Opinion: The Second Amendment is moot. Useless. Unnecessary. Repeal it.

[Roland99]

https://constitution.findlaw.com/amendment2.html

What the Second Amendment Says

"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

Frequently Asked Questions

What was the original intent of the Second Amendment?

Many historians agree that the primary reason for passing the Second Amendment was to prevent the need for the United States to have a professional standing army. At the time it was passed, it seems it was not intended to grant a right for private individuals to keep weapons for self-defense.

Well, we have had a large standing army for a very long time. In fact, the standing army was created around (or before) the time the Constitution was actually written. But the size of the army was quite small back then. Militias were used to make up the content of that army when called upon in a time of need.

As the years went on, the size of the national military grew, to the point that militias were, in effect, extinct.

Yet the interpretation of the Second Amendment morphed over the years to include self-defense in general (which is NOT explicitly mentioned in the Second Amendment) and we all know since the mid/late 1900s that gun manufacturers have lobbied Congress (and funneled enormous sums of cash into the NRA which underwent its own coup in the 1970s to become a more radical organization and a de facto marketing arm for these gun manufacturers). And courts being stacked with pro-NRA/pro-gun judges have continued to distort the original intent of the Second Amendment.

So, yeah, in my opinion, the Second Amendment is a moot portion of the US Constitution and should be repealed.

[EnergizedLib]

1. Absolutely

Repeal that and the 10th.

[jimfields33]

2. If we repeal the 10th, then the Supreme Court literally last word

No abortions that are happening in blue states could be happening and a lot of other things states get to do regardless of the federal government.

It’s pretty impossible to get rid of either amendment at this point

The best way is to start over with a new constitution. Not sure the mechanism for that.

[Roland99]

3. That mechanism would like entail all out revolution and would not have a very happy ending for many.

[EnergizedLib]

4. The 10th allows red state dictators and oppression

The 10th impedes progress from being made in this country and allows DeFascist to happen.

[jimfields33]

5. or it would allow red politicians to run the whole country no matter what when they have majority.

On the flip side, democratic majority could clean up a lot of red state nonsense.

[EnergizedLib]

8. How so?

We just had a Democratic majority for two years and a packed court that believes states rights supersede individual liberty.

The 10th allows for discrimination, segregation, homophobia. I’ve noticed that the most oppressive legislation comes not at the federal level, but the state level.

States rights means states rights to discriminate.

[Zeitghost]

15. Without States Rights/10th

Things like medical or recreational marijuana would be impossible at the state level.

[ShazzieB]

41. Agree with repealing the 2nd amendment, but not the 10th.

States rights are a more complicated issue, and repealing the10th amendmet would have much wider and more far-reaching effects. Besides, getting ANY amendment repealed is a herculean task. Why make things even harder?

I'm not a huge fan of the 10th amendment, but the 2nd amendment is much more urgent, imo, because lives are directly at stake. Much more sensible to focus on that right now.

[AZ8theist]

39. Article 5 of the US Constitution is the mechanism.

It outlines 2 methods for amending the constitution:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Convention_to_propose_amendments_to_the_United_States_Constitution

The Koch brothers have been trying for years to have the first one happen so they can jam their libertarian nonsense down the collective throats of every American.

[Seeking Serenity]

78. An Article 5 convention for proposing amendments

In which case the amendment would be a wholesale re-write of the thing

[friend of a friend]

63. Do you really think that states would vote to repeal the 10th Amendment?

Not a chance.

[EnergizedLib]

79. Then get a new Constitution that allows more federal power

[friend of a friend]

85. The states won't vote for it.

[Pete Ross Junior]

6. Why not bag the whole "constitution" thing altogether? It keeps politicians from doing good, right?

[Roland99]

7. Really? Strawman much?

I focused on ONE of the Amendments and gave my reasoning for it

Do you have anything of substance to add at all?

[Marius25]

11. The Constitution should be thrown in the garbage honestly

It's an 18th Century design that doesn't work in the 21st Century. That's why the US is like the only country on Earth without a relatively modern Constitution.

