Nov 2023 Mod notice:
There may be other, more specific, threads about some aspects of US politics, but this one tends to act as a hub for all sorts of related news and information, so it's usually one of the busiest OTC threads.
If you're new to OTC, it's worth reading the Introduction to On-Topic Conversations
and the On-Topic Conversations debate guidelines
before posting here.
Rumor-based, fear-mongering and/or inflammatory statements that damage the quality of the thread will be thumped. Off-topic posts will also be thumped. Repeat offenders may be suspended.
If time spent moderating this thread remains a distraction from moderation of the wiki itself, the thread will need to be locked. We want to avoid that, so please follow the forum rules
when posting here.
In line with the general forum rules, 'gravedancing' is prohibited here. If you're celebrating someone's death or hoping that they die, your post will get thumped. This rule applies regardless of what the person you're discussing has said or done.
Edited by Mrph1 on Nov 30th 2023 at 11:03:59 AM
![]()
Sometimes outside observers are the most objective; further, that type of dismissal of someone's point of view is inherently suspect; it's an ad hominem argument.
The measures taken up by the Senate were grossly inadequate to solving the gun problem, but they were at least a start, and with 90+ percent support among the general populace, they were as close to politically (*ahem*) bullet-proof as it comes.
The Second Amendment is obsolete, dangerously so if it keeps being used as a sledgehammer to bar any attempt to stop violence.
edited 20th Jun '16 6:59:20 PM by Fighteer
"It's Occam's Shuriken! If the answer is elusive, never rule out ninjas!"The Constitution's been updated several times, that's what amendments are for. However, there's a lot of political and social will AGAINST changing that one particular thing, and we're not going to get it changed in a week, however much some of us here may want it. (Generally, there's a will against changing anything within the Bill of Rights, and those were the first amendments made.) Frankly, I hope this just means there's more bills coming down the line, to be negotiated and such instead of just fizzling out. At this point it's a sad achievement that these things got voted on at all.
edited 20th Jun '16 7:07:37 PM by AceofSpades
The Constitution was written to be changed; that's why it contains provisions for amending it. If you want to get rid of the second amendment, then you need to pass an amendment to do so. However, doing so is a political impossibility because there are a large number of people in favor of the second amendment who do not believe that it should be amended and will block any attempt at doing so. So without overwhelming popular support, it simply can't be done. Which is the system working as intended.
Saying "the second amendment is stupid" and trying to pass laws that break it instead of amending it properly is a fools' errand — all it will do is get shot down by the courts instead.
However, I do think that meaningful gun control is possible without passing another amendment. There hasn't actually been much in the way of real tests of the limits of the second amendment — just things like Heller vs DC, which was a massive overreach on DC's part that amounted to a blatantly unconstitutional ban on guns. Something like the National Firearms Act has never been tested in court, so clearly some amount of gun control is constitutionally permissible.
The right way to go forward with gun control, seeing as passing an amendment is a nonstarter, is to see how much the courts will let you get away with... though with people kneejerk opposing any and all gun control legislation no matter what, that's also difficult (but not impossible, like an amendment would be).
edited 20th Jun '16 7:18:44 PM by NativeJovian
Really from Jupiter, but not an alien.I regard with skepticism any claim made by someone from outside the US to the effect of: "WE have gun control, and it works just great, and everybody here is okay with it."
Nonsense and other such comments. In my various web searches, I have come across a UK-based site that detailed the history of gun control in Great Britain, and how it failed to reduce crime as advertised. The author laments that he can't own firearms of his choosing, but only what Parliament decrees he can be trusted with, and urges American readers not to let the same thing happen in their country. And I'm sure this fellow isn't the only one in the entire nation who feels this way.
This Space Intentionally Left Blank.I speak as a foreigner but seeing the mess the US politicians did with laws and acts that almost threw the 4th and 5th Amendments under the bus after 9/11, I wouldn't trust laws made on the heat of the moment when a tragedy occurs as a solution to make things better. They end up usually very poorly thought.
Inter arma enim silent legesFrom what I can tell, the four measures on gun control pretty much failed along party lines. The Republicans voted down the two Democratic Proposals and the Democrats voted down the two Republican proposals, including the one which would require a judge to get involved before denying people access to guns which would most likely be the one that would actually pass muster with the Supreme Court. Quite frankly, the current government can't even pass simple legislation. They certainly would not be able to push an amendment any time soon.
Wizard Needs Food BadlySpeaking purely hypothetically here, and only out of a sense of morbid curiosity, are there any amendments that, theoretically speaking, we could ditch? Or would removing any of them make an unsalavagable wreck of our democracy that we wouldn't be able to turn back from?
edited 20th Jun '16 7:33:10 PM by kkhohoho
Not really so easily, but admittedly it is rather archaic. The 3rd Amendment was in response to the British Quartering Act. But I really don't think that sort of thing happens anymore.
In instances of Martial Law (such as in the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina), it may become necessary to find local shelter for the National Guard troops deployed there. But the Army is too polite to boot somebody out of their house these days...
This Space Intentionally Left Blank.Not really... Most Amendments to the Constitution are merely to fix major loopholes that the Constitution allows. Also there is one Amendment that we actually do live perfectly fine without, namely the 18th Amendment, Prohibition, which was repealed by the 21st Amendment, the Repeal of Prohibition. Technically, the 18th Amendment is still in the Constitution, but the later 21st Amendment superseded it completely. In addition, that was a very unique situation in that there was both enough popular support in 1919 to pass the 18th Amendment AND enough popular support in 1933 to pass the 21st Amendment which repealed it.
Wizard Needs Food BadlyNot to cause a derail, but it seems Trump fired Lewandowski. http://tinyurl.com/j6y8sgl

No, I'm glad the gun-control bills got shot down (if you'll pardon the expression.)
This Space Intentionally Left Blank.