Why the Second Amendment may be losing relevance in gun debate

[BULLDOG]

OK so you have nothing about a person who is legally carrying a firearm accidentally shooting anyone.

Didn't think so.

Last time I checked no toddler can get a carry permit.

Maybe you should be advocating licenses for having kids

Or advocate common sense safety, None of those in the videos saw the need to take safety precautions.

 

[Blues Man]

Or advocate common sense safety, None of those in the videos saw the need to take safety precautions.

430 accidental gun deaths per year or

over 100 million gun legal gun owners in the country. So .00043% of gun owners are ever involved even once removed in accidental fatalities.

That is a stellar safety record.

But you still can't prove that people LEGALLY carrying concealed weapons kill innocent bystanders because as a group people who LEGALLY carry concealed weapons are some of the most law abiding people in the country.

I want to amend this by also stating that some of those accidental gun deaths obviously involve people who possess guns ILLEGALLY so the safety record for people who own guns LEGALLY is even better than the statistics show.

 

[Vagabond63]

So when you buy life insurance are you paranoid that you're going to drop dead any second?
When you wear a seat belt are you paranoid that you'll be in a car accident?
When you buy home owners insurance are you paranoid that your house will burn down?

A firearm is personal protection insurance that's all.

No, This is paranoia,
"We know, in the world that surrounds us, there are terrorists and home invaders and drug cartels and car-jackers and knock-out gamers and rapers, haters, campus killers, airport killers, shopping-mall killers, road-rage killers, and killers who scheme to destroy our country with massive storms of violence against our power grids, or vicious waves of chemicals or disease that could collapse the society that sustains us all." --- Wayne LaPierre

His solution: "Owning a gun is the solution. The world is a scary place. There are bad guys everywhere threatening you and your family, and the only thing they’re afraid of is a gun in your hands."

If you truely believe this, you are a paranoid gun nut.

 

[Otis Mayfield]

‘Joseph Blocher, professor of law and co-director of the Center for Firearms Law at Duke Law School, described the patchwork of state laws that exists across the country as a "buffer zone" for the Second Amendment.

"Before you even get to the Constitution, there's a huge array of other laws super protecting the right to keep and bear arms," Blocher said. "This collection of laws is giving individuals lots of protection for gun-related activity that the Second Amendment would not necessarily require, and certainly, and in almost all of these instances, that no lower court has said the Second Amendment would require."

Adam Winkler, a professor of law at the UCLA School of Law, also said the Second Amendment is losing its legal relevance in distinguishing lawful policies from unlawful ones as the gap between what he calls the "judicial Second Amendment” and the "aspirational Second Amendment" widens.

Winkler defines the "judicial Second Amendment" as how courts interpret the constitutional provision in their decisions, and the "aspirational Second Amendment" as how the amendment is used in political dialogue. The latter is "far more hostile to gun laws than the judicial one," he said -- and also more prevalent.

"The aspirational Second Amendment is overtaking the judicial Second Amendment in American law," he wrote in the Indiana Law Journal in 2018, a sentiment he repeated in a recent interview with ABC News. "State law is embracing such a robust, anti-regulatory view of the right to keep and bear arms that the judicial Second Amendment, at least as currently construed, seems likely to have less and less to say about the shape of America's gun laws."’

Why the Second Amendment may be losing relevance in gun debate

In the bitter debate over gun control, battle lines are often drawn around the Second Amendment, with many in favor of gun rights pointing to it as the source of their constitutional authority to bear arms, and some in favor of tighter gun control disagreeing with that interpretation. Joseph...

www.yahoo.com

This is why meaningful, constructive, good faith debate concerning the Second Amendment, its meaning, and its application as a matter of regulatory law is impossible.

The judicial Second Amendment camp and the political Second Amendment camp will always be at odds, never finding consensus or agreement – with the former following Second Amendment jurisprudence as determined by the Supreme Court and the latter having nothing but contempt for the Court and its decisions concerning the Second Amendment.