[wnylib]

48. Starting from scratch in the current political atmosphere

would produce a nightmare of chaos ending on dictatorship after a period of violence.

Amendment is the route to go. It is up to those of us who want the 2nd repealed - or at least a bam on assault rifles passed - to change the national attitude on guns. And don't say it can't be done. It can. Would not be easy. Would require a lot of dedicated work to change people's attitudes, but it could be done.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

9. The 2nd Amendment is not going to be repealed.....Period!!!!

You know that, I know that, the whole country knows that.

First off, you would have to get the Congress to call for a Constitutional Convention, which in itself will open the door up for all the rights.

Secondly, if that was managed, and it came to a vote to repeal the 2A, just where are you going to get the necessary 2/3 vote in House and the Senate to approve and then 3/4ths of the States to ratify it?

What the means is that 13 states can block a repeal of the 2A, or any change to the Constitution.

Oh, and one more thing, even if the 2A were repealed, that doesn't mean firearms are banned, far from it, states would still be allowed to set their own firearm laws.
It's a noble thought for sure, but not achievable any time soon.

[Initech]

10. It would take a war, or maybe two to get it repealed.

The echo chamber is strong (and getting stronger) and short of a war declaration, they will keep piling it on. It really is past time to stop playing nice with these shitheads.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

12. I agree,

and I know this isn't a very popular opinion here on DU, but, IMHO, every Democrat should start thinking about learning to use a firearm or a tazer, etc., as you say, it really is past time to stop playing nice with these shitheads.

[GenXer47]

28. and then what?

My brother once asked the rhetorical question "whatcha gonna do when the Proud Boys start marching down your street?" He owns two pistols and a carbine - I own no guns.
My response was: "what are YOU gonna do"?
The guy's almost 70 years old. He has to pee every 35 minutes. He's not affiliated with any militia, he's got no military experience and no idea what the hell he's talking about. I'd love to see him on his first assignment: camp out on this rooftop, all week, and wait for the Proud Boys to loiter on the corner until you have a clear shot. And don't miss, after incredibly poor sleep, exposure to the elements, and minimal food.
Cosplayers are not soldiers, but that's exactly what most American gun owners are. I fully support the well-regulated militia - the National Guard - who maintain an armory, not to mention military discipline and order.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

29. I never said anything about attacking anyone,

that's your interpretation.

[friend of a friend]

65. I'm 79 and I still do a kill shot at 400 meters with my M-14 with iron sights.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

67. First rifle I carried in Vietnam,

I much preferred it over the new M-16, was much more reliable.

[friend of a friend]

68. I never fired the M-16. I can't believe they didn't even have cleaning kits at first.

It was supposed to be so advanced it couldn't jam. Yeah, as long as you didn't fire it.

[The Jungle 1]

38. We have had this debate in the past concerning the 2nd. I support repeal.

Do you support everyone having a gun?
Should we arm all student?

Here is my view. If I need to take a gun to church and school we are already a failed society. Something is wrong and we need radical change. I never see any logical suggestions on what to change. As you know I am in agreement with repeal of the 2nd.

I will sent a note to my legislator thanking him for allowing more children to be killed. Doing nothing is not the answer.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

43. First off, I've never said I oppose a repeal,

all I've done is point out how difficult it is to do at this time.

Second,

Do you support everyone having a gun?
Should we arm all student

No and no.

I respect your right to your opinion and I fervently urge you to utilize your 1st Amendment right to speak out for your beliefs, a right not used is a right eventually lost.

I will sent a note to my legislator thanking him for allowing more children to be killed. Doing nothing is not the answer.

Good for you, that's absolutely your right, again, under the 1A., I wish more people would exercise their rights more vocally and in writing.

[The Jungle 1]

47. I don't think I said you did or didn't support repeal.

I just asks some questions. What irritates me is that no one offers solutions. I know and respect your position

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Warren Burger once said, "The gun lobby's interpretation of the Second Amendment is one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American people by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime."

[MarineCombatEngineer]

49. +100.

