After District of Columbia vs Heller, it isn’t the Second Amendment that is the problem. Heller held that while people had a right to keep a gun in their home for self defense and have the right to have hunting and recreational firearms, the right was subject to the same level of regulation as every other constitutional right. The government can ban assault weapons if it has the political will. The problem is people don’t realize that reasonable gun regulation is absolutely constitutional. They think it supplants the right of every American to be safe.
The problem is the misinformation the NRA and other gun groups have pumped out unopposed for decades and the willingness of Americans to believe it.
One thing I believe does need to happen and that would be for the NRA to get back to it’s service roots. In the 1950’s their work was gun safety, not politics. That is what they ought to do. Upcoming generations need to be taught that guns need to be handled carefully. Or as I once said to an NRA guy when I was probably 8 or 9 years old “Wouldn’t it be best to not handle guns at all?” I am all in for liability insurance for gun owners, stringent universal background checks, a ban on person to person unregulated and unreported sales, and a ban on military style high capacity pistols and rifles. This could be done without being unConstitutional.
Of course since it’s August and Congress is into the 2 week of their 6 week vacation nothing will be happening immediately. Ya know… when I was still working I rarely took a 2 week break but never a 6 week vacation. Being a member of the House or Senate is quite the part time gig.
By way of responding, Jake Tapper on Sunday said he extended invitations to Abbott, Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick, and both Cornyn and Cruz to appear on his show and speak about the El Paso shooting. All of them declined. I don’t know if any of them appeared elsewhere (read: FOX), but their all choosing not to appear on CNN is a sign that this is different–esp. with the Dayton shooting occurring the very next day.
Patrick has said in public statements (no questions allowed afterwards that I know of) that video games contributed to the El Paso shooter’s actions. He’s a Social Warrior of the first order, so that sort of thing’s to be expected of him. He’s also the guy who said, after the shooting at Sante Fe high School, that there weren’t enough exits in the building. I suspect that the “No Restrictions on Guns!!!” hill is one he’s prepared to die on. But with Cornyn genuinely worried that he’s going to have a challenging race ahead of him and with Dems thinking they have a good shot at winning control of the Texas House next year–which would cause political pressure on Abbott–maybe there’s a decent chance we could see some kind of legislative action in Texas.
Maybe.
ETA: We’ll take what we can get, of course, but in a better world changes to gun laws would be occurring because they’re just the right and responsible thing to do, and not because some people up for reelection decide to do something out of fear for their jobs.
I’m not seeking perfect solutions. But “assault weapons” is a term that is very, very difficult to define in legal terms. If there is limited time and energy for improving things related to guns, universal background checks, limiting sales of firearms, longer waiting periods, requiring licenses to purchase ammunition and limiting the size of magazines would save more lives.
Don’t forget profit. The NRA is nothing more than the marketing arm of the firearms industry, including all the nifty accessories and related gear. Consider this - there’s no profit in the old 1950s style firearms industry. When Papaw buys a hunting rifle or shotgun and hands it down to his son, who then eventually hands it down to his own son - that’s no longer considered Norman Rockwellesque nostalgia - that is now considered two lost sales opportunities. Better to ramp up the fear of immigrants, socialism, “the shit hits the fan” scenarios, looters, etc, and stock your “castle” with multiple ARs decked out with all the scopes, vertical handgrips, slings, extra magazines, etc.
The NRA is part of the “big business” aspect of this now - they no longer give two shits about the old quaint safety-and-education stuff.
Therein is the main problem.
Some news organization needs to have a trauma surgeon show what these weapons do
to Civilians
Pass the photos around to Congress
Ask them how they feel about assault weapons
This ain’t no 50’s TeeVee western where the hero takes a bullet and its a spot on his side where “Doc”
removes the offending bullet and drops it in a dish
These instruments of war rip the body apart. The flesh explodes
Not sure which thread the story appeared in about 8chan (rw site which fosters the hate that drives all this shit) going offline temporarily when they lost their load-balancing service provider, but it looks like they’ve now actually lost host, as well. This more serious and can keep them off longer, although I do expect them back like a bad mold infestation.
Yes. Reasonable regulation is possible even under the Supreme Court’s mistaken interpretation of the Second Amendment. And getting a future court to modify its interpretation is much more likely than changing the amendment.
If I were in El Paso my advice on how to handle him coming is a variation of the ignore tacit. Let those who feel they must “show” their opposition to Trump is to simply, quietly, line to route of his travel and show your backs. Don’t chant, don’t hold up signs, don’t try to stop his motorcade, just turn your backs.
This will be a powerful act, do not act overtly.
Yes. Consider this ad, which lots of people made comments about in the wake of the Sandy Hook shooting because the Bushmaster was the weapon of choice:
That is a huge part of the problem.
The inside joke is that in America today, if you want to sell a product, just slap the word “tactical” on it and use terms like “mission-oriented” to push it.
Think I’m laughing? Just pay attention and you’ll see it.
Well, I don’t think they’re to blame in the classic sense that gun advocates want us to believe, but I will say this - years ago I watched a program that talked about this and tied into the manner that our own US military trains our soldiers and Marines. The main focus was about how humans are not naturally inclined to kill other humans - they have to be taught or conditioned to do so (think about all those old stories/studies about how often soldiers in WWII would NOT fire their weapons during a firefight). To overcome this natural aversion, one thing our military did was switch to those human-sized, human-torso-shaped targets for training, because it subconsciously conditions a trainee to grow accustomed to shooting at a real human target eventually. This led to the program asking the question - do these “first person shooter” games inadvertently accomplish the same end result - a short-circuiting of the natural aversion to killing another human being? I think it’s an interesting question - maybe if we could ever get funding to the CDC restored for the studying of gun violence, that’s a tangential aspect that should be researched?
Assault weapons are the porn of the NRA. You know them when you see them. So if the word assault doesn`t mean anything then friggin define it. Rounds fired per unit time, type of projectile, magazine capacity, male human erectile potential.
This really pisses me off.
KY did the same thing recently, or at least a very close version of it.
My own personal preference would be reciprocity for CCWs across all 50 states, but with one unified standard for issuance based on the most stringent requirements (probably NY or CA).