The article in the OP says that state laws protect gun rights more than the Second Amendment these days.

That might be true in some states.

But I think if the Second Amendment is repealed, that will be bad news for gun rights.

 

[maybelooking]

If you truely believe this, you are a paranoid gun nut.

Fortunately, the VAST MAJORITY OF US believe the exact thing you avoided in the statement you replied to.

A firearm is personal protection insurance that's all.

At the same time, we also understand REALITY. Something leftist anti gun nuts have a hard time with. Leftists always see the world AS THEY THINK IT SHOULD BE......rather than how it REALLY IS.

 

[maybelooking]

But I think if the Second Amendment is repealed, that will be bad news for gun rights.

It will also be right around the time hell freezes over.

 

[Flash]

An estimated 430 accidental gun deaths annually

Unintentional firearm deaths in the United States 2005–2015 - Injury Epidemiology

Background Unintentional gun death occurs four times more often in the United States than other high-income countries. Research on these deaths typically has a narrow scope. We believe this is the first study describing the circumstances of these deaths in the United States that covers more than...

injepijournal.biomedcentral.com

Out of the 100 million plus guns in the country

If any other product had that kind of safety record it would be held up as an example.

True! About half the number of people that get struct by lightining each year.

It is more dangerous to walk outside than it is to have a firearm in the home.

 

[Vagabond63]

Another example of paranoia. Do these people truely believe they are safe?

 

[2aguy]

Are you saying no individual seller has ever sold a gun to a felon? How could you know that? The individual seller is under no obligation to know or find out whether the recipient is a felon.

Nope....I am saying that straw buyers are people knowingly selling to criminals......you are lying and saying that the individual selling his shotgun or pistol because they don't want it anymore, is the same thing as a straw buyer.....that is a lie. These individual sellers are not supplying the guns these criminals use, and you know it......but you want gun registration...in order to get it, you need to get universal background checks.........so you lie....

 

[2aguy]

Another example of paranoia. Do these people truely believe they are safe?
View attachment 559897

Nice fake photo.....

If it isn't a fake...

How many people did their guns hurt?

 

[2aguy]

I would disagree here. More rabid paranoia than cowardice. A gun nut can be physically brave, but still believe that there's always someone lurking behind a bush or down a dark alley ready to kill them at a moments notice. Feeding that form of paranoia is used effectively by the gun manufacturing industry to generate their profits.

The real cowards?

This man is now trapped in his apartment....because London parks are unsafe for bike riders....

On a dry, unseasonably warm evening, still light enough to get home before dark, Harry Speak would usually leap at the chance to do his regular loop around Richmond Park. But rather than cycling the leafy seven-mile track, the 28-year old solicitor, is inside his Hammersmith flat, using the turbo-trainer.
After the violent mugging of professional cyclist and former stockbroker, Alexandar Richardson, Speak is scared to complete a lap he’s done almost weekly for a decade. He’d been riding his own road bike in the park just 24 hours before Richardson’s ordeal. “It’s left me pretty rattled.”
---
Speak and his friends can think of little else. “Am I being overly-cautious? I don’t know. I want to cycle outdoors and make the most of these final days of evening light, but I really don’t want to be part of a diminishing group going in and out of Roehampton Gate as each evening gets darker,” he says. For the time being, he’ll stick to the living room instead.

Speak’s concerns point to a rising tide of fear across the capital - are these extreme attacks the sign of a terrifying new London crime wave?

Across the capital, violent bike theft appears to be on the rise, with more than 10 bike-jacking incidents occurring in the city each week as demand for bikes continues to skyrocket post-pandemic. Attacks often take place on quiet lanes or near canals but according to bike theft platform Stolen Ride, thieves are becoming more “brazen” - as exemplified by Richardson’s attack, which took place in a busy cycling hotspot at 3pm on a Thursday afternoon.

