What is common sense? What is a conversation?

[Birds Away]

Then, a few years from now, we have the SAME conversation and come to the same middle ground.

Then, a few years from then, we have the SAME conversation and come to the same middle ground.

Eventually we end up like Great Britain and Australia.

No thanks. On some things there can be no compromise. Compromise is not always a virtue. Sometimes it is evil. See below.

Compromise

This is exactly as planned. They know that these bans haven't reduced violence in the past and that they won't in the future. In fact, they are counting on it. When the next horrible incident happens they can say "we didn't go far enough". After a couple incremental steps Voila! no guns. I believe they are perfectly aware that no matter what legislation is passed there will always be one more armed lunatic who wants to be famous. By the end of the first term of the next President, they will have won.

 

[spec4]

Man, you are old.

Yeah, it happens before you know it.

 

[Ted]

Yeah, it happens before you know it.

I'm already begun to realize that.

 

[jgreiner]

The reason that the "middle ground" keeps getting re-defined is because America is a representative republic. And gun owners who want an unrestricted interpretation of the 2nd amendment only make up a portion of the entire republic. The rest of the republic also gets represented in these debates.

The question about criminals is a good one. But it's not really the spark that has lit the current debate. The current debate is centered around keeping guns out of the hands of troubled young people, minimizing the amount of damage they can do, and most of all protecting children in schools who have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Adam Lanza wasn't a criminal until he pulled the trigger on his mother.

Please don't misunderstand me, I am in fervent support of the second amendment. But I believe our constitution is wise. That the state of our union is solid. That thousands of men and woman across the country have taken an oath to defend the constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. I was one of those servants and I am aware of the difference between a lawful and unlawful order.

I simply don't see the practical application of a "well regulated" civilian militia in our modern age.

I'll give you one: So that we the people can PROTECT ourselves from an OPPRESSIVE gov't. Which, I might add, we are rapidly acquiring with Obama in office.

 

[thatgtrguy]

I'll give you one: So that we the people can PROTECT ourselves from an OPPRESSIVE gov't. Which, I might add, we are rapidly acquiring with Obama in office.

Well it's a good thing we have term limits and elections then. Obama didn't win a second term. Romney couldn't stop himself from making mistake after mistake on the campaign trail.

 

[IndyDave1776]

The reason that the "middle ground" keeps getting re-defined is because America is a representative republic. And gun owners who want an unrestricted interpretation of the 2nd amendment only make up a portion of the entire republic. The rest of the republic also gets represented in these debates.

The question about criminals is a good one. But it's not really the spark that has lit the current debate. The current debate is centered around keeping guns out of the hands of troubled young people, minimizing the amount of damage they can do, and most of all protecting children in schools who have the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Adam Lanza wasn't a criminal until he pulled the trigger on his mother.

Please don't misunderstand me, I am in fervent support of the second amendment. But I believe our constitution is wise. That the state of our union is solid. That thousands of men and woman across the country have taken an oath to defend the constitution from enemies both foreign and domestic. I was one of those servants and I am aware of the difference between a lawful and unlawful order.

I simply don't see the practical application of a "well regulated" civilian militia in our modern age.

Can you understand plain English, comprehend the difference between a right and a privilege, understand the concept of limited government, or have any understanding of the difference between a republic and a democracy?

How can you believe that the nation is in any condition approaching 'solid'? We are bankrupt, have the most corrupt government in our history, and are accelerating toward a brick wall rather than doing anything to correct the situation.

How can you call yourself a supporter of the Second Amendment when you obviously are not?

How can you be so grossly ignorant of history to not understand the importance of the militia (i.e., the sum of all citizens ARMED)?

Dictators throughout history have depended on people like you to create the situation in which complacency allows them to win before anyone realized that the fight had started.

 

[schwaky18]

Well it's a good thing we have term limits and elections then. Obama didn't win a second term. Romney couldn't stop himself from making mistake after mistake on the campaign trail.

Just like it is a good thing we have a Constitution that doesn't allow the President to legislate through executive orders? (purple everywhere)

What if Obama says screw it I am not leaving after 2 terms and issues another executive order saying he can stay? And What if all the people that voted for him stands behind him on that? A majority doesn't make it right nor legal.

 

[cosermann]

... A majority doesn't make it right nor legal.

Exactly why we have a Constitution - to prevent a tyranny of the majority (aka mob rule, etc.).

 

[jkershner]

I simply don't see the practical application of a "well regulated" civilian militia in our modern age.

As a fairly fervent 2A supporter, I will say this: You may be right. The idea of a citizen militia may have outlived its usefulness. I disagree of course, and so do many of the members here.

However, the essential point I (we?) would make in this case is that popular opinion of any constitutional issue is simply not relevant. It doesn't matter if the opinion is shared by a minority, a majority, all, or none of America. The bottom line is that it IS in the Constitution, it is a fact that the People ARE the Militia, and the only way to get around that obstacle is to repeal the Second Amendment.

I am not trying to be smug or flippant, but I think I could get you to agree that the likelihood of that happening is not good.