would you support an amdt. to constitution that bans the sale & ownership of

[Indy Texas]

LOL @ the outrage, and ROLF @ the left-wing outrage. Oh no, banning guns, so terrible.

It's a cultural thing. I don't really understand it either.

I'm from rural America and don't understand it. It's fun to shoot a gun but if you're concerned about constructing responsible public policy, it's quite clear that gun ownership is a terrible vice and a not a virtue. It's amazing to me that a few pulls of the trigger is sufficient to cloud people's judgement on this issue...

I understand liberals being aghast at this proposal but leftists? What is wrong with you people, we're supposed to believe that the idea of "negative liberties" grounded in 18th century classical liberal thought are nonsense...

I'm not sure what positive liberty you think is entailed in a blanket handgun ban. The Constitution has never been a document that has taken rights away from people in the long-term. It has always been used as a facilitator to expand them. Having an amendment that explicitly says "You can't do/have X" seems like a very HP move.

My personal view on guns and gun ownerships has always been that if I ever reached a point where I, like so many NRA supporters, felt I not only needed access to the biggest guns I could get but needed to carry them around with me everywhere, I'd be less concerned about my right to do that and more concerned about what has happened to a society that makes me or anyone else feel like they need to carry a deadly weapon with them everywhere.

While it's not an explicit Constitutional right, I and most people believe they have a reasonable right to a little thing called public safety. Gun nuts rant incessantly about how they have a right to defend themselves. I don't think I should have to protect or defend myself when I'm doing something as innocuous as going to school or shopping at the mall. In those situations, I am indisputably in the public sphere where public safety is the responsibility of the state. If there is a public safety deficit, the solution is more public safety - more police and other "good" people with guns. These are not situations that are analogous to having a murder or a burglar break into your private home, where your own authority trumps that of the public. It's part of the reason I vigorously oppose concealed carry and open carry laws.

[PJ]

Of course not. I would support the elimination of the 2nd Amendment, but to put a ban in the bill of rights is outrageous. Gun rights should be limited and protected via statute, if anything.

[TNF]

LOL @ the outrage, and ROLF @ the left-wing outrage. Oh no, banning guns, so terrible.

It's a cultural thing. I don't really understand it either.

I'm from rural America and don't understand it. It's fun to shoot a gun but if you're concerned about constructing responsible public policy, it's quite clear that gun ownership is a terrible vice and a not a virtue. It's amazing to me that a few pulls of the trigger is sufficient to cloud people's judgement on this issue...

I understand liberals being aghast at this proposal but leftists? What is wrong with you people, we're supposed to believe that the idea of "negative liberties" grounded in 18th century classical liberal thought are nonsense...

You don't have to believe in the idea of "negative liberties" to support the right of gun ownership.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

LOL @ the outrage, and ROLF @ the left-wing outrage. Oh no, banning guns, so terrible.

It's a cultural thing. I don't really understand it either.

You know how drugs are banned, and thus it's SOOOOOO HARD to get drugs now? Oh wait...

[Gass3268]

I would prefer a clean repeal of the Second Amendment.

America would be a much better place without the 2nd Amendment, but alas our country has a major gun fetish.

[Franzl]

LOL @ the outrage, and ROLF @ the left-wing outrage. Oh no, banning guns, so terrible.

It's a cultural thing. I don't really understand it either.

You know how drugs are banned, and thus it's SOOOOOO HARD to get drugs now? Oh wait...

And yet other countries show that guns can be successfully regulated. I don't see why the two are a valid comparison.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

LOL @ the outrage, and ROLF @ the left-wing outrage. Oh no, banning guns, so terrible.

It's a cultural thing. I don't really understand it either.

You know how drugs are banned, and thus it's SOOOOOO HARD to get drugs now? Oh wait...

And yet other countries show that guns can be successfully regulated. I don't see why the two are a valid comparison.

There's countries with similar gun ownership rates to the US with far less violent crime: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25201471

Also considering how many handguns are currently in ownership and circulation banning them now would be closing the barn door after the cows have left.

[Franzl]

LOL @ the outrage, and ROLF @ the left-wing outrage. Oh no, banning guns, so terrible.

It's a cultural thing. I don't really understand it either.

You know how drugs are banned, and thus it's SOOOOOO HARD to get drugs now? Oh wait...

And yet other countries show that guns can be successfully regulated. I don't see why the two are a valid comparison.

There's countries with similar gun ownership rates to the US with far less violent crime: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-25201471

Also considering how many handguns are currently in ownership and circulation banning them now would be closing the barn door after the cows have left.

Now that is a valid argument, although again, even if it's gotten so bad, that's not a reason to condone it and provide an absolute right to guns.

And I stress that eliminating that constitutional right is not equivalent to banning guns. There's no reason why Wyoming and New Jersey should or would choose the same gun policy.

[Hatman 🍁]

Absolutely. I'm disappointed at the so-called left wingers on this forum. It appears the only left wingers on the forum that are in favour of this are foreigners who know well enough how successful gun regulation is in their country.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

And I stress that eliminating that constitutional right is not equivalent to banning guns. There's no reason why Wyoming and New Jersey should or would choose the same gun policy.

That's not what the question is though.