[ShazzieB]

52. You're right about that not being a popular opinion. 😉

I have no desire to play nice with the shitheads, believe me, but I have even less desire to kill them, or anyone else. I fully support you doing what you feel you need to do, but believe me, you don't WANT me waving a gun around. With my ADHD and all around klutziness, I'd be much more of a menace to myself than to anyone else.

Personal issues aside, the US already has way, WAY, WAY more guns per capita than any other country in the world. Check it out: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Estimated_number_of_civilian_guns_per_capita_by_country

I can't help but feel that putting even more guns in the hands of even more people would make us all less safe, not more, no matter who those people are. I'm sure you are aware that a lot of us here at DU feel that way, and that changing our minds is not a realistic goal, but as I said, I fully support you doing what you feel you need to do. You seem to be knowledgeable and responsible in these matters, which not everyone is.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

53. +100. nt

[Roland99]

13. Certainly not something that would probably even happen in the rest of my lifetime

but get that ball rolling. Start changing mindsets. We need generational support

[MarineCombatEngineer]

16. Well, I'm 75, so definitely not in the time I have left on Planet Earth,

it's going to be up to other generations to achieve this goal and I wish them all the good will.

[Roland99]

18. Peace

[dpibel]

32. You're mistaken about procedure

Not, obviously, about the outcome.

Repealing an amendment doesn't require a Constitutional convention.

Or maybe there was one of those around 1933 and word just hasn't yet gotten to me about it.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

33. Maybe not,

but it would require a majority of 2/3rds of Congress to agree to it, and the ratification by the states just ain't going to happen.

[Bucky]

102. There's good reason to argue that it WOULD take a constitutional convention to repeal it

The idea of getting supermajorities in both house of Congress to vote for a repeal amendment is as ludicrous any hope 3/4 of the states to ratify said repeal.

[Smackdown2019]

56. AGREE

1. BAN THE ASSULT weapons. We did in the 20s and 30s
2. Do NOT do away what rights we have. Women lost the right to abortion in the red states and here we are talking about losing the right to carry. Bill of Rights is our Freedom and frankly for the pursuit of happiness is Freedom. So if abortion is taking away, so are other rights, like to a lawyer, right to remain silent.
3. Now, a little grain of thought.... what sets us apart from other countries is the fact, citizens have guns. Look at Isreal and Ukraine, Citizens are armed and that is what kept them from being overrun by their enemies. Granted, we should not have a 60 cal carried in back of pickup trucks, but if you want heavy fire power, then it should be well regulated. These assualt weapons are not going to be banned anytime soon, but they can be regulated. Regulated where they can be used and how they are safe guarded from removed....

[MarineCombatEngineer]

57. Really with I could rec your post,

but in lieu of that , here's this.

[former9thward]

103. Weapons that some posters like to call assault (that is how it is spelled) weapons

were not banned in the 20s and 30s.

[Smackdown2019]

104. Sorry, using a cellphone typing.

Stand Corrected... they weren't banned, BUT might as well say they were.

1934 National Firearms Act

$200 tax to own or transfer the Thompson Machine Gun. In the 30s. During the Great Depression.

[former9thward]

105. Yes that was a fully automatic machine gun.

That remains in effect today. Even though it is not super hard to convert a rifle to fully automatic those weapons are not used in mass killings. They are done by handguns and single shot, single pull rifles.

[Smackdown2019]

106. They had Headlines Shooting back then

As we have Headline Shootings today.

Differences is those Shootings back then were Gang on Gang or Gang on Police.

Today, SICK individuals shooting kids with Military grade weaponry.

We could control those Military grade weaponry by regulations, as the laws we passed in 1986.

I always said if you want to own a AR15, you would have it secured at a shooting range or gun club. Never taken off the premises, all transport of such of weaponry should be by a licensed arms dealer. That way, second ammendment would allow those they use the second ammendment as a right, has the right to own one, but with limitations. Perhaps a $10000. Tax on them would improve the want.

[hunter]

99. Yeah, but we can treat gun fetishes the same as we do drunk driving or smoking.

Both drunk driving and smoking used to be acceptable.

