I post here my repeated call for repeal of the Second Amendment. But, as was predicted by one of my readers, I think this will be my last time doing so, not because I think it wrong to advocate for the repeal, but because of lack of interest in its repeal amongst my readers and the frequency of the need for repeal.
Repeal the second amendment.
My intent is to run this entry again and again each time some nutcase uses guns to kill strangers until the second amendment is repealed.
The truth is that the NRA and other advocates for guns in the U.S. have won the argument for whether the second amendment was about individuals or about militias. So, to allow reasonable governmental exploration into control of weapons, the only option is to eliminate the second amendment all together.
Anyone who thinks that will be the end of gun ownership in America simply does not know Americans. What it might do, though, is put some rationality back in the discussion. Right now, the gun possession argument is dominated by those who fear government more than anything. What I fear most, on the other hand, is the dominance of government by those who think the role of government ought to be making them, personally, more money. There are certainly more of these than ought to exist in a democracy.
Perhaps it would do to amend the second amendment so that the argument about individuals versus militias had a clear outcome in favor of militias, but it hardly seems likely that supporting the right of militias to build and maintain nuclear weapons will gain support from most Americans.Yet that seems more reasonable to me than advocating for a right to be armed no matter how marginal your mental stability may be. So long as the second amendment stands as it does now, the burden of proof lies on the government, so instability has little to do with it.
The only potential barrier to this plan seems to be that I will not have an opportunity to address other issues in this blog, since the murder of innocent strangers seems to be all the rage, right now.
How did things get so weird? The Republican Party has been taken over by the people who have become so disgruntled by government in theory that they support a presidential candidate whose positions remind one of a dictator. And they raise a good question: which is worst, a government that can do nothing, or one that takes action on its own volition, as determined by its leader? Is anybody better than somebody from the other Party?
How did we get so divided that it’s our side or no ballgame? Now it’s a dictator or Hillary. For some the decision to go with the dictator is easy to make.
It’s spinning out of control,