18 were shot within 4 hours

[MavsSuperFan]

People who carry guns in open public like that are asking to be shot at and disarmed if someone decides to go crazy.

This opens up a can of worms as well.

A lot of people who shoot up places are insane or pretty close to it. They are not going to care in the end who has a gun or not. For example the Alexis shooting. Dude went into his place of work where he KNEW there were security guards who has handguns and shot people anyway including them. And he seemed like a pretty normal person on his outer shell.

I think the last thing we need is someone shooting up a public place then a civilian getting in a shoot out with him in open public.

It's just more chaos to me and not more order.

When it's all said and done, humans have been killing themselves for years and years. It's never going to be stopped and it can only be controlled to a certain people or prevented. I personally feel giving ever dick, larry and moe that can pass background checks and get one legally isn't the answer.

Personally I agree with you, but how do you deal with the fact that the 2nd amendment exists? Do you not agree with me the only way to legally limit guns is to amend the constitution?

Personally I dont want us to start picking and choosing which amendments to the constitution we follow. That could be a disaster. Most of the 27 amendments are great. It would be a tragedy if we set a precedent where we started to ignore the intent of the amendments. (I realize this is already happening, but its something I wish would stop)

what if someone wanted to weaken the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 13th, 14th, or 19th amendments?

[LJJ]

No its off putting.

I grew up in a house that had a rack of rifles on the wall in the downstairs living room and a lot of my family members are still avid hunters. For me, killing defenseless animals doesn't make me happy, but I don't condemn anyone who hunts.

HOWEVER

when I travel to countries like The Philippines or Sri Lanka and see 110 pound boys in uniform with massive automatic assault rifles protecting a busy street corner or running the metal detector at some shopping mall, it is unsettling. Or worse somewhere like Cambodia where guns lie around in the open all over the place.

they have real problems in those places and very little stability. The US isn't like that. The need to carry big 'f*ck off' weaponry is only feeding the ego of the owner, not really protecting them nor making the streets a safer place. The US is stable, there is no need for battle ready equipment.

That being said I have no problem with a holstered hand gun.

I think in bold that's the for me key there. I've been to places where people have guns, but it's somewhat reasonable they have guns. In Israel however I saw citizens lugging around full automatic weapons while living a charmed life and under no pressing threat whatsoever of having to use their weapon for defense.

Now I'm sure it's not quite as extreme in the US as it is in Israel, but attitude wise it's probably somewhat similar.

[JtotheIzzo]

Personally I agree with you, but how do you deal with the fact that the 2nd amendment exists? Do you not agree with me the only way to legally limit guns is to amend the constitution?

Personally I dont want us to start picking and choosing which amendments to the constitution we follow. That could be a disaster. Most of the 27 amendments are great. It would be a tragedy if we set a precedent where we started to ignore the intent of the amendments. (I realize this is already happening, but its something I wish would stop)

what if someone wanted to weaken the 1st, 3rd, 4th, 5th, 13th, 14th, or 19th amendments?

I think this is important, and I also feel that limiting privacy for the sake of safety is a big mistake. That is why I find the apathy towards 4th Amendment violations so troubling.

Teddy Roosevelt tried the same shit back in his day saying it was an age of steam not sail so we could no longer be safe from threats from abroad. But now we are bigger pu*ss*es... so because a few dune coons (sorry not meant to be racist just want to highlight the absurdity and felt this language achieved this most succinctly) hijacked a few planes people are willing to throw the baby out with the bath water.

You are either down with the constitution or you aren't.

'America' as an ideal doesn't work if there isn't a way for the people to take down the system.

Once the power is too much, it fails.

[MavsSuperFan]

I think this is important, and I also feel that limiting privacy for the sake of safety is a big mistake. That is why I find the apathy towards 4th Amendment violations so troubling.

Teddy Roosevelt tried the same shit back in his day saying it was an age of steam not sail so we could no longer be safe from threats from abroad. But now we are bigger pu*ss*es... so because a few dune coons (sorry not meant to be racist just want to highlight the absurdity and felt this language achieved this most succinctly) hijacked a few planes people are willing to throw the baby out with the bath water.

You are either down with the constitution or you aren't.

'America' as an ideal doesn't work if there isn't a way for the people to take down the system.

Once the power is too much, it fails.

I agree with you sentiments about respecting the constitution and how overall its one of the finest, most well intentioned political documents in human history.

One the problems I have is personally i would like to limit civilian ownership of assault rifles and machine guns, but if I am being intellectually honest, I have to admit that the intent of the second amendment (at a minimum) was to provide for the right of civilians to bear infantry level "arms".

At the most (Jeffersonian) extreme the intent of the second amendment was to provide the ultimate hedge against the federal government. The idea was that states and local militias should be able to oppose and overthrow a tyrannical federal government. If you gathered up every gun owner/militia group currently in america, I doubt they could handle a single battalion.