Thirty year olds used to think they were hot stuff for seducing sixteen year olds.

If somebody opened a can of beer in my car or lit up a cigarette I'd leave them at the side of the road.

If some thirty year old started bragging about "scoring" with a minor I might superstitiously hit the "record" button on my cell phone and send it to the cops.

If somebody started fondling their gun I'd do the same, possibly after disarming them in a most unpleasant way.

Gun fetishes are as disgusting as all that. I'm not afraid to get in anyone's face about it. I've mocked people for their gun love.

When public opinion shifts the law will follow.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

100. You have put it quite succinctly.

For the record, I agree 100% with your post.

[maxsolomon]

14. In an ideal world, sure.

The reality of a replacing a CA, particularly one whose repeal would currently cause a civil war, means that's nearly impossible in our lifetimes.

[The Jungle 1]

40. The same things were said about abortion!!!!

If not repeal then what? More guns? High school kids with guns? We should all carry a gun to church?

Everyone says no to repeal of the 2nd but they all offer no solution. Just more bloodshed. When will there be enough dead children?

We are already in a war!!!!! Over 100 mass shootings this year. I want to end the war.

[maxsolomon]

58. Reproductive choice isn't a constitutional amendment

Last edited Mon Mar 27, 2023, 11:59 PM - Edit history (1)

Rampage Shootings don't currently have a solution.

Maybe 50 years from now it may have one - it's taken 45 years (from the NRA's "Cincinnati Revolution" ) to get to this point. The pendulum may swing the other way but it's going to take decades...

[The Jungle 1]

69. The point is clear

It was said reproductive rights could never change. Those rights were changed. The present interpretation of the 2nd is fraud.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Warren Burger once said, "The gun lobby's interpretation of the Second Amendment is one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American people by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime."

States with restrictive gun control have way lower mass shootings. There is a solution! Ignoring the blood of children is not a solution.

[maxsolomon]

71. Do you have stats to back up that claim on states w/ lower mass shootings?

Or is that overall gun violence? I've seen that shown to be lower, but not Mass Shootings in particular.

[The Jungle 1]

74. Your question is what always happens. It is a diversion.

It is called picking the fly shit out of the pepper. Much like the argument of what is an assault weapon. This game will not save the babies who are torn apart and left in pools of blood.

Bottom line more children die from gun violence than any other cause. They want teachers to carry guns and going to church requires a gun. We are a failed society at war with ourselves. I want solutions not debate over if it is happening and where it is worse.

But to your point.
https://www.bmj.com/company/newsroom/higher-rates-of-mass-shootings-in-us-states-with-more-relaxed-gun-control-laws/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/search/research-news/5504/
https://www.americanprogress.org/article/fact-sheet-weak-gun-laws-are-driving-increases-in-violent-crime/
https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/
https://www.healthline.com/health-news/these-states-have-the-highest-rates-of-gun-violence-and-deaths

I am not sure why you needed to ask me this question when a 30 second search provides a long lists of studies and facts.

Lax Gun laws are taking away my right to "life liberty and the pursuit of happiness". When will my rights be respected?

[maxsolomon]

80. Thanks for the top link.

I'm not trying to be oppositional, but you sure are.

I want accurate statistics on mass shootings, and I wasn't aware of many. As tenuous a link as this study establishes, this is the 1st one I've seen, and I've been following Rampage Shootings for decades.

As to your last question, the answer is self-evident: never. The 2nd is in the Constitution, LL&TPOH is in the Declaration.

[The Jungle 1]

87. You are correct I am very angry over the issue of dead, bloody children!

This has gone on long enough with zero action to stop the rampage.
Mostly when I read questions like yours the question is nothing but a diversion from the issue of dead, bloody children.
Why do you need accurate statistics. Clearly children are being mutilated all over the USA at a disgusting rate. Here is a well documented statistic: Gun violence is the number one cause of death for children in the USA. What more do we need?
This is still America and I am allowed to be mad!

