of view?

You're not listening: Dangerously aggressive, non-indigenous, hybrid subspecies which did not exist at all until 50 years ago, being killed while patrolling past domestic animal kill-sites. REAL coyotes are experts at hiding and in NO danger whatsoever.

[Pilgrim]

Retired Justice John Paul Stephens suggested a wording change to the Second Amendment (adding five words) which I think would be helpful. His well-reasoned argument is found here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-five-extra-words-that-can-fix-the-second-amendment/2014/04/11/f8a19578-b8fa-11e3-96ae-f2c36d2b1245_story.html

The revised wording, which I actually think captures the original concept well: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed."

[4stringer77]

Jefferson thought we should be armed at all times.

[Dave W]

Ok, Dave advocates taking 7-year-olds to shooting ranges firing wannabe-military look guns, his point being somewhat opaque other than that we should all be less hysteric (tell that to the parents of the Orlando victims). Maybe that little girl should take an AR-15 (in pink?) to school so she can fend off the coyotes trying to eat her on her way home.

I rest my (gun) case!

Uwe, I can see why you have a hard time understanding our culture. After all, Germany has no history of firearms usage. 

FWIW, I live five miles from downtown and there are plenty of coyotes and foxes around here. It's no laughing matter.

Retired Justice John Paul Stephens suggested a wording change to the Second Amendment (adding five words) which I think would be helpful. His well-reasoned argument is found here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/the-five-extra-words-that-can-fix-the-second-amendment/2014/04/11/f8a19578-b8fa-11e3-96ae-f2c36d2b1245_story.html

The revised wording, which I actually think captures the original concept well: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the Militia shall not be infringed."

Al, you know as well as I that there's zero chance of the Second Amendment being amended.

[uwe]

Uwe, I can see why you have a hard time understanding our culture. After all, Germany has no history of firearms usage. 

A real cheap shot (pun intended!), Dave!

I could counter: Maybe we have learned a lesson or two. And please don't elevate that private gun ownership-fetish to being a part of - otherwise in many ways admirable - US "culture". That's like saying being allowed to drive 150 miles/h is a part of German "culture" - I don't quite see it up there with Beethoven or Goethe. Let's settle on "national peculiarities" for both.

[4stringer77]

The news today is the House of representatives will vote on legislation that will prevent suspected terrorists from buying guns. It is troubling that something like a terrorist watch list, derived from no due process, may be used to take away a constitutional right. Ironically, the government passing these laws is responsible for arming terrorists in the first place.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2016/06/law-enforcement-sources-gun-used-paris-terrorist-attacks-came-phoenix/

[Psycho Bass Guy]

please don't elevate that private gun ownership-fetish to being a part of - otherwise in many ways admirable - US "culture". That's like saying being allowed to drive 150 miles/h is a part of German "culture" - I don't quite see it up there with Beethoven or Goethe. Let's settle on "national peculiarities" for both.

...but it is. This nation was formed out of armed invasion and rebellion against colonial masters and there are still very strong ties to the idea of 'if we don't like the government, we'll get rid of it.' Germany only graduated out of monarchy with Hitler. While the US may romanticize its past, we DID beat the English (twice) and the French, and numerous other governments BECAUSE we were essentially a bunch of guerillas armed to the teeth. We've not had centuries of submission to monarchy to condition us as a people to automatically submit to authority and though modern mass media and Madison Avenue have worked hand-in-hand to pacify this country and turn it into a mindless consumerist oligarchy, there ARE a few of us here who have a serious problem with that.

[Pilgrim]

Al, you know as well as I that there's zero chance of the Second Amendment being amended.

At present, agreed. However, I'm not sure that's a given over the next 20+ years.

[uwe]

"Germany only graduated out of monarchy with Hitler. "

Credit where credit's due: With the Weimar Republic which Hitler killed off and which was left unsupported by pretty much all parties except the Social Democrats who were the only ones to speak up in the last semi-free session of the Reichstag/German parliament!

