Liberals Should Love 2nd Amendment

[wuapinmon]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/7...cond-Amendment

This is an interesting editorial. I mostly agree with it. I don't agree with his indictment of people who say that they "don't like guns." I say that I don't like handguns, but I still think that they should be legal.

[il Padrino Ute]

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2010/7...cond-Amendment

This is an interesting editorial. I mostly agree with it. I don't agree with his indictment of people who say that they "don't like guns." I say that I don't like handguns, but I still think that they should be legal.

That was a good read. Of course, the Daily Kos folks started showing their true colors in the comments section.

[Non Sequitur]

I think it's dumb that gun ownership is a constitutional right. Is the right to own a gun really an inalienable right? Wouldn't it make more sense to just let states and municipalities decide how they want to regulate firearms?

[il Padrino Ute]

I think it's dumb that gun ownership is a constitutional right. Is the right to own a gun really an inalienable right? Wouldn't it make more sense to just let states and municipalities decide how they want to regulate firearms?

The Founders felt it was an inalienable right. That's good enough for me.

[Non Sequitur]

The Founders felt it was an inalienable right. That's good enough for me.

I have no doubt that if the founders hadn't deemed it an inalienable right, we would still have gun ownership today. I just think the debate would be a lot more intelligent.

[il Padrino Ute]

I have no doubt that if the founders hadn't deemed it an inalienable right, we would still have gun ownership today. I just think the debate would be a lot more intelligent.

More intelligent? How so? I tend to think that both sides would scream more because there would be no constitutional guidelines for owning guns. Both sides would try even harder to shove what they think should be done down the throats of the other side.

[UtahDan]

I think it's dumb that gun ownership is a constitutional right. Is the right to own a gun really an inalienable right? Wouldn't it make more sense to just let states and municipalities decide how they want to regulate firearms?

I thought this passage was interesting:

No. 5: The Second Amendment is about revolution.

In no other country, at no other time, has such a right existed. It is not the right to hunt. It is not the right to shoot at soda cans in an empty field. It is not even the right to shoot at a home invader in the middle of the night.

It is the right of revolution.

Let me say that again: It is the right of revolution.

"Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of these ends life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness it is the right of the people to alter or abolish it, and to institute new government."

To alter or abolish the government. These are not mild words; they are powerful. They are revolutionary.

The Founders might never have imagined automatic weapons. But they probably also never imagined a total ban on handguns either.

[il Padrino Ute]

I thought this passage was interesting:

That was the part that I liked the most. It's about the right of the people to tell the government to back the <redacted> off when it starts to be too intrusive. And that is exactly how it should be.

[Tim]

That was the part that I liked the most. It's about the right of the people to tell the government to back the <redacted> off when it starts to be too intrusive. And that is exactly how it should be.

I actually agree with you here. It's all about protecting us from the government. A rifle in the closet for those rare times that you need to rise up and stave off the government. That seems like a far cry, though, from how most of America's gun owners approach gun ownership.

[Non Sequitur]

That was the part that I liked the most. It's about the right of the people to tell the government to back the <redacted> off when it starts to be too intrusive. And that is exactly how it should be.

If it gets to the point where we need guns to tell the government to back off, we're pretty much screwed. It's not the 18th Century, with their muskets against our muskets. They've got ICBM's, you know. Not sure what gun show I have to go to to get one of those.

[RobinFinderson]

I like the 2nd amendment. I like what it stands for. The 2nd amendment says that Americans have the right to do stupid shit that might not even be in their own best interest. That is what freedom is all about. To me, the 2nd amendment and gay rights have a lot in common. It seems just stupid that a lot of people that argue for the right to own a gun, even though it is more likely that you will shoot yourself or someone in your family, or that a loved one will use it to end his or her own life than it is that the gun will ever be used in the defense of good guys from bad guys, that many of of these gun nuts argue against gay marriage on the grounds that it won't be good for society. I say eff that! This is America, baby, and gay marriage might dern well be the gayest thing to ever happen, but the 2nd amendment is about freedom, even the freedom to do stupid stuff, and it isn't the government's job to tell us that we can't do stupid stuff, it is the government's job to accommodate our stupid stuff, as long as it doesn't stop other people from doing their stupid stuff... like owning guns. God bless America.

[Pheidippides]

I think it's dumb that gun ownership is a constitutional right. Is the right to own a gun really an inalienable right? Wouldn't it make more sense to just let states and municipalities decide how they want to regulate firearms?

You're getting your constitutional history messed up - that is originally the way it worked. The bill of rights (and the 2nd amendment) did not bind the states but rather bound the federal government. It was only by virtue of the 14th amendment that the BoR became applicable to the states as well. There is a disconnect between the text of the 10th amendment and the practice of the 14th.

For my part, I think gun ownership is precisely for the revolutionary reason - I think the article got it exactly right.

[Non Sequitur]

I like the 2nd amendment. I like what it stands for. The 2nd amendment says that Americans have the right to do stupid shit that might not even be in their own best interest. That is what freedom is all about. To me, the 2nd amendment and gay rights have a lot in common. It seems just stupid that a lot of people that argue for the right to own a gun, even though it is more likely that you will shoot yourself or someone in your family, or that a loved one will use it to end his or her own life than it is that the gun will ever be used in the defense of good guys from bad guys, that many of of these gun nuts argue against gay marriage on the grounds that it won't be good for society. I say eff that! This is America, baby, and gay marriage might dern well be the gayest thing to ever happen, but the 2nd amendment is about freedom, even the freedom to do stupid stuff, and it isn't the government's job to tell us that we can't do stupid stuff, it is the government's job to accommodate our stupid stuff, as long as it doesn't stop other people from doing their stupid stuff... like owning guns. God bless America.

Exactly! It's none of the government's business where I choose to holster my magnum.

[pellegrino]

I actually agree with you here. It's all about protecting us from the government. A rifle in the closet for those rare times that you need to rise up and stave off the government. That seems like a far cry, though, from how most of America's gun owners approach gun ownership.

that was kind of beneath you

[venkman]

I think it's dumb that gun ownership is a constitutional right. Is the right to own a gun really an inalienable right? Wouldn't it make more sense to just let states and municipalities decide how they want to regulate firearms?

The right to defend your life is an inalienable right. So, yes, gun ownership is an extension of that right.