The 2nd is an amendment to our Constitution. It can be changed!
Life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness are endowed by our creator and are unalienable right according to Mr. Jefferson. But what did he know. Guns are way more important!
Unalienable: that which cannot be given away or taken away.
So again I ask when will my unalienable rights be respected.

[NBachers]

17. Let's focus on real world solutions. Opening the Constitution to change will hand it over to maggots

[Initech]

23. And we do not want these assholes turning this country fascist authoritarian.

[NBachers]

34. Multiple maggot states are already in line for a Constitutional Convention. The threshold isn't far

away. If they can get there, they’ll abort this nation and create their own hellscape. And we’ll be first in line for elimination.

[MarineCombatEngineer]

35. I'm afraid you're right,

but I can guarantee this, they may get me in the end, but there will be several who'll join me in a dirt nap.

[Evolve Dammit]

19. whatever "militias" there are are not "well-regulated" and they want to kill US. Domestic terrorists

[Celerity]

20. The 2nd Amendment is a potential national suicide pact. It has allowed the RW to accrue hundreds of

millions of guns. Far more than the anti RW has.

Given the right series of events and inflection points breaking the wrong way, it could all go pear shaped and get psychotically unhinged. This is especially true if you have bad actors in charge at the key power structure points, like a deranged RW POTUS, and a complicit military 🪖, who would stand down on order, and let the madness play out for a sufficient amount of time.

[MineralMan]

21. Agreed. So, let's do what's needed to repeal that amendment.

We can start by electing a 2/3 supermajority in both houses of Congress. That'd be great. Then, we could make sure that enough states have legislatures that would ratify such a repeal. If we do those things, then we could repeal the 2nd amendment with no problem.

Without doing those things, there is no chance that we can do it. So, let's get started, eh?

[LonePirate]

22. Repealing the 2A is a long overdue first step to solving this problem

[KPN]

24. Yup. It's just a tool for firearms manufacturers and, consequently, those

(todays Republicon Party) who find it self serving to whip up fear, angst and paranoia among mindless voters.

[Jburt301]

25. If the supreme court would rule that 2A is not for personal self defense, then there is no need

No need to repeal it.

The problem is not that 2A exists, IMO. The problem is that it has been twisted into something it was not intended to be....as the OP is pointing out.

[Traildogbob]

26. 129 mass shootings

THIS year. If dead students, children, adults or just about ANYBODY else from the mighty gun, is what GQP call the “cost of Freedom”, why are the aborted fetuses or cell masses not considered the “Cost of Women’s Freedom”?
No need to answer, women, dead children have zero freedoms. USA USA USA.

[Fiendish Thingy]

27. So, since that is never going to happen, what is your Plan B?

Even if the court was expanded to 21 seats and packed with Bernie and AOC’s recommendations, the 2A isn’t going anywhere (although such a court could uphold sensible restrictions and regulations)

[Roland99]

30. Jburt in post 21 hit on it....courts need to change their interpretation

and that involves a LOT of work before that can happen, too. Unstacking the court, curtailing the gun lobby, ending the NRA

[inthewind21]

42. Un-stacking the court

How do you suggest doing that? Know what would have been nice? If the voting citizens of this country had listened, and taken seriously over the last at least 4 decades when R's have been broadcasting their goal of locking up the Supreme Court, stacking the federal courts and taking over as many state houses as they could. Stuffing the Genie back in the bottle will be an almost impossible task. Especially since the NRA along with republicans have been so successful in pounding into their supporters head that "their coming to take your guns". Now we have a very large population of "pry it from my cold dead hands" mindset.

[Roland99]

50. it has to start at local levels

GOTV is the key

[inthewind21]

60. Local

Levels will do NOTHING to unwind the Federal Courts and the Supreme Court. Know what happens when Hometown X in state Z passes stricter gun laws and the gun nuts don't like it and scream their constitutional rights are being violated?

[Disaffected]

31. The wording of the 2nd is not even gramerical IMO

and therefore ambiguous and open to widely different interpretations. Was an unnoticed mistake perhaps made long ago at some point in transcription from one form to another? Or, was that the manner of speaking in the day?