And I don't deny the relevance of the right to an armed uprising against real or perceived oppressors to the creation and early existence of the US of A. But maybe after more than 200 years of generally decent democratic experiences (with a few bumps here and there), you could perhaps put a bit more trust in your countrymen or is it that anybody going to Washington DC to work automatically becomes an oppressor and loses all American values? Plus for outside oppressors you have a well-equipped army to defend with.

I also doubt the continued relevance of a population under arms keeping its freedom in today's world. Neither Assange nor Snowden nor Ms Manning needed to fire a shot to rattle the system - and no bullet could stop what they triggered. The concept that even the mass of today's privately held arms in the US could prevent a 21st Century totalitarian surveillance state using current and future technology means is archaic at best. You could defend yourself against a zombie infestation with all those guns of course, true. Such acute threats by "hybrid species"  (cheap shot from me, I know) aside, I believe that doing away with the internet and other free media via technological means would today do more to pave a way to a dictatorship than confiscation of all privately held guns in America. Keep your computers and give up your guns except for a few to defend your cattle agains coyotes and other predators, I'm ok with that.   

Now you say: "But it's historic and in the Constitution!" That's true, but some centuries ago large parts of the Western World also came to the conclusion that the up to then dearly held practice of witchhunting was no longer needed to preserve public order.    Your Constitution thankfully did away with kings and queens, pretty much unheard of at the time, why does a piece of human philosophy that was once inherently modernist need to be unalterably preserved like it was a mosquito caught in amber as society progresses and faces new challenges? Ask yourself whether George Washington or Thomas Jefferson would say to Orlando: "That is the price we have to pay and what we envisaged we would want to pay." Am I allowed to have my doubts about that?

[lowend1]

A real cheap shot (pun intended!), Dave!

I could counter: Maybe we have learned a lesson or two. And please don't elevate that private gun ownership-fetish to being a part of - otherwise in many ways admirable - US "culture". That's like saying being allowed to drive 150 miles/h is a part of German "culture" - I don't quite see it up there with Beethoven or Goethe. Let's settle on "national peculiarities" for both.

Then there's the "German Porn" thing...

[uwe]

Most American websites are obsessed with anal sex I've heard!   

[lowend1]

Most American websites are obsessed with anal sex I've heard!   

That may be true, but here they are obsessed with stuff going IN.

[uwe]

We've aways had that quest for Lebensraum in us.

[Dave W]

At present, agreed. However, I'm not sure that's a given over the next 20+ years.

I am. No chance of ever getting 2/3 majority in both houses of Congress to even get it it submitted to the states, no chance of 2/3 of the states approving any change. No chance of it happening by the constitutional convention method.

The news today is the House of representatives will vote on legislation that will prevent suspected terrorists from buying guns. It is troubling that something like a terrorist watch list, derived from no due process, may be used to take away a constitutional right. Ironically, the government passing these laws is responsible for arming terrorists in the first place.
http://www.judicialwatch.org/blog/2016/06/law-enforcement-sources-gun-used-paris-terrorist-attacks-came-phoenix/

I'm appalled that it could even be allowed to come up for a vote.

[nofi]

so a few people who may be on the terrorist no fly list by mistake can't buy guns for awhile. i say suck it up for the greater good. if this becomes a law that stops one person from murdering innocent people than its worth it. some sacrifices must be made in times of war. no , this will not lead to a domino affect with other "rights"
being in jeopardy. you have to start somewhere and whatever it is will not be popular with everyone, nothing ever is. gov. brown of ca. just signed some perfectly logical gun and ammunition legislation. more states should look at that because this country will never agree on one, uniform set of gun control laws foe everyone.

the right usually has no problem wiping their ass with the constitution when it comes to denying people certain civil rights, must often of a religious or 'alternate lifestyle' nature. but somehow this is no fly/no gun thing is more important.