Skip to main content

View Diary: Should the 2nd Amendment Be Repealed? (87 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Let's be realistic, seeing as this is a reality (9+ / 0-)

    based community.

    First, the idea is academic at best.  A constitutional change requires a support level far in excess of standard congressional action and a repeal of the 2nd would never get this level of support anytime in the foreseeable future.

    Second, even if it were repealed, it would not solve the real underlying problems, which are the root cause of violence.  Even if this were extended to where a magic button were pushed that removed all guns from all citizens, the violence would continue.

    As with abortion, making something illegal does not make it go away.  

    •  The idea of gay marriage was once said to be... (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      a2nite, prishannah, diomedes77, coquiero

      ...academic at best.

      But attitudes changed, just like attitudes are changing with respect to gund.

    •  Repealing the 2nd isn't about getting rid (4+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      dream weaver, a2nite, alain2112, coquiero

      of guns.

      It wouldn't do that.

      We don't have special rights to buy TVs, smartphones, refrigerators, cars and houses, but we still buy them.

      But it would go a long, long way in destroying the myth that guns are sacred objects and symbols of freedom. It would go a long, long way in changing the gun entitlement culture.

      That's a necessary step in reducing gun violence.

      •  It's the ability to defend one's self ... (0+ / 0-)

        that is sacred, and arms, at the time the 2nd was written, was the best way to achieve that.

        "Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity, and I am not sure about the universe." -- Albert Einstein

        by Neuroptimalian on Fri Apr 19, 2013 at 07:30:39 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

        •  The 2nd has nothing to do with that. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          coquiero

          People in America defended themselves for well over a century and a half before it was put down on paper. They needed no encoded or set aside "right" to do so.

          We are only one of two nations -- the other being Yemen -- with a special set aside "right" to own guns. But people all over the world "defend themselves" without such an amendment, and buy guns as well.

          It's unnecessary and barbaric to actually include such a thing in a Bill of Rights, while leaving out the necessities of life. No set aside for safe food, clean water, decent shelter, quality education or health care, etc. No set aside right to a safe environment. But one for deadly pieces of metal.

          That's insane and barbaric.

    •  it would change the discussion (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      diomedes77, dream weaver

      The Constituition doesn't have magic powers to stop all violence, or even all murders, but that's not what it's for.

      If the 2nd amendment were repealed, then there wouldn't be any talk about one's constitutional rights being infringed if they weren't allowed to buy/own a particular weapon.

      We'd be able to talk about guns without the constitutional overhang; every discussion wouldn't have to be a to-the-death fight over guaranteed freedoms, or parsing what the founders wrote vs what their intent was.

      We could maybe have a public policy discussion, at the federal but mostly at the state and local level I think, about modern weapons and their place in society, and whether a community has a say in an individuals personal weapon ownership at all.

      The outcome could be stricter weapon regulation, or less regulation than we have right now, but we would be able to decide and make changes if we the people want to.

    •  "Reality" is simply what you demand. (0+ / 0-)

      First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.

    •  It's a long-term conversation. (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      diomedes77, coquiero

      The Marathon Bombing and the MIT shooting and the Watertown shootout are the sorts of things that should cause us to rethink how things are. I'm concerned about process here. A small majority here want to keep the 2nd Amendment. I respect that. But if we develop a national consensus 20 or 50 years from now that we don't need it anymore, then so be it.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site