Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

cynatnite

(31,011 posts)
Fri Feb 23, 2018, 02:03 PM Feb 2018

I am a gun owner and I do NOT support the 2nd Amendment...

I view gun ownership as a privilege and not a right. It's the same with cars. You have to earn the privilege to drive. You have to be licensed and insured.

I would have no problem proving that I am capable and responsible when it comes to gun ownership. I should earn it by showing I know how to use it, register it, be licensed and insure it just as I have to with my vehicles.

Am I alone in thinking this way?

49 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
I am a gun owner and I do NOT support the 2nd Amendment... (Original Post) cynatnite Feb 2018 OP
gun owning household for my entire life Fresh_Start Feb 2018 #1
A "cabinet" as in wood and glass? oneshooter Feb 2018 #8
I said I have a safe now.... Fresh_Start Feb 2018 #14
You said "cabinet" oneshooter Feb 2018 #16
metal locked cabinet too heavy to move with a dolly Fresh_Start Feb 2018 #18
Mine are in 3 650lb fireproof safes oneshooter Feb 2018 #20
My Dad was a gun owner, needed it to protect our livestock. redstatebluegirl Feb 2018 #2
I dunno how alone you are. Orsino Feb 2018 #3
As a non-gun owner, I support the second amendment unblock Feb 2018 #4
The reason doesn't exist today Major Nikon Feb 2018 #35
I wonder if that could be the basis of a legal argument Shrek Feb 2018 #37
That was the prevailing legal argument Major Nikon Feb 2018 #40
In a way, the Civil War proved that the arguments made in the Federalist papers... moriah Feb 2018 #45
Gun owner and hunter... NeoGreen Feb 2018 #5
I also Timewas Feb 2018 #6
Describe to me" reasonable testing " . oneshooter Feb 2018 #9
not really possible Timewas Feb 2018 #12
It can be a right, but also have restrictions. Caliman73 Feb 2018 #7
Do you keep your firearms in a bolted down steel safe? oneshooter Feb 2018 #11
I do, the .22 and .303 Enfield bolt action rifles that I have GP6971 Feb 2018 #30
So the entire Bill of Rights are just priviledges? hack89 Feb 2018 #10
I get what you're saying... cynatnite Feb 2018 #13
Then change the 2A hack89 Feb 2018 #15
You are not alone. I dumped the NRA 30 years ago rustydog Feb 2018 #17
No one needs a semi-auto gun. A shot gun is enough. johnpowdy Feb 2018 #19
Nobody needs a vehicle that carries more than 2 people oneshooter Feb 2018 #21
Vehicles aren't designed to kill johnpowdy Feb 2018 #22
And yet they manage to do just that, more often than firearms. oneshooter Feb 2018 #24
Doesn't matter. No one needs a gun. johnpowdy Feb 2018 #25
You do if you need to shoot something. jmg257 Feb 2018 #29
Not this ridiculous argument again. Give it up. It doesn't hold water. smirkymonkey Feb 2018 #38
Are you saying that vehicles, operated by humans, do not kill more humans than rifles do? oneshooter Feb 2018 #43
The PURPOSE of a vehicle is not to kill. smirkymonkey Feb 2018 #48
And yet vehicles KILL MORE PEOPLE than rifles do. oneshooter Feb 2018 #49
I believe the 2nd Amendment protects a civil liberty. aikoaiko Feb 2018 #23
Protects a civil liberty? You mean infringes on my right to live johnpowdy Feb 2018 #26
if it is outdated as you say then repeal it. aikoaiko Feb 2018 #34
It aint called the "Bill of Privileges". jmg257 Feb 2018 #27
I support single mothers be given free handguns quartz007 Feb 2018 #28
Free handguns to single mothers with children? Bayard Feb 2018 #33
Single mothers living in Chicago bad neighborhood quartz007 Feb 2018 #46
Nancy Lanza was a single mother. Dr. Strange Feb 2018 #41
Do you mean oneshooter Feb 2018 #44
I own guns and support the 2nd randr Feb 2018 #31
Probably not. It has come to the point though that I do not want to be around them tymorial Feb 2018 #32
+1000 smirkymonkey Feb 2018 #39
You can support MichMary Feb 2018 #36
I own guns, but I don't support the right-wing interpretation of the 2nd Amendment. Paladin Feb 2018 #42
My husband and I are gun owners peggysue2 Feb 2018 #47

Fresh_Start

(11,330 posts)
1. gun owning household for my entire life
Fri Feb 23, 2018, 02:04 PM
Feb 2018

guns stored safely in gun cabinet now
though I grew up with them on a rack on the kitchen wall

I completely agree that guns are not treated with the appropriate respect and care.
I have no mythical belief that hunters are better then non-hunters with respect to gun safely
During deer season they used to start before dawn with 'morning services' of spirits

oneshooter

(8,614 posts)
8. A "cabinet" as in wood and glass?
Fri Feb 23, 2018, 03:26 PM
Feb 2018

Why dou't you spend the money and get a REAL SAFE. Bolt it to the wall studs and too the floor.