In any case it certainly needs serious amendment or abolition.

How about guaranteeing right to ownership but, nothing greater than 38 calibre, solid bullets only, no semi-automatics and no concealed carry?

[inthewind21]

44. Convince

The Supreme Court of that and you might be on to something.

[thatdemguy]

107. I think it was how they worded things at the time.

And thats one of the problems, no one can decide what they actually meant besides the SCOTUS.

Yes I think it could be "cleaned" up.

And here again we get in to the wording. The wording as it is read, and pretty much has been read for many years would not allow wide scale limits. The courts and states have had years of limited control based on the public good approach. Broadly limiting to under a caliber size means nothing. the ar fires a round smaller than 38, heck the 9mm is smaller than a 38. No semi autos means they would just go back to revolvers, and carry more than one.

I have been thinking about getting my concealed carry permit just incase I ever need to but I dont own a handgun to carry. But looking in to it, half the states you can carry with no permit. As for legal concealed carry I cant find evidence of legal concealed Carriers, beyond one or two things, being a problem. People who get permits are not out shooting up the streets.

[SunSeeker]

36. Funny how the right wingers are originalists except for when it comes to the 2nd Am. nt

[yonder]

51. +1 and another 100 for good measure.

They twist the meaning of words to suit and when that doesn't work, historical intentions are manufactured as needed, with no regard for consistency.

[cstanleytech]

37. The message needs to be making it "safe" for law abiding gun owners to keep their guns.

Trying to do totally do away with the 2nd will pretty much doom it but a message of amending it enough so the state can track and legislate the ownership of guns from "criminals" has a better chance at getting passed.

[The Jungle 1]

45. The interpretation of the 2nd has been perverted.

U.S. Supreme Court Justice Warren Burger once said, "The gun lobby's interpretation of the Second Amendment is one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American people by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime."

It does not have to be this way.

[Johonny]

86. This

The second amendment is about as relevant as the third. It has been greatly perverted in the name of capitalism by gun manufacturers.

It will be this way as long as the CULT of GOP own the courts. I won't call them conservative, because their interpretation of the 2nd amendment is not even consistent with the conservative movement at all.

[The Jungle 1]

88. Yup and Burger was a conservative.

The right hates when I rub their nose in that.

[BannonsLiver]

46. I'm a civilized country that would happen.

But we are not a civilized country. Never have been and probably never will be. We’re like the dude who lives in a trailer and their car is worth more than the trailer.

[wendyb-NC]

54. I totally agree

It's akin to idolatry.

[The Jungle 1]

55. We need more mothers like...

Emmett Till's mother.
Full open casket. Show the world what an AR does to children!

[inthewind21]

61. Not sure

I agree with you. Would you want photos of your maimed child out in the public sphere forever? I'd like to think if I were in that situation I could "show the world". However, I can't honestly say that I would. I don't know if that is how I want myself and the whole world to remember my child as a bloody mangled mess that was shot at school. I do not blame anyone for not splashing photos out to the public.

[The Jungle 1]

70. Yes I understand

It would take a brave family.

[inthewind21]

81. More than brave

It would take being willing to let the likes of Alex Jones and the rest of the loon brigade harass you with them forever. And in 2023, unlike 1956 we have social media, any photos released WILL be out there FOREVER!

[The Jungle 1]

89. The pictures of Emmett Till are still out there.

They are as relevant today as when first published.
The pictures still inspire.
Nothing changes when we sit on our hands.

[inthewind21]

92. I know they do

And yes, they inspire, SOME. Have you ever heard any politician, then or now, claim Till's death was a false flag operation so the government could come in and confiscate guns? Was Maime Till trying to make the case for repealing the 2nd amendment? Has Maime Till been harassed with vile posts on her Twitter, FB, Instagram etc. Has she been stalked or received death threats? I'm sure she took a very very lot of heat for releasing them. And I admirer her for her courage. But she didn't live in a world with billions on social media and a 24-7 cable terrorist network (FOX), doxxing and such. She's been dead for 20 years. Comparing the photos she released 68 years ago of her son is a whole other story than what goes on in 2023 with the gun nuts. You're comparing apples to oranges. As for the "we" you refer to as "sitting on their hands" It's not OUR decision to make. It's the parents of the dead kids. So far, NONE have done it. And I can't blame them. Not in the least.

