Skip to main content

View Diary: Security guard's gun accidentally shoots student (186 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Of course (0+ / 0-)

    That falls under due process.  I have no issue with anyone convicted of a gun crime, or found liable for being irresponsible with their gun being prevented from owning guns in the future.  As long as its done in court.

    Want to find this clown guilty of a crime in court and take his rights away?  Fine by me.  Want to take away rights without due process?  Not fine.

    What does "till oopsie is removed from the 2nd" mean?  Does that mean America voting on new language for the 2nd?  Again, fine by me if we all vote on it.  Not fine if it's imposed by fiat.

    •  I am saying that oopsie is understood as (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      DefendOurConstitution

      being in the 2nd. That 'understanding' needs to be codified out. There is no crying in baseball and there is no oopsie in the 2nd.

      I am saying we need to change our minds. When we change our minds that keep means keep and not keep until you experience oopsie, less, far less, people will die (mostly children).

      And yes that would mean changing many laws. And losing the fear that someone is going to take guns away from the rightful.

      So Kathy Quixote rides again. Maybe it can be done? That's enough for me. Come along  Sancho. Or you be Quixote and I'll be Sancho. I don't care.

      Let's get the oopsie out of the 2nd.

      Validate my parking Validate my parenting Validate my politics Validate my religion And I will be happy.

      by 88kathy on Tue May 14, 2013 at 03:30:56 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Can you define oopsie a little better? (0+ / 0-)

        Here's how I see it.  We are guaranteed our Constitutional rights until they are taken away through due process in a court of law.  Anyone convicted of a crime can lose their rights.  So I don't see anything with the 2nd that needs to change.

        Now if an idiot gun owner leaves a loaded gun lying around a three year old, and the child kills himself or someone else, then the gun owner should be charged with a felony.  And if convicted, he loses his 2nd Amendment rights.

        If that conviction isn't happening to your satisfaction, that's what needs to change, not anything with the Constitution itself.

        •  I have never seen changing the Constitution as the (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Norm in Chicago

          problem. The Constitution says keep and bear arms. I maintain that keep means keep and is not a decorative term.

          1. Not maintaining possession of your gun should be a felony regardless of outcome. The responsibility now generally transfers to society when the gun owner loses possession. The gun owner says, don't you worry little lady my guns are fine, oopsie, someone took them, I lost them, better watch out, they are dangerous, I'm going to the store to get another.

          2. Shooting a gun by accident should be a felony regardless of outcome. Just because the bullet did no damage is not fault the person who accidentally shot the gun. The person who accidentally shot the gun had no idea where the bullet was going. Now it's just -- haw haw haw, that was close, I'm going to run to the store and get more ammo.

          There is no requirement of intelligence to buy a gun, so why should an idiot gun owner be a surprise?  We have a belly up to the bar requirement for gun ownership. Now it is pretty much anybody and the NRA is pushing for everybody ownership. Gun ownership has absolutely no effect on intelligence. It just makes unintelligent people more lethal.

          There are so many get out of jail free cards. Failure to keep should be a responsibility not taken lightly.

          Validate my parking Validate my parenting Validate my politics Validate my religion And I will be happy.

          by 88kathy on Wed May 15, 2013 at 06:39:47 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site