THEN you can say you have safe storage.

redstatebluegirl

(12,265 posts)
2. My Dad was a gun owner, needed it to protect our livestock.
Fri Feb 23, 2018, 02:04 PM
Feb 2018

He also said it was a privilege not a right and he thought it was way to easy to buy one.

Orsino

(37,428 posts)
3. I dunno how alone you are.
Fri Feb 23, 2018, 02:10 PM
Feb 2018

I think that the National Guard and Army Reserve satisfy the "well-regulated militia" clause.

I wouldn't mind private gun ownership, if it were as heavily regulated as it is overseas. Licensing and insuring owners and their weapons would seem to be minimal common sense.

Unfortunately, we have hungry arms manufacturers who need gun culture and its attendant paranoia in order to thrive, and who prey on masculine inadequacies to further enrich themselves.

unblock

(52,273 posts)
4. As a non-gun owner, I support the second amendment
Fri Feb 23, 2018, 02:11 PM
Feb 2018

for members of well-regulated militias.

It has to be interpreted in a way that gives credit for the founders to have inserted that first part for a reason.

The absolutists want to interpret it as if they put that first part in for no reason at all.

Major Nikon

(36,827 posts)
35. The reason doesn't exist today
Sun Feb 25, 2018, 12:55 AM
Feb 2018

At the time there was no standing army of any mention. The US relied on citizen soldiers who drilled in their off-time with black powder weapons that were commercially available at the time. Armies could then be mustered locally to respond to various threats and disbanded when no longer needed.

At the time the 2nd Amendment was important to defend and protect our newly created democracy. Today it's been perverted to mean ammosexuals have an unfettered right to just about any firearm. The results speak for themselves.

Shrek

(3,981 posts)
37. I wonder if that could be the basis of a legal argument
Sun Feb 25, 2018, 10:08 AM
Feb 2018

In the modern world a militia is no longer necessary for the security of a free state.

Consequently the right to bear arms may now be infringed.

Major Nikon

(36,827 posts)
40. That was the prevailing legal argument
Sun Feb 25, 2018, 11:46 AM
Feb 2018

It’s only been a relatively recent change in legal rulings that have changed, all thanks to historical revisionism and activist judges.

moriah

(8,311 posts)
45. In a way, the Civil War proved that the arguments made in the Federalist papers...
Sun Feb 25, 2018, 01:51 PM
Feb 2018

... namely, that the ability of the federal government to draft people into an army or create a standing army couldn't defeat armed people defending their own territory (though people have argued that the war started being lost when it left the borders of the defined "confederate" states, morale issues perhaps), was false.

Maybe that's why people are so up in arms, literally, here. Still, the evolution of firepower a state militia could attempt to capture from the federal government for rebellion even against actual tyranny, and the evolution of the federal response capacity (if someone actually took a base with significant enough weapons, it would just be aerially bombed IMHO), makes the idea of armed citizens being an effective deterrent for government action even more obviously ridiculous.

So we're left with the slightly more logical to defense argument, that "gun culture" produces people who are already somewhat trained should we need a true draft again or to defend against a land invasion. Sadly, it also produces people who literally videotape themselves drunkenly shooting a firearm who probably can still buy them, and 19 year olds who shoot up schools.

And for that, I think a "gun and ammo license" on a will-issue basis if they are legally allowed to purchase, waiting periods that involve a training class for the original license and a waiting period for gun purchases made by people who don't already have a CHL or a paper shield, for private party transfers to be documented and guns/funds held in escrow by local FFLs for a small fee during the waiting period if one is required, giving free checks for people purchasing because they have a paper shield, banning all modifications that increase a legal gun's factory capacity to fire more bullets without reloading or fire them faster than with factory-supplied magazines, buy-backs for extended capacity magazines but not for mods, limiting long gun magazine capacity to five, and automatic forfeiture of licence and all firearms if one transports a modded firearm except when moving to another residence -- in other words, if a cop sees it outside of a home search, you're FUBARed....

Is perfectly Constitutional. And we really need to look toward serialization of ammunition. Combining that with tracking ammunition purchases will allow straw purchasers to be discovered, and while many WWI weapons are still in firing condition, shooting ammo from that time risks blowing up your gun. Ammunition stockpiles will degrade faster than weapons do.