[The Jungle 1]

98. Same response over and over again year after year.

Nothing will work and we should do nothing! All plans are bad.

[jaxexpat]

59. I remember being taught about "blue laws".

They were laws on the books specific to a place and time, redundant and/or antiquated, never enforced but not worth the trouble to formally remove. Seems to me that statute called the 2nd amendment fills the bill perfectly. Except in this case it would save lives and help restore domestic tranquility should congress go to the trouble of revoking it.

[inthewind21]

64. I remember

them too. Also know as Sunday Laws. And yes, they were enforced. Which is why you couldn't buy pantyhose at the grocery store on Sunday and the mall was closed. Most have been repealed but not all. How would blue laws help in reducing mass shooting?

"Blue laws, also known as Sunday laws, are laws that restrict or ban some or all activities on specified days (most often on Sundays in the western world), particularly to promote the observance of a day of rest.[1] Such laws may restrict shopping or ban sale of certain items on specific days. Blue laws are enforced in parts of the United States and Canada as well as some European countries, particularly in Austria, Germany, Switzerland, and Norway, keeping most stores closed on Sundays.

The U.S. Supreme Court has held blue laws as constitutional numerous times, citing secular bases such as securing a day of rest for mail carriers,[2] as well as protecting workers and families, in turn contributing to societal stability and guaranteeing the free exercise of religion.[1][3][4] The origin of the blue laws also partially stems from religion, particularly the prohibition of Sabbath desecration in Christian Churches following the first-day Sabbatarian tradition. Both labor unions and trade associations have historically supported the legislation of blue laws.[1] Most blue laws have been repealed in the United States, although many states ban selling cars and impose tighter restrictions on the sale of alcoholic drinks on Sundays."

[jaxexpat]

66. Wow! I rarely get misunderstood quite as enthusiastically.

If there's a need for studying blue laws I'll recommend you.

I remember a law on the books in my hometown which provided a night in jail for spitting on the sidewalk. The reason was that trichinosis was a real health problem in the old days and the saliva of an infected person carried the eggs of the worms which were supposed to burrow up through the bare feet of pedestrians.

[inthewind21]

82. I didn't

misunderstand at all. I just corrected you on YOUR misunderstanding.

[intelpug]

72. Blue laws

The flaw in your logic is that the second is in fact a constitutional amendment, not a "statute" that was enacted by legislation. Even if it was found to be obsolete it cannot simply be overturned or repealed like statutory law's can be so,, no, It do's not fit the bill perfectly like a blue law. Not at all

[The Jungle 1]

75. We had prohibition.

Then we didn't.

It can be done. Just the effort to attempt repeal would force gun laws to change.
Repeal would not cause a civil war. We are in a civil war!

[inthewind21]

83. Yes, we did

And it was repealed 13 years later. Know how long it took to get prohibition ON the books? Any idea WHY it was repealed?

[The Jungle 1]

90. It was repealed because jury nullification.

The government couldn't get a conviction and crime was rampant.
My grandfather ran a still.

[inthewind21]

94. Not completely

But that may have factored in.

[intelpug]

84. Prohibition

I merely point out that the second is part of the constitution itself, The author calls it " the statute called the second amendment". Unfortunately it is not a "statute" and therefore it cannot be merely rescinded like a statute can be.

[The Jungle 1]

91. The 2nd is an amendment to our constitution just like prohibition was an amendment.

The second CAN be repealed.

[inthewind21]

93. Answer the question

How long did it take to get an amendment for prohibition?

[The Jungle 1]

97. Wow I feel like I am in 6th grade

You have a point you want to make, make it.

I don't want to sit on my hands while children are mutilated. A strong attack on the 2nd would force progress. We need progress!

