Second Amendment Discussion
 

See, you Americans are weird. As far as I know, in no other country is it legal for a private citizen to carry a gun; the only people allowed to be armed are certain police and the military. So how do you - non-Americans too - feel about the 2nd Amendment? Does it need to be tightened up? Is it fine as it is? Should I just raise my hands and back slowly away?

Ban all guns.

But start with the government. Start with the nukes. Work your way down to the cops’ pistols. Then start disarming civilians.

This from a man whose current response to most things is
http://www.kalashnikov-encyclopaedia...ted%20AK47.gif

What part of start with the government confused you?

In a way, I agree with Hawk. Though I'm not in favor of banning guns in general.

Gun control is gun centralizaiton. Need guns to enforce gun control. Need guns to enforce taxation. I'll give up my guns when the government gives up their guns.

To be more specific, I'm not opposed to more checks and balances - strong background checks, closing gun show loopholes, etc.

The ban all guns part.
So are you going to use guns to disarm the Feds, and then, what? Throw yours away? Melt them down into ploughshares? Violence don't defeat violence and two wrongs don't make a Republican senator on Capitol Hill.

Yes. If the government completely disarms I will too. I genuinely mean it when I say I want to ban all guns. There has to be a sane process though.

Right now we have a system that allows power hungry senile angry narcissistic lunatics (and that’s ANY president) access to the nuclear football. That’s insane. There’s a starting point and it’s not my revolver. My revolver is literally last. But unlike other gun control advocates I have a sincere position to eliminate ALL guns and all weaponry from the planet. I believe in banning ALL guns.

There were some lower court rulings dating back to the 1980s iirc, but the second amendment as a protection of individual gun rights was only just established by the supreme court in 2008.

You shoulda kept the original.

Background checks remind me of free speech caveats that ban advocating violence against the government or support for an enemy of the state. Free speech as long as you don’t threaten the dickweeds in control is almost meaningless. A background check is basically like do we think you would be inclined to use it. Selling guns only to people who don’t want to use them defeats the purpose or at least what I see as the purpose: Mao’s barrel of a gun thing.