Stance on gun control

[Spartan198]

Sadly I think incidents like that, for just as petty or even pettier reasons, are going to rise before they go decrease and it's going to turn out badly for gun owners who don't seek to use their 2A rights to intimidate political and social opposites. I can only hope I live long enough to see some semblance of sanity reestablished within both sides. I'm not optimistic.

[MT2008]

Therein lies the frustration for reasonable guys like us: Many of us don't terribly like what we see from many on "our side" (i.e., the American right). I also think that many of us are perfectly willing to discuss gun control measures which fall short of banning anything. Unfortunately, for the extreme left, banning AR-15s is more of a reprisal against those on the right that they blame overturning Roe vs. Wade (side note: I'm personally not a pro-life zealot) than it is about public safety.

To Nyles' point from 2016: Gun ownership should not be a person's identity, but given the times that we live in, it's hard not to think of gun ownership as a lifestyle choice. When you own guns, you have to be careful about where you live and what you do at all times. So whether or not we like it, guns are often a pretty big part of our identity by virtue of the risks and life changes that come with ownership. Not everyone takes the responsibility seriously, but for those of us that do, we also feel a sense of siege when anyone tries to illegalize ownership.

Originally Posted by funkychinaman

I'm also curious, what violent Canadian city is he referring to?

Toronto? Seems as though I hear about shootings there all the time. When I was there in 2018, a rapper who is associated with Drake was shot outside of a club (only a few blocks from the AirBnB where my ex and I were staying!)

Googling indicates that Kelowna in B.C. is currently the most violent city in Canada (for 2022).

[S&Wshooter]

Every gun law is a stepping stone to further gun laws, with the ultimate goal of complete civilian disarmament. No matter how good intentioned such laws may be, history has shown that once they get rolling the push for further restriction doesn't stop. For everyone one of these incidents on the news (highlighted specifically to turn public opinion against gun rights) of Billy Bob shooting Cletus in a road rage incident, there are thousands of (intentionally) unreported defensive gun uses

[Jcordell]

Originally Posted by S&Wshooter

Every gun law is a stepping stone to further gun laws, with the ultimate goal of complete civilian disarmament. No matter how good intentioned such laws may be, history has shown that once they get rolling the push for further restriction doesn't stop. For everyone one of these incidents on the news (highlighted specifically to turn public opinion against gun rights) of Billy Bob shooting Cletus in a road rage incident, there are thousands of (intentionally) unreported defensive gun uses

I know I know. You make a good point as well.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by S&Wshooter

Every gun law is a stepping stone to further gun laws, with the ultimate goal of complete civilian disarmament. No matter how good intentioned such laws may be, history has shown that once they get rolling the push for further restriction doesn't stop. For everyone one of these incidents on the news (highlighted specifically to turn public opinion against gun rights) of Billy Bob shooting Cletus in a road rage incident, there are thousands of (intentionally) unreported defensive gun uses

Understood. I prefer to make a distinction between what I support in theory (i.e., I don't think any and all gun control laws are inherently bad and/or unconstitutional) vs. what I am willing to support given our current meta (i.e., I recognize that in our hyper-polarized society, almost any gun control laws are likely to become a slippery slope to outright bans).

One point that I think needs to be considered and discussed more often by the absolutists on our side: If we say any and all gun control laws are unconstitutional, and oppose them only on that basis, it's only a matter of time before a "Repeal the 2nd Amendment" movement gains steam. There are already a growing number of folks on the left calling for such a repeal now than there were 20 years ago, or even 10 years ago. That is partially a result of the left in this country becoming more radical in general, but it's also a result of many on the right becoming more radical and "in your face" about gun ownership than before.

[Jcordell]

Originally Posted by MT2008

One point that I think needs to be considered and discussed more often by the absolutists on our side: If we say any and all gun control laws are unconstitutional, and oppose them only on that basis, it's only a matter of time before a "Repeal the 2nd Amendment" movement gains steam. There are already a growing number of folks on the left calling for such a repeal now than there were 20 years ago, or even 10 years ago. That is partially a result of the left in this country becoming more radical in general, but it's also a result of many on the right becoming more radical and "in your face" about gun ownership than before.

You are right. And with that then how long before there is a move to repeal other amendments which are just getting in the way of doing things. Maybe not the 1st but the 4th or 5th amendments are a pain in the neck aren't they. I suppose we could repeal the 3rd and nobody would care - until the military started quartering troops on your property because of housing shortages or budget issues.

No easy answers are there.

[MT2008]

Originally Posted by Jcordell

You are right. And with that then how long before there is a move to repeal other amendments which are just getting in the way of doing things. Maybe not the 1st but the 4th or 5th amendments are a pain in the neck aren't they. I suppose we could repeal the 3rd and nobody would care - until the military started quartering troops on your property because of housing shortages or budget issues.

No easy answers are there.

Strangely enough, NPR (about 5 years ago) had a piece which made essentially the same points. The Constitution isn't perfect, which is why there is a mechanism to change it, but just because you can (in theory) doesn't mean you should. And certainly, we should have learned our lesson by now with Prohibition working out the way it did.

[funkychinaman]

This refusal to compromise is going to doom this country. This country was built on compromise, right or wrong. In the past, I also had the sense that both parties were motivated by the best interests of the country and its people, rather than just trolling and getting invited to cable news.