Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Questions for gun fans

As far as I can tell, not one gun-o-phile speaking in public recently has said anything about what sorts of gun regulations they do think are a good idea, and which they'd vote for, given the chance.

If you mention the whole text of the 2nd Amendment instead of just the parts the gun crowd likes, you get tortured "reasoning" that boils down to saying "Well, we don't have militias any more but the obvious intent of the Founders was that EVERYONE GETS TO HAVE GUNS."

In other words, the text of the Constitution needs to be interpreted in light of modern circumstances.

Meaning there are no originalists in gun-fan foxholes.

Even the current far-Right Supreme Court majority said guns could be regulated, just as the 2nd Amendment requires.

So--tell me--what gun regulations do you folks advocate--regulations that you feel properly balance the individual rights you obsess about exactly as much as the far Left does--with our collective responsibilities to each other?

Here are some possibilities:

1. Gun registration--a complete audit trait that can be shared between all government agencies, resting on top of a biometric ID database for every individual who's an American citizen or is physically residing within our borders.

2. Making unlicensed exporting of firearms/ammo a felony if it isn't already.

3. Forbidding possession of firearms by anyone determined to be mentally unstable, even if they haven't committed a crime (yet). This would depend on that universal ID biometric database keeping a dossier on everyone.

4. Banning private possession of military weapons/ammo--anything capable of automatic fire, anything with a magazine larger than 10 rounds, any add-on magazines with larger capacity.

More specifically,
a. How about 50 cal. machine guns set to fire single shots, with primo sniper scope mounted--like what master sniper Carlos Hathcock used in 'Nam?

b. High capacity magazines. Good for self defense against SWAT squads. And why might you want self defense against SWAT squads? Face it--to be able to defend yourself against a massive assault you'd need Claymores, a rooftop machine gun nest, etc. Society can't survive when individuals are so armed.

c. RPGs (Rifle-Propelled Grenade launcherss). I just want to hear a gun guy admit that RPGs, while "arms" that can be "born," represent too much firepower for society to allow individuals to bear.

d. Hand grenades.

e. Automatic rifles (BARs, SAWs etc.).

f. Dum-bum bullets (designed to kill people by kind of exploding inside a body).

I could go on--but feel free to suggest your own regulations. Or your argument to repeal the 2nd Amendment to remove the requirement that arms be regulated.

Lastly, and on that thought, if you had a chance to repeal and replace the 2nd Amendment with a new one, how would you word it?


mjbarkl said...

You write very well, which you already know, and I have enjoyed browsing your posts. As with
I would like to read them all, but
your body of work is so massive I can't find a starting poing. Is there an index somewhere? Best wishes, --Mike, http://www.mjbarkl.com/run.htm

Ehkzu said...

I'd love an index. I don't think blogspot.com enables that but I'll look into it. Or maybe I should just compile everything into a book, with the entries sorted into subject-centric chapters ("school reform", "military issues," etc.).

mjbarkl said...

I'd buy that book! When I commented on 2/12 that chart on the left of postings by month or year wasn't there for your more recent years. Seems to be all fixed now. Thanks. Here's a draft that seems to annoy the pro-gun crowd: (format is from H.J.RES. 438, 102nd Congress):
- - - -

Proposing an amendment to the Constitution of the United States repealing the right to keep and bear arms.

Resolved by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled (two-thirds of each House concurring therein),
That the following article is proposed as an amendment to the Constitution of the United States, which shall be valid for all intents and purposes as part
of the Constitution when ratified by the legislatures of three-fourths of the several States at any time after the date of its submission for ratification:


1. Any right to keep and bear arms, whether under the Second Amendment to this Constitution, or under some pre-existing doctrine of natural law or common law or otherwise, or under Constitution or laws of any State, is repealed.

2. The privilege to keep and bear arms throughout the United States shall be under such Regulations as the Congress shall make."
- - - -
Best wishes, --Mike