Actions
Post info
cosmicrat
Peace, freedom, equality, tolerance, and justice for all
19.02.2018 (94 days ago)
Recommend
 
Post view

The Second Amendment Problem
by cosmicrat ·
19-February-2018, 12:25 am

The second amendment to the Constitution, as currently interpreted, is a piece of crap. The NRA, largely responsible for that bizarre hijacking of what began as a protection for Southern state slavery, is a subversive organization.

Does anyone find my words too harsh? Harsher than the sound of a bullet tearing through the flesh of a child? I didn’t think so.

Let’s get specific.

The NRA is an organization that enables and contributes to domestic terrorism, mass murder with firearms, and many thousands of individual firearm homicides every year.

Once a relatively benign promoter of gun safety, the NRA suffered a hostile takeover in 1977 by right-wing extremists.

The hostile takeover of the NRA

SCOT LEHIGH: The NRA’s sharp turn to the right

For 40 years these extremists have been propagandizing Americans and bribing our legislators.

The right to bear arms, an amendment that has been twisted loose from its original purpose, resulting in a heavily armed population in a society where that is not only useless but dangerous as well, serves to give gun owners a sense of personal power that is only an illusion. It turns them from a part of a society to a collection of individuals, distrusting other individuals, unable and unwilling to cooperate and organize with others to defend their common interests.

This, of course, was and is the intention.

The increased level of fear, the growing divisiveness, and the rampant corruption of legislators, both state and federal is eroding the function of, and trust in, democracy.

It is important to recognize that the far right really doesn’t like democracy. They will use and abuse and manipulate its forms, and take advantage of the freedom it provides, in order to further their agenda. They don’t want the will of the people in a healthy responsive democratic system to get in the way of their oligarchy.

The NRA has done more to subvert our democracy and our principles than the Communist Party ever did. It should be declared criminally subversive by law. Consider it a violation of Congressional ethics to accept any donation from the NRA. All legislation known to have been endorsed by the NRA should be reviewed for immediate repeal. The financial relationship between the NRA and all US gun manufacturers and importers should be investigated. For any employment requiring a security background check, the applicant would need to reveal present or past membership.

The Second Amendment was never intended to apply to individual private citizens. It clearly states that its purpose was to enable armed state militias. A Supreme Court with an intelligent majority should have long ago clearly stated that. It is not so much a matter of “conservative” or not, but a willingness and ability to disregard the propaganda and interpret the words as written. Scalia couldn’t do that. What would the current court do? Let’s find out.

The amendment could have been more clearly written. The others, despite their terse style, left little room for doubt as to their intent or reason for existing, which were mostly self-evident.

The first half of the sentence describes the purpose clearly enough, but does not state why such a guarantee be might thought necessary. That was intentional. The Southerners who insisted on it understood. Those in the north who were not at all pleased about the acceptance of slavery already included in the Constitution’s compromises, probably knew as well, but preferred not to have it spelled out.

No other major nation has the firearm violence problem we have created for ourselves over gun obsession.

Let’s begin to end it.

Facts:

[1] Individuals who were in possession of a gun were about 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession.

[2] For every one justifiable homicide in the United States involving a gun, guns were used in 44 criminal homicides.

[3] The presence of guns in the home increased an individual’s risk of death by homicide by 90%.3

[4] Gun ownership is at the lowest level in the United States since at least the early 1970s. In 1973, 47 percent of American households reported having at least one gun. That figure peaked in 1977 at 50.4 percent, according to the most recent report by the University of Chicago. But since then it has trended downward. In 2014, 31 percent of households in the US said they had a gun.

Though there are about as many guns as people, only a minority of Americans own them.

[5] In an analysis of 235 mass killings, many of which were carried out with firearms 22 percent of the perpetrators could be considered mentally ill.

[6] A 2015 study found that less than 5 percent of gun-related killings in the United States between 2001 and 2010 were committed by people diagnosed with mental illness.

So, while it’s true that disturbed people shouldn’t be allowed guns, they aren’t the main problem. It’s the guns, and the people who propagandize for proliferation, and those stupid enough to believe them.

For sensible and effective changes to be made, a great deal of public education will be needed. About 20% since 1977 have already realized they don’t need to own guns. But even among the 70% who are gun-free, too many fail to question the “right” that some of the 30% claim. Not all gunowners are ideological about it. Many of them may have legitimate practical needs for them, but would not say that everyone should have one.

All of us, especially politicians, need to stop pandering to the phony 2nd Amendment argument. 

The gun nuts are a misinformed minority, and should be treated like climate change deniers, Holocaust deniers, flat-Earthers, etc. We need strict gun registration, gun-owner licensing, requiring a verified legitimate purpose as well as a background check. Non-official carrying in public places should be banned.  That would be a start.