NeoGreen

(4,031 posts)
5. Gun owner and hunter...
Fri Feb 23, 2018, 02:18 PM
Feb 2018

...and I agree with you.

Training (initial and annual), medical review/certification, license to own, registration of what you own and proof of insurance, or in other words "Well Regulated".

You are not alone.

Timewas

(2,195 posts)
6. I also
Fri Feb 23, 2018, 02:44 PM
Feb 2018

Own some firearms, I also agree wholeheartedly with the concept of proving proficiency and safe practices and would be perfectly will to go through any reasonable testing and would not be averse to requiring some sort of liability insurance to go along with all of it...

Timewas

(2,195 posts)
12. not really possible
Fri Feb 23, 2018, 03:40 PM
Feb 2018

To make any sort of reasonable testing definition without a lot more time to go over it.I am a gun owner,I use them to hunt and keep them for protection here on our ranch,not necessarily MY personal protection but we have cattle,goats and birds such as chickens geese and ducks, also have a lot of young children playing around here pretty much all daylight hours.. so there is always a possibility of a wild animal doing something strange and possibly.. Any "laws,rules or regulations" would take a while to get together a comprehensive agreement on..

A basic showing of safe practices and an understanding of laws would be first on the list..

Caliman73

(11,741 posts)
7. It can be a right, but also have restrictions.
Fri Feb 23, 2018, 02:53 PM
Feb 2018

The problem is that people think that rights are absolute, when they really aren't. You cannot disturb the peace or incite violence using your right of free speech. You can't run a meth lab out of your home, just because the 4th amendment protects against unreasonable search.

I see gun ownership as a RESPONSIBILITY. If you choose to own a firearm, you need to know and understand that you are owning a tool, a weapon that can easily kill someone if it is misused in any way. If you do not secure it and your kid gets it and kills someone, YOU killed that person. If you don't keep track and someone steals it and kills someone, YOU facilitated that by not keeping it secure.
Currently, it is a right. It may not be in the future. It is however ALWAYS, a RESPONSIBILITY. To me, taking pictures, joking, and worshiping firearms has always been weird. It creeps me out. I have reasons why I own. I know that I own very very dangerous tools. It is my responsibility to keep myself and others safe from them, right or not.

I have no problem with restrictions or additional safeguards either. Living in California, we have some of the more restrictive laws on the books and they have not impeded my ownership.

oneshooter

(8,614 posts)
11. Do you keep your firearms in a bolted down steel safe?
Fri Feb 23, 2018, 03:32 PM
Feb 2018

And I do not mean one of those sheet metal "storage lockers" that wally world sell for $100.

GP6971

(31,174 posts)
30. I do, the .22 and .303 Enfield bolt action rifles that I have
Sat Feb 24, 2018, 11:46 PM
Feb 2018

bought the safe for the weapons but it has mostly valuables in it. It became important to me as the grandkids got older and became more curious.

I keep the .22 for the coyotes that hang around... they were pretty aggressive up until a few years ago. The .303 is an original Lend Lease rifle made by Savage.

The safe is bolted to the wall and the garage concrete floor.

cynatnite

(31,011 posts)
13. I get what you're saying...
Fri Feb 23, 2018, 03:59 PM
Feb 2018

It's a valid point, too.

When there was a fear of a soldier from across the ocean threatening you and yours during a time of great upheaval, yeah, this was a necessary thing.

These days...no, I can't agree. Owning a weapon should be a privilege that's earned...like a car. The 2nd amendment's time has come and gone. It's outdated and archaic.

hack89

(39,171 posts)
15. Then change the 2A
Fri Feb 23, 2018, 04:53 PM
Feb 2018

don't set a precedent where the government can fundamentally change a civil right because it is "outdated and archaic".

rustydog

(9,186 posts)
17. You are not alone. I dumped the NRA 30 years ago
Fri Feb 23, 2018, 09:42 PM
Feb 2018

I have a hunting rifle and a semi auto handgun.
My wife has two handguns...I do not conceal carry.

aikoaiko

(34,175 posts)
23. I believe the 2nd Amendment protects a civil liberty.
Sat Feb 24, 2018, 11:25 PM
Feb 2018

Just like the other amendments in the Bill of Rights.

There can still be age requirements and restrictions, but they should be limited.

johnpowdy

(116 posts)
26. Protects a civil liberty? You mean infringes on my right to live
Sat Feb 24, 2018, 11:30 PM
Feb 2018

The 2nd is outdated and useless. Sure, maybe it was useful in the 1800's when fighting the British but it does not belong in today's modern society

jmg257

(11,996 posts)
27. It aint called the "Bill of Privileges".
Sat Feb 24, 2018, 11:37 PM
Feb 2018

Maybe you should rethink your view.