Bike wars: How cyclists became the target of violent moped gangs

As machete-wielding gangs target cyclists in Richmond, Katie Strick reports on the frightening crime wave - and what is being done

www.standard.co.uk

 

[2aguy]

I would disagree here. More rabid paranoia than cowardice. A gun nut can be physically brave, but still believe that there's always someone lurking behind a bush or down a dark alley ready to kill them at a moments notice. Feeding that form of paranoia is used effectively by the gun manufacturing industry to generate their profits.

Explain this.......

A woman wants a hand gun to keep herself from being gang raped in a London Park.....Britain says she doesn't have "good reason," to have the gun.

A British member of the House of Lords wants to hunt quail on the land of his private estate......this is a "good reason," and he is given the permit for the gun...

That makes sense to you?

 

[Abatis]

hmmmm, the most telling thing about this post is the Freudian slip:
"Before you even get to the Constitution,"
Now there is proof of what they are really going after

Yes, it is a slip and it does expose the fundamental flaw in Blocher's and Winkler's (and the ABC/Yahoo article author's) reasoning.

They want to conclude (and have us believe) this theoretical "aspirational" 2nd Amendment is the guiding force pushing state laws expanding gun rights in states, but in fact the movement existed [and exists] "before you even get to the [federal] Constitution".

Blocher says those state laws constitute a, "collection of laws is giving individuals lots of protection for gun-related activity that the Second Amendment would not necessarily require, and certainly, and in almost all of these instances, that no lower court has said the Second Amendment would require."

IOW, that collection of laws were entirely a recognition of a right to arms that developed and were codified without any reference to or reliance on, the federal 2nd Amendment which was my position in my first post in this thread.

So, the statement "before you get to the Constitution" isn't wrong, it's the conclusion drawn from it by these anti-gunners, that is wrong, misguided and misapplied. That is typical for anti-gunners, misconstructing and perverting history and law . . .

.

 

[maybelooking]

Another example of paranoia. Do these people truely believe they are safe?
View attachment 559897

crazy paranoid loons EVERYWHERE!!!!

 

[maybelooking]

How many guns can I own without being labeled as paranoid by the anti gun loons? Inquiring minds want to know!!!!

 

[danielpalos]

I prefer to "get drafted into a militia contingent" if I have to keep and bear Arms.

 

[Blues Man]

No, This is paranoia,
"We know, in the world that surrounds us, there are terrorists and home invaders and drug cartels and car-jackers and knock-out gamers and rapers, haters, campus killers, airport killers, shopping-mall killers, road-rage killers, and killers who scheme to destroy our country with massive storms of violence against our power grids, or vicious waves of chemicals or disease that could collapse the society that sustains us all." --- Wayne LaPierre

His solution: "Owning a gun is the solution. The world is a scary place. There are bad guys everywhere threatening you and your family, and the only thing they’re afraid of is a gun in your hands."

If you truely believe this, you are a paranoid gun nut.

So what one guy from the NRA says is the opinion of every gun owner.

Got it

 

[Blues Man]

How many guns can I own without being labeled as paranoid by the anti gun loons? Inquiring minds want to know!!!!

none.

Even owning a single firearm for self protection means you're paranoid.

 

[M14 Shooter]

And this thread is proving that meaningful, constructive, good faith debate concerning the Second Amendment, its meaning, and its application as a matter of regulatory law is indeed impossible.

Ironic, given your proven predisposition to lie in any such conversation.

 

[M14 Shooter]

No, This is paranoia,
"We know, in the world that surrounds us, there are terrorists and home invaders and drug cartels and car-jackers and knock-out gamers and rapers, haters, campus killers, airport killers, shopping-mall killers, road-rage killers, and killers who scheme to destroy our country with massive storms of violence against our power grids, or vicious waves of chemicals or disease that could collapse the society that sustains us all." --- Wayne LaPierre

If gun-relatd violence is so bad that US and the states must eact ever-increasing restrictions on the exercise of the right to keep and bear arms by the law abiding, then there can be no paranoia found at all in the position that a person has a legitimate reason to want a firrarm for self-defense.