Comments
Order by: 
Per page: 
 
  •  SecretCorners: 
     

    UPDATE: the federal statues; in 2013, define a mass killing as only THREE people. 

     
     91 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
    0 points
     
    •  SecretCorners: 
       

      This is why the number of mass shootings in the US is so bloody high.  As I kept trying to tell you, definitions do matter.

       
       91 days ago 
      0 points
       
  •  SecretCorners: 
     

    I know that data gets in the way of the narrative but as a scientist, I have to live by the data.

    According to the FBI, there were a total of 625 murders committed with rifles and shotguns in 2012. That breaks down to 322 murders that were rifle related and 303 that were shotgun related.

    The total number of deaths committed with fists, hammers, and other blunt objects was 1,196. That breaks down to 518 murders related to hammers and blunt objects and 678 related to fists.

     
     92 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
    0 points
     
    •  cosmicrat: 
       

      The problem with that comparison is that the type of firearm is not always known or accurately reported.  It is well known that the vast majority of murders are with handguns.  For planned multiple murders, the logical choice is a semi-auto rifle, for ammo capacity and accuracy.

      "According to FBI data for 2016, 11,004 of the 15,070 murders in the United States were committed with firearms. Handguns were the most common type of firearm used in 7,105 cases. In 3,263 cases, the type of gun was not reported to the FBI or was listed as “other” while in 903 instances, the weapon was not identified or was listed as “other.”

      Meanwhile, in the UK:  "The Home Office Homicide Index showed there were 518 homicides (murder, manslaughter and infanticide) in the year ending March 2015 in England and Wales. This represents a decrease of 5 offences (1%) from the 523 recorded for the previous year. Over recent years, the number of currently recorded homicides has shown a general downward trend and the number for the year ending March 2015 (518) was the lowest since 1983 (482). In the year ending March 2015, there were 9.0 offences of homicide per million population."

      However, the US does not have a higher general crime rate than other industrialized countries, just a much higher murder rate, and nearly 70% of those murders are by firearm.  

      America doesn’t have more crime than other rich countries. It just has more guns.

      https://www.vox.com/2015/8/27/9217163/america-guns-europe

      And, we don't have more mental illness than other countries.  We're not even close to highest in suicides (though our rate would be even lower if we didn't make it so easy to do it with a gun).  http://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/10665/254610/1/WHO-MSD-MER-2017.2-eng.pdf

      Those who claim our gun problem is not a gun problem are running out of other things to blame it on.

       
       91 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
      0 points
       
      •  SecretCorners: 
         

        Is it a gun problem?  You ignored the data again, was that intentional?  It appears that it is not a gun problem but a hammer and fist problem since more murders were committed by using blunt force trauma.

         
         91 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
        0 points
         
        •  cosmicrat: 
           

          Where did you get that idea?  69% of US murders are by firearm-- by your own chart, in 2012 & 2013.  Other years were close to the same.

           
           90 days ago 
          0 points
           
  •  SecretCorners: 
     

    It appears that the last assault weapons ban had little affect.

    https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf

    What is really wanted is a weapons confiscation; removing guns and rifles completely by force.  Will that mean less deaths or just less shootings.  Well, it appears that it will mean less shootings but not necessarily less killings.  Look at how many deaths were from knives.

    http://thefederalist.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/FBI-Murder-Victims-2013.png

    Also, the data shows that 2/3 of the shooting deaths were suicide.  So we are chasing the wrong rabbit here.

    The problem is the culture as Dan has stated.  For one, parents are not parenting; they let children with undeveloped minds sit in the room with the telly on with violence blaring out onto the room.  There was a study done back in the sixties I think; timestamp could be wrong, where children that watched violent shows played more violently than if they watched nonviolent shows.

     
     92 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
    0 points
     
    •  cosmicrat: 
       

      "Compared with the 10-year period before the ban, the number of gun massacres during the ban period fell by 37 percent, and the number of people dying from gun massacres fell by 43 percent. But after the ban lapsed in 2004, the numbers shot up again — an astonishing 183 percent increase in massacres and a 239 percent increase in massacre deaths."

      Banning assault weapons specifically reduces mass killings.  It is true that they are a minority of gun deaths, but they are a different kind of murder, usually random strangers, sometimes picked for a certain characteristic, but not personally known to the killer.  More than ordinary murder, it increases the general level of fear.

      Obviously, we should reduce ALL murders, by controlling all kinds of firearms.