The 2nd was enshrined for a reason...to protect the people's RIGHTS from a new govt that now had powers over their role in the militias, and those organizations.

Of course times have changed, but those entities, and so those rights, were extremely vital.

 

quartz007

(1,216 posts)
28. I support single mothers be given free handguns
Sat Feb 24, 2018, 11:39 PM
Feb 2018

for protecting them and their children. If not free, at least available cheaply and quickly. Ditto with seniors. These two groups have never been involved in any mass murders.

All guns similar to AR-15 must be banned and illegal to possess by civilians.

Bayard

(22,112 posts)
33. Free handguns to single mothers with children?
Sun Feb 25, 2018, 12:49 AM
Feb 2018

Seriously? Are these also going to come with a free gun safe to keep the kids from shooting each other?

I have my dad's old shotgun hanging on the wall. Single shot. We don't have any kids to try to play with it. My husband is out of town all thru the week. I am in the boonies on a farm by myself most of the time, with questionable neighbors. I think it would be the last line of defense, if someone managed to get around my dogs and my geese. And if I didn't hit someone with the first shot, I'd have to say--wait a minute while I reload! My gun guru brother is in the process of finding me a handgun, which will probably stay in a drawer. He worries about me.

In the country, or on a farm, you can need a gun for other situations than protection. I had to shoot one of my ducks last year that had torn herself to pieces on something. And you best be prepared for a rabid skunk or raccoon. Its just another piece of practical equipment.

I don't get the idea of a woman needing a man to protect her. I've had to literally fight for my life twice. Once, many years ago when I was out for a run and a guy came after me with a butcher knife. The second time when two of my psychotic neighbors in CA came to my property and attacked me in my yard, even though I had restraining orders against them. I would not have had a gun on me in those two cases, even if I'd had one. Maybe I've beaten the odds so far.

I would question most people's motivation for having guns. Do they really need one for protection, or just like them? I don't see why anyone needs an assault weapon for any reason.

 

quartz007

(1,216 posts)
46. Single mothers living in Chicago bad neighborhood
Sun Feb 25, 2018, 04:18 PM
Feb 2018

have been attacked, robbed, raped thousand times more than any accidental use by their kids. Most kids growing up under those circumstances are way more street smart than white suburban kids.

tymorial

(3,433 posts)
32. Probably not. It has come to the point though that I do not want to be around them
Sun Feb 25, 2018, 12:37 AM
Feb 2018

I don't want to be friends with gun owners. I don't want my kid around gun owners. I want nothing to do with you all. I know that's harsh but I am sick of the gun culture. You are probably a very good person. You are likely compassionate and caring. You however have a gun.

MichMary

(1,714 posts)
36. You can support
Sun Feb 25, 2018, 10:02 AM
Feb 2018

the 2nd Amendment without supporting the NRA.

This is like saying, "I want to criticize the current president and I do NOT support the 1st Amendment."

The 1st Amendment means you can criticize the buffoon-in-chief, and the 2nd Amendment is why the government can't come and confiscate your guns.

Paladin

(28,267 posts)
42. I own guns, but I don't support the right-wing interpretation of the 2nd Amendment.
Sun Feb 25, 2018, 12:37 PM
Feb 2018

Contrary to the NRA's outlook (as confirmed by that evil old bastard, Antonin Scalia), I believe the "well regulated militia" clause ought to still be operative, and that membership in such a militia ought to be subject to some rigorous entrance requirements----confirmation of mental sanity and periodic proof of responsible gun-handling, for starters.

peggysue2

(10,836 posts)
47. My husband and I are gun owners
Sun Feb 25, 2018, 04:49 PM
Feb 2018

Owning a gun is a huge personal responsibility. Something I don't often hear (if I hear it at all) in these gun discussions, particularly from the right-wing gun fetishists. It's been reduced to 'the right to bear arms' without any discussion beyond that.

So, no. I don't think you or your position is solitary. Being licensed and insured is not an outrageous demand. Anymore than background checks and/or eliminating gun sales for those with a criminal charge on their records or people suffering from mental health issues.

Rights, per se, are not limitless and/or without boundaries. The majority of gun owners approve of sensible gun regulation.

Btw, I watched an interesting vid yesterday illustrating the limits of gun defense for the average citizen, even those with training and/or a family history with firearms. The average gun owner simply does not have the muscle memory to react effectively (quickly enough) in a threatening situation. The muscle memory is the result of repetitive, on-going training, the sort of thing law enforcement is required to keep up. And even then, there are no guarantees

A chilling reminder!

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»I am a gun owner and I do...