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

Paper Roses

(7,473 posts)
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 01:17 PM Jun 2016

Is there a point in our current political environment here we must change the constitution?

The second amendment needs to go.!!! That so many support this 'right to keep and bear arms' is so outdated as to be ridiculous.

The time has come. It is my opinion that there should be an amendment to the Constitution to outlaw guns and anything else that is considered 'arms'. Please tell me why this need to shoot and kill is relevant to the world as it is today.
To Congress: Do something, damn it.

Thank you Seth Moulton and others who stood up and expressed their opinion on this ridiculous 'right' we have.
Times have changed, we need for laws that protect the people, not the gun-slingers!


The NRA and its minions would be dancing to a different tune if one of their family members was shot and killed by a gun-slinging idiot., whatever his ideology.

16 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Is there a point in our current political environment here we must change the constitution? (Original Post) Paper Roses Jun 2016 OP
Not the highest priority in amending the constitution, IMO. Lizzie Poppet Jun 2016 #1
I've got no problem with the Second Amendment. It is the interpretation that gets me. tonyt53 Jun 2016 #2
I think the interpretation is spot on - or, if anything, more lenient than intended. Donald Ian Rankin Jun 2016 #8
No, it's not Spider Jerusalem Jun 2016 #11
Pretty much Johonny Jun 2016 #16
There is not the slightest chance of repealing the 2nd Amendment. Just reading posts Jun 2016 #3
But is there a chance of creating an amendment that makes Amend 2.1 (beta) HereSince1628 Jun 2016 #4
So, "strike all the militia related language . . ." MousePlayingDaffodil Jun 2016 #5
yes, congressional compromises could result in something like that HereSince1628 Jun 2016 #6
No, there isn't SickOfTheOnePct Jun 2016 #7
2/3 in the house and senate and ratified by deaniac21 Jun 2016 #9
38 states SickOfTheOnePct Jun 2016 #15
When the Democrats last controlled... meaculpa2011 Jun 2016 #10
You are a dream come true for the NRA. aikoaiko Jun 2016 #12
2nd amendment changes would be lower on my list of needed improvements Doctor Jack Jun 2016 #13
Keep entire Bill of Rights. GulfCoast66 Jun 2016 #14
 

Lizzie Poppet

(10,164 posts)
1. Not the highest priority in amending the constitution, IMO.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 01:21 PM
Jun 2016

An amendment that renders moot the ghastly Citizens United decision has to be at the top of the list, in my view.

YMMV...

Donald Ian Rankin

(13,598 posts)
8. I think the interpretation is spot on - or, if anything, more lenient than intended.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 04:39 PM
Jun 2016

The goal of the 2nd amendment is very explicit: it's to enable the formation of private armies sufficiently well armed to defeat the armed forces of a state, probably including their own.

I think that interpreting it correctly would entail not just privately-owned assault rifles, but privately owned nuclear missiles.

The way forward is to repeal it. Of course, that's not going to happen, so actually the only way forward is to accept that thousands of innocent people are going to go on being needlessly shot every year.

 

Spider Jerusalem

(21,786 posts)
11. No, it's not
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 04:48 PM
Jun 2016

the purpose of the second amendment was to allow state militias and ensure that the federal government would never try to disband/disarm said state militias. There's historical context for this in British history (the last exercise of the royal veto by a British monarch was in 1708 when Queen Anne vetoed the Scottish militia bill).

Johonny

(20,851 posts)
16. Pretty much
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 06:28 PM
Jun 2016

Supreme Court justices used to know this then Scalia and the fake originalists created a "new" meaning out of thin air. Now what is common knowledge as to its meaning is something that is basically false.

But we don't have to pretend to appease them.

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
4. But is there a chance of creating an amendment that makes Amend 2.1 (beta)
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 01:33 PM
Jun 2016

I think the NRA has sufficient control to prevent repeal, not sure a majority couldn't be found to strike all the militia related language and to modernize the punctuation.

5. So, "strike all the militia related language . . ."
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 01:37 PM
Jun 2016

. . . and "modernize the punctuation"? Something along these lines, you mean?

"The right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed."

HereSince1628

(36,063 posts)
6. yes, congressional compromises could result in something like that
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 01:44 PM
Jun 2016

although I don't think it would be worded quite that way as there will be a strong push to be able to prevent the "dangerous trigger people of the moment" from buying at least some types of them.



SickOfTheOnePct

(7,290 posts)
7. No, there isn't
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 04:35 PM
Jun 2016

Anything that changes the interpretation will not only not pass Congress, it would never get the requisite number of states needed to be added to the Constitution.

meaculpa2011

(918 posts)
10. When the Democrats last controlled...
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 04:43 PM
Jun 2016

the House, the Senate and the White House they passed ZERO gun control legislation.

Now you think that there's a possibility that the Second Amendment can be repealed. (?????)

Doctor Jack

(3,072 posts)
13. 2nd amendment changes would be lower on my list of needed improvements
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 04:52 PM
Jun 2016

Overturn citizens united

Get rid of the electoral college

Get rid of presidential term limits

Get rid of elected judges

Have congressional districts drawn by independent authorities, no politicians

GulfCoast66

(11,949 posts)
14. Keep entire Bill of Rights.
Wed Jun 15, 2016, 04:58 PM
Jun 2016

Go to a parliamentary system. Yep, throw the whole thing out and use a system that has proven to be more democratic.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Is there a point in our c...