       
       91 days ago·2 replies2 replies 
      0 points
       
      •  SecretCorners: 
         

        Looking at the data, it would appear we need to ban knives; sorry cooks, you will just have to use your teeth in your food preparations.  However, we know if we ban all knives, the people would just use other means to commit the murders.  The current mentality is that if we remove the guns then no more murders; however, we know that is not really the truth.  Gun ownership is actually down in the US.  Perhaps the breakdown of the traditional family has a role to play; this is especially true in the Black community and let's not dance around the elephant in the room, Blacks do commit a proportionately higher rate of crimes and no, it is not due to a system in place to put all Blacks in prison.

         
         91 days ago 
        0 points
         
      •  SecretCorners: 
         

        Banning assault weapons specifically reduces mass killings.

        Does it?  Where is your data on this?  Are you saying the DOJ is wrong? The man in the Florida nightclub shooting might have just as well used a different method for killing those in the night club.

        By the way, the definition for mass killings is the death of five or more people.  There have been many mass killings where a knife was the weapon.  There has been many mass killings where a handgun was used.  There has been many mass killings by means other than assault weapons.  The problem of mass killings is not due to any specific weapon but due to the people that committed them.  Instead of focusing on such things as weapon laws we need to focus on the people and try to figure out the true cause of the actions they took.

         
         91 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
        0 points
         
        •  cosmicrat: 
           

          This is the summation of the data, as posted above:  "Compared with the 10-year period before the ban, the number of gun massacres during the ban period fell by 37 percent, and the number of people dying from gun massacres fell by 43 percent. But after the ban lapsed in 2004, the numbers shot up again — an astonishing 183 percent increase in massacres and a 239 percent increase in massacre deaths."  

          I'll retrieve the graph if you need something visual.

           
           90 days ago 
          0 points
           
  •  Greystarfish1: 
     

    Gun Control has failed. Chicago has some really strict gun control laws, yet it is one of the most dangerous cities in the world. It is a mental health and a Psychiatric drugs issue.

    An article of interest is at https://www.cchrint.org/school-shooters/ .If you are at Facebook, watch this video at https://www.facebook.com/jayla.holmes.14/posts/540421986326650?pnref=story .It talks about mass shootings and suicide caused by Psychiatric drugs. If you are not at Facebook, I found this video at https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UhO0Pul_FcE

     
     93 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
    0 points
     
    •  cosmicrat: 
       

      Gun control has not failed, because it hasn't really been tried yet in this country.  It does, indeed work quite well in other countries.  Do you think Americans are uniquely violent people, or the psychiatric drugs you mention are only used here?  Whether the drugs always work as intended is another question, but mental illness is a factor in only about 22% of mass shootings, and less than 5% of all shootings.

       
       92 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
      0 points
       
      •  Greystarfish1: 
         

        Gun control has failed. Crime rises because the criminals will use guns, knives, etc. http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/guns-in-other-countries/ .Did you watch the video?  

        It talks about  Psychiatric drugs, mass shootings, and suicide. The  Psychiatric drugs effects people and causes all kinds of problems. The video has doctors, psychologist, etc. discussing the problem. It includes 911 calls, as well. 

         
         92 days ago·2 replies2 replies 
        0 points
         
        •  cosmicrat: 
           

          Gun control WORKS in all the countries where it has been instituted.  They have crime, they have drugs, and they have mental illness.  They have human social problems.  Because they have MANY fewer guns, they have MANY fewer murders.  It's not that complicated.

          Some US states have slightly more restrictions than others, but if the state next to it doesn't, it can't really be effective.  The guns leak through.

           
           90 days ago 
          0 points
           
        •  SecretCorners: 
           

          You have to understand what is meant by the definition of gun control; it is the removal of guns, not simply the restrictions of guns to those with mental illness.  I don't hold any desire for guns myself, not even for target shooting.  I would rather test my skill at hitting a target with bow and arrow; which, by the way, can be a very deadly way to kill someone; just harder to conceal.  Of course the small high power dart shooters could be used.  See, the problem is not the weapon.

           
           91 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
          0 points
           
          •  Greystarfish1: 
             

            I totally agree.

             
             91 days ago 
            0 points
             
  •  Midianlord: 
     

    America doesn't have a "gun problem", and never did.

    It has a culture problem, and always did.

     
     93 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
    1 point
     
    •  cosmicrat: 
       

      Yes, the culture problem includes an obsession for firearms.  Rather than discourage that sickness, we are barraged with propaganda making it worse, and laws making it easy for anyone to partake of them.

       
       92 days ago·1 replies1 replies 
      0 points
       
      •  SecretCorners: 
         

        No, the problem is a fascination with violence.  Americans are some of the most violent people on the planet.  Look at what sells in the theatre.  Look at the show "Into the Badlands."  The violence in that show is so bad that if I try to watch it, it makes me sick, physically sick.  I have watched it but only by turning my head away from the screen at the graphic scenes of gore.

         
         92 days ago 
        0 points
         
The Second Amendment Problem