[Calculating]

73. Never going to happen

Doing so would result in the second Civil War. Be careful what you wish for....

[GaYellowDawg]

76. Not going to happen, and even proposing it is a waste of time.

There have always been a lot of guns in the South. When I was in high school, it wasn't uncommon to see gun racks in pickup truck cabs parked at school. My only experience on a shooting range was when my 8th grade "reading" class went skeet shooting with .22s and 12 gauge shotguns. By the way, I went 9/10 with the 12 gauge (I missed the first shot because the recoil startled me) and 10/10 with the .22 and they (the local NRA guys, who were there to promote gun safety, not ownership) were all saying I was a natural. I didn't really care. I've never been interested in guns. But they were always present.

The thing that has changed has been the culture. In the early/late 80's, guns were a tool. They weren't venerated. They were just something people had mainly to go hunting. I first noticed a change in the early 90's with Clinton's election. Republicans had held on to the White House for 12 years and considered it a birthright, so they went crazy when they lost the election. Pat Buchanan and the Religious Right were at their zenith. All of the anti-government paranoia that Reagan and Bush I pushed resulted in a lot of people losing their minds and talking about rising up against "the gubmint." It got worse and worse and, as you know culminated in Ruby Ridge, the Turner Diaries, Waco, and the Oklahoma City bombing. It was at this point when guns transitioned in the culture from a tool for personal use to a "necessity" to prevent "gubmint takeover." Gadsden flags proliferated.

I had a housemate in the late 90's who was a gun nut from Texas. He seemed normal before we signed the lease, and then he moved somewhere around 30 guns into the house. He called his favorite gun "Baby" which I thought was absolutely bugfuck nuts. All the time, he was calling friends about guns. "Got any new toys?" It was at this point when I realized that it was an obsession with a lot of people. I called it people who were in love with the bang-bang. They loved the guns, they loved the noise they made, they loved the destruction they caused. They passed around plans for building guns. My housemate would buy gun barrels and make stocks for them, and sell the guns. He and his friends didn't pay attention to any laws about registration. There was this whole network of them and this was just in a county in middle Tennessee. The day I moved out (which happened the moment the lease was up), he showed me a box he'd had under his bed. Full auto military grade M16. I had no idea. I was really angry because if he'd been found out, I would most likely have been charged.

There are millions like him. Immersed in guns, with guns the focal point of their lives. There are always references to "God-given rights" but the only right they're really talking about is the 2nd Amendment. And with that term, gun ownership is wrapped up with religion, at least in the South. There's guns and church. Everything else is secondary.

Mass shootings and gun ownership won't ever decrease until gun ownership is decoupled from religion, self-image, and masculinity. And that's just not ever going to happen unless an entire generation decides to reject guns and NRA/gun manufacturer propaganda.

Sorry to go on at such length. I got into this reply and just rambled.

[Zeitghost]

77. "The thing that has changed has been the culture. In the early/late 80's, guns were a tool."

And back then gun violence and murder rates were considerably higher.

What has changed is the media coverage of gun violence. That is not to say we do not have a gun or violence problem. It is still very real. But this idea that it is a recent problem or that things are worse now than the were in the 70's, 80's and 90's is simply not true.

[fescuerescue]

95. The 1st amendment needs a little tweaking to.

It's abused almost as much as the 2nd.

If we can get enough support to fix the 2nd, might as well fix the 1st while we are under the hood.

[SYFROYH]

96. If it's moot, then it doesn't need to be repeals.

[Bucky]

101. The sun is too hot. We need to cool it off and thereby end global warming

You can dislike and disapprove of the second amendment all you want. It is a fact of life that we have to live with. Arguments about whether it should go or a far better example of what of the legal profession means by "moot."

The real question is not what should be done about it but how it could be possible to go about doing anything about the second amendment. And the answer to that question is absolutely nothing. The process of repealing an amendment is so prohibitively involved, it is virtually impossible to achieve.

Us complaining about it doesn't do a damn thing. Our effort should be spent on how to mitigate the damage that it does to our society. You might as well try to outlaw earthquakes.