Again, the problem isn't in the manufacturing; it's in the MARKETING. The gun industry KNOWS how these guns are being used and are frequently marketing to the wrong people.
Show me an example of marketing to the wrong people. This is just your opinion to support a premise that has no foundation.
The AR-15 design has been around for 60 years or so, but no one thought of marketing it to civilians at the time. It was designed for the military. Then the gun industry realized that it was popular amongst crazies and started marketing it to the crazies.
True, but not the entire narrative. Colt mass produced the M-16 after obtaining the rights from Armalite and the gun was made available to both military and the semi-auto version to civilians (shortly after military adoption, long before this "Marketing to crazies" as you put it was put in place). When the patten ended, other manufactures jumped on the band wagon. Why, because of the 2A. But Colt did sell the AR-15, Semi-auto version to the public well before the patten ended.
Also, the military has always had SURPLUS. This surplus of arms which have historically been made available to the public. The only thing stopping the surplus of AR style rifles to the public is the full auto (which the public can get a license for FYI).
Your "Marketing to Crazies" premise is severely lacking.
The point is, they aren't making it in their kitchens, which was the problem for a while. Sure, there are always going to be operations making it, but that avenue was closed.
The avenue is not closed. You can still go buy the ingredients. It's just a bit harder to do so.
I'm going to break this to you gently. There are no "Rights". There are only privileges that society thinks you can have.
Disagree. The 2A is a right. People like you feel it's not a right. The Founding Fathers would absolutely disagree with you.
If the majority turned against gun ownership, we'd see guns banned.
So why isn't the majority turning. Because the vast majority understand that people have the right to project self and country from internal or external threats. A right that some of you want to give up because of the love of gov't, which is completely backwards in how we should view the gov't.
The Second Amendment is about militias... It was interpreted that way for over 200 years.
Wrong again. Yet, you provide no historical evidence or case logic.
Why should more be required when it's clearly more than most of you did?
What happened was I got to work for private companies AFTER 40 years of Republicans demolishing the middle class. The capper was after I busted up my knee, I had a manager who worked very hard to get rid of me after six years because "He didn't have to deal with a union".
Really, I don't care, and no one else does. I've said it before, a lot of people were affected by the economy, job losses, etc., And many picked themselves up and moved on. I shouldn't have even brought it up.
The Republicans are for the rich; the Democrats are for the working man.
That's the narrative the Dems want you believing in. But that's not the case. We have an economy and a system that allows for the attainment of wealth. The individual decides on what amount it takes to make them happy, successful, etc., So if you're happy with where you're at in life, so be it. If not, then go make a change. The democratic party as I see them, is a party that points to success and says "Look at what they have, that's not fair, take it from them". Instead, the Dems should be focusing on the "how" and the tools available to succeed instead of vilifying success The republicans want to keep that success available and it should be done fairly with equity in opportunity.
Sorry, you are too stupid to see that, bitterly Clinging to your gun and your bible.
I don't cling to either the bible or gun. In fact, I think making any correlation between Jesus/God/Christianity and Guns is complete bullshit and antithesis to the NT Jesus.
However, we as a citizens have the ability and right to bare arms.
This country isn't going to be protected by Joker Holmes and Awake the Rapper having AR-15s. What I learned in the military is the strength of a military is its ability to act as a unit. And you don't have that with crazies running around with guns.
Again, conjecture. There are plenty of civilians that take absolute responsibility with ownership, but also training. Joker Holmes and Awake the rapper, if that's the image you have, then you really don't understand the culture and poorly misinformed.
I think the 2A is about militias.
Clearly you're admitting your thought is opinion..."I think".
Because that was the context it was written in.
Read this (seriously) and come back to me:
It was written at a time when VERY FEW people owned guns, and the original draft of the Amendment also allowed for religious exemptions for militia service. Combined with the 3rd Amendment, you can see that the intent of the Founding Slave Rapists was to regulate a militia.
The fact that very few owned guns at the time or shortly before the revolution supports the need for the people to be armed to keep balance between the gov't and the people. Thus why you need to read the above link and get back to me.
Now, all that said, even if a "right to bear arms" made sense in 1787, does it make sense today? The Founding Fathers also thought Slavery was nifty, only property-owning males should vote.
Cleary, not apples and oranges. The balance of power between the people is force. The founding fathers realized this.
You wouldn't have had a school shooter in 1787. He'd pick off maybe one kid before all the other kids ran away while he was reloading his muzzle from his powder horn. If the technology changes, we need to rethink the rest of it, too.
I think the largest school tragedy was due to explosions.
en.wikipedia.org
