Can you give me an example of an "assault weapon ban" law which will change anything but will not impact semi automatic hunting rifles or handguns?
I'm not aware of any current "assault weapons ban" legislation at the State or National level. Can you direct me to any current proposals so that I can read up?
Kamala Harris specifically said in her speech a few days ago that she wants to "ban assault weapons".
Yeah, the discussion does need to happen. But sensible laws dont happen as long as NRA keeps misrepresenting the 2A. Thats where the struggle is coming in on that side. If the NRA was a serious organization, they would be just as appalled about the mass shootings. But they arent. That, in my opinion, is worse than "BAN EVERYTHING." the 2A can work. Its there for a reason (antiquated or not), but there needs to be good-faith talks about limiting access, background checks FEDERALLY (Imo... states cant be trusted).
The NRA isn't a consideration in the 2nd amendment though. The NRA can go away tomorrow and the 2nd amendment will still mean what it means. "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed"
You left out "a well regulated militia". It was about a popular militia, not every nut having a personal armada.
Good point. That just describes the purpose for the right and the type of arms they intended the population have a right to. "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." "Militia" is unorganized infantry. At the time it was written "well regulated" meant to be high functioning and capable. Reliable. Most militia in those days were very unreliable. To the point that regular military did not like to count on them. The intent was that every American have the right to own transport and practice with arms equivalent to the infantry soldier of the time. They didn't specifically list weapons because they knew that the weapons would change. They would evolve. They would improve with time. This was very specifically written to ensure that the American population be armed and well practiced with equivalent weaponry of the typical infantry soldier of the same time. So that they could defend themselves and their country as capably and reliably as possible. This is the intent of the founding fathers. We can change this. But it will require a constitutional amendment (most likely via constitutional convention). And the vast majority of states are opposed to these kinds of restrictions. *Edit* However, The Constitution does allow us to restrict the rights of people who have broken the law. So I think you're correct. "Nuts" (people who have proven to be unsafe or dangerous) should be prevented from owning or even possessing firearms of any kind. But I also believe that the ratio of restricted people should be low. Probably no more than 1% of the population in any region. We can reduce the frequency and severity of violence in our country. I maintain the most effective way to do this is via access to education and minimizing the motivations to obtain such weaponry by increasing access (ideally universally) to services such as health care and a robust social safety net.
I think we all would be behind this. The problem is one of the two major political ideologies in the country right now wants there to be more guns that are easier to obtain and accessible to everyone while simultaneously increasing the wealth gap, destabilizing strong public education and opportunities for further education, fighting affordable healthcare (including mental and emotional diagnosis, treatment and destigmatization just because the Democrats beat them to it) and sewing all kinds of social division. Obviously, there's a correlation between violence and our mediocre happiness index and poverty level. Happy people with stable lives aren't going to risk that by getting into stupid fights. There are other steps that could be taken beyond banning guns, too. We keep hearing how it's people killing people, not guns killing people, but the U.S. right won't even come to the table to talk about insurance, gun safes, background checks, better firearm education and testing for those that want to own firearms and regulations of certain types of guns or modifications. And that's mostly driven by legislators in the pockets of the NRA and gun lobby, which now has extended just by the tenor of American politics where neither side can take the same position on an issue to the entire Republican Party. And I'm a gun owner.
There are plenty of responsible gun owners who, for example, don't think domestic abusers or people on terrorist watch list or people adjudicated to have such severe mental illness they can't care for themselves to have access to unlimited firearms. These restrictions were lifted by Trump administration. One of very first acts.
Funny how lefties are getting excited over a candidate being installed that got 0 delegate votes in 2020 https://www.youtube.com/shorts/3wpj93QEzZY?feature=share
I was thinking about what you said about the ban affecting hunting rifles and guns. That would never fly but I haven't seen a specific proposal that defines assault weapons in a way that would also affect hunting rifles or guns.
Yeah, I'm not arguing in support of any right wing ideologies. Since they turned the NRA from a legitimately fantastic safety organization into a nut factory I've had no interest in any gun culture. I'm simply discussing the things we could do even in the current environment. For example, we could actually create funding for a branch of the ATF to handle universal gun safety and self defense training including concealed carry, then we could offer reciprocity across the whole country. Or the ATF could oversee local testing and classes if that were preferred. I don't think any Republicans would be opposed to that. In fact they'd probably be all over it. We could even offer tax credits to people who take the classes every year. We could eliminate background checks at point of sale in exchange for a universal policy that all dangerous felons would be prohibited from access to firearms and would have a firearms restriction on their ID. This would make it a felony for any person (including sales clerks) to give a restricted person access to a firearm. All gun transfers in the country (including loans between family members) would require showing a valid unrestricted ID (drivers license or state ID). We already have a database of felons (and dangerous people). We'd just need them all to get updated ID with the restrictions. Every state has this capability today with current equipment and policies. Now there is no longer a push for a database of gun owners. Just an easily accessible, encoded database of dangerous people. Why would anybody oppose this? Anybody who provides guns to these people are prosecuted, given a felony (along with whatever fines and jail time comes along with it), and added to the list. No normal people want psychos running around with guns. This allows everyone to help be a part of the solution. If a politician were to support these kinds of changes while advocating that the real solution to violent crime was to improve access to education and healthcare they'd find very little pushback. And let's be real, the Democrats have had multiple opportunities to get universal healthcare or at least a public option in place over the last 15 years and have refused to do it. They aren't as bad as Republicans but they aren't actually getting good things done either. They have had opportunities and failed miserably. I'm going to vote for the democrat in the upcoming election, but I almost feel as though the Republicans are actual clowns who behave so horrendously so that we'll be grateful to have a right wing democrat as an option to vote for.
Yes, that's true. And I'm not advocating for any of those people to have access to guns. Even though with 400 million guns in the country, and the freedom to manufacture that we have in this country, they will have access to them if they have enough motivation. We can do a better job of restricting them with other means though. Ideally by empowering everyone to help prevent them from accessing guns rather than just at the point of sale.