[Franzl]

And I stress that eliminating that constitutional right is not equivalent to banning guns. There's no reason why Wyoming and New Jersey should or would choose the same gun policy.

That's not what the question is though.

No, but that would be the best solution. I merely said if forced to choose between a ban and the status quo....I'd take the former.

[PJ]

LOL @ the outrage, and ROLF @ the left-wing outrage. Oh no, banning guns, so terrible.

It's a cultural thing. I don't really understand it either.

You know how drugs are banned, and thus it's SOOOOOO HARD to get drugs now? Oh wait...

The difference between drugs and guns is that guns are not an addictive substance.

Absolutely. I'm disappointed at the so-called left wingers on this forum. It appears the only left wingers on the forum that are in favour of this are foreigners who know well enough how successful gun regulation is in their country.

Ahem.

[Associate Justice PiT]

I honestly don't get how anyone can believe that a ban on handguns will make handguns more difficult to obtain than how difficult it is to obtain marijuana now (that being not difficult at all.)

     For that matter, consider how well Prohibition worked out. History does not bear out an argument that banning handguns would be successful.

US firearm deaths per 100,000: 10.3
UK firearm deaths per 100,000: .25
Italy firearm deaths per 100,000: 1.28
Canada firearm deaths per 100,000: 2.38

Other industrialized nations regulate firearms far more stringently and they have far less gun violence.  We have a long way to go culturally and in terms of urban violence, but it's not surprising that regulation actually works when implemented in a smart way.

     Key term is "culturally". Or to consider along the lines of what I was talking about before, banning alcohol was an unmitigated disaster while banning lots of other drugs fared better. Firearms restrictions would probably have some effect, but cross-national comparisons are inane when the countries being compared are so different in regards to gun culture.

Comparing one nation to another is inane, but comparing a weapon to a beverage makes sense?

     Considering how broadly different the history of firearms is between the United States and England, you might as well be comparing a weapon to a beverage. At least the case of Prohibition says something about the application of policy in the United States.

[Marokai Backbeat]

In some hypothetical scenario where I was building a country from scratch? Sure, totally. In America today? No, it would just be a mess. I don't care about the silly notion of "rights" in regards to this issue, I just think it's incredibly impractical. Enforcing it would be a nightmare as guns are already so readily available and so ingrained in the culture that it just wouldn't be feasible, or particularly effective, to institute such a strict ban. I wish that weren't the case, though.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

In some hypothetical scenario where I was building a country from scratch? Sure, totally. In America today? No, it would just be a mess. I don't care about the silly notion of "rights" in regards to this issue, I just think it's incredibly impractical. Enforcing it would be a nightmare as guns are already so readily available and so ingrained in the culture that it just wouldn't be feasible, or particularly effective, to institute such a strict ban. I wish that weren't the case, though.

Good post. People talking about this don't take into account just how unfeasible it'd be now and how much social disorder would result BECAUSE of it.

[dead0man]

They don't care....GUNS=SCARY!

[Franzl]

They don't care....GUNS=SCARY!

[politicallefty]

No, but I would prefer a rewrite of the Second Amendment so as to clearly establish gun ownership as a responsibility that can be clearly subject to government regulation.

[dead0man]

They don't care....GUNS=SCARY!

Indeed, the odds are SOOOOO freaking remote that the people that worry about it probably don't understand them, even more so if you don't happen to live in a handful of specific square miles.

[Hifly]

Yes and the Second Amendment must be repealed in its entirety. I want to see the NRA and the libertarians cry their eyes out.

[Franzl]

They don't care....GUNS=SCARY!

Indeed, the odds are SOOOOO freaking remote that the people that worry about it probably don't understand them, even more so if you don't happen to live in a handful of specific square miles.

So pure coincidence that the chance is about 10-15 times higher in the US?

Of course the odds of being murdered with a gun are low for any individual person, but we're talking about thousands of human beings that are dying every year. You may not care about it, but it's obvious that the American gun problem is real.

[TNF]

They don't care....GUNS=SCARY!

Indeed, the odds are SOOOOO freaking remote that the people that worry about it probably don't understand them, even more so if you don't happen to live in a handful of specific square miles.

So pure coincidence that the chance is about 10-15 times higher in the US?

Might hand gun ownership not be the only variable here? Of those countries listed, the United States is a far more unequal society with less readily available access to mental health care.

[Keystone Phil]

They don't care....GUNS=SCARY!

Eye-opening chart. Didn't know Puerto Rico was a country.

[Franzl]

They don't care....GUNS=SCARY!

Indeed, the odds are SOOOOO freaking remote that the people that worry about it probably don't understand them, even more so if you don't happen to live in a handful of specific square miles.

So pure coincidence that the chance is about 10-15 times higher in the US?

Might hand gun ownership not be the only variable here? Of those countries listed, the United States is a far more unequal society with less readily available access to mental health care.

I don't believe gun ownership is the only variable, but I also don't buy that mental health has a lot to do with it overall outside of random mass shootings.

Economic inequality, I'm sure, plays a role, but easy access to guns allows people to murder that would not be able or willing to do it a different way.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Some of those other countries on the list (like Norway and Canada) have quite a few gun owners as well.