Skip to main content

View Diary: Gun control and buggy whips (223 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Removing... (13+ / 0-)

    ...or severely restricting a right that I already have because of the actions of someone else is most certainly a punishment, in my opinion.

    I see it as no different than limiting the protections on our right to privacy based on the actions of others -- the notion that we have to give up our protections against unreasonable search and seizure because of the actions of a very few.

    You may disagree, there's nothing wrong with that -- I only ask that one be consistent about it.

    And I most definitely disagree with this:

    Obviously the second amendment doesn't talk about our modern weapons...
    It most certainly does -- at no point does the 2nd Amendment limit its protections to only those arms that existed at the time it was written, any more than the 1st Amendment only applies to those mediums available to the press that existed at the time it was written.

    "No amount of belief makes something a fact." --James Randi

    by theatre goon on Sun Oct 27, 2013 at 07:05:35 AM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  what about your right to (3+ / 0-)

      harass in the workplace?  To incite violence?  To cause loud noise against neighborhood ordinances?  Cases for all of these could be found in the 1st amendment.

      The second amendment, like any other amendment, does not suggest that no regulations are allowable: witness the clause 'necessary to the security of a free state'.  Scalia concedes this point in Heller, anyway.

    •  and I would further raise this question: (3+ / 0-)

      does a 'right' mean that you can do whatever you want, unfettered?  Legislation on the other amendments would seem to suggest that this is not the case.

      What about our restrictions on criminals, or the mentally ill?  We don't allow them to have guns (or at least we try not to).  Why is this not seen as a violation of their constitutional rights?

      •  bevenro, you're going waaay off reservation (10+ / 0-)

        In a diary focused on technology making regulation of an object more difficult (see Gutenberg, bible translations into the vernacular) you're back onto Scalia, and "unfettered right".

        I get it.  The Right of the People, isn't THE People, it was code for tnemnrevog het and every sane Justice up until the Roberts Court knew that the power must be kept from "certain classes" by upholding stare decisis.

        Now it's all fucked-up.

        It's also moot, if this technology becomes widespread - and it will.
        Fix the societal ills.  Generations of the same family, same neighborhood, on welfare, on the streets, in the jails, in the morgues.
        Otherwise a next-next-gen cell phone with enough horsepower, and a $400 printer and you have the modern day dagger made of ice.
        Here.
        Deadly.
        Gone.

        Possible 3-4 years from now.

        •  while I support the concept of fixing the cultural (4+ / 0-)

          ills it's such a monumental concept that I think that the small steps forward we DO take need to be integrated with a focus away from the haphazard ease of acquisiton of the weapons themselves--as we have done with cigarettes.

          As for mass produced 3-D parts--I'm a bit less pessimistic--at least with respect to the time frame-  They will facilitate, but I don't see them as changing the whole paradigm for a much longer time, to be honest.  

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site