# No ma'am - A Marine's Letter to Senator Dianne Feinstein **URL:** \ **Category:** Miscellaneous and Personal Stuff I Must Share\ **Created:** [January 4, 2013, 8:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100 "2013-01-04T20:47:15Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 8
**Author:** ![Broomstick](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/broomstick/32/246_2.png) [@Broomstick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Broomstick)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 2:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/141 "2013-01-08T02:32:05Z")
> [@ladyfoxfyre](#): > > I don’t have an answer to that. But trying to point out that bodyguards who still carry guns in a city where restrictive gun laws exist is hypocrisy is stupid. Chicago didn’t have a _restrictive_ gun law, it _banned guns_. Strictly speaking, even the Aldermen and bodyguards weren’t supposed to have them, _only_ the police. And yet… the very people saying “we need to get rid of all guns!” wouldn’t get rid of their own. They _always_ made an exception for themselves, and that’s where the hypocrisy comes in. If the weren’t hypocrites they’d trust the police - as they insisted the ordinary citizen do - to protect them and give up THEIR guns as well. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 3:08am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/142 "2013-01-08T03:08:27Z")
Dumb question, but why is Dianne Feinstein apparently the subject of all these fears about new gun laws? Surely other Congressmen and Senators (particularly those from Connecticut) will have something to say about this. And in the aftermath of the events at Sandy Hook Elementary School, why is the discussion solely about potential new gun control measures? Why is no one talking about mental health treatment and research? Because there are _two_ things in common to most of the recent mass murders; guns and mental illness. ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/143 "2013-01-08T03:25:24Z")
> [@Dewey\_Finn](#): > > Dumb question, but why is Dianne Feinstein apparently the subject of all these fears about new gun laws? It’s her name on the bill. She submits it, or something like it, every single year. > [@](#): > > And in the aftermath of the events at Sandy Hook Elementary School, why is the discussion solely about potential new gun control measures? Why is no one talking about mental health treatment and research? Because there are _two_ things in common to most of the recent mass murders; guns and mental illness. Mental illness isn’t anywhere near as newsworthy as guns. Plus, both sides probably agree that any change in mental health practices is going to be a long time coming, particularly effective enough to prevent these spree shootings from happening: we have to figure out what’s causing it, figure out a cure, find a preventative measure, put things into place. Guns, however… the solution is obvious. To some very vocal people, on both sides of the story. ---
**Author:** ![Dewey\_Finn](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/dewey_finn/32/4222_2.png) [@Dewey\_Finn](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dewey_Finn)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/144 "2013-01-08T03:32:25Z")
> [@Ethilrist](#): > > It’s her name on the bill. She submits it, or something like it, every single year. Can someone link to the actual text of the bill that Sen Feinstein proposed? ---
**Author:** ![RickJay](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/bb73d2/32.png) [@RickJay](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RickJay)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 3:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/145 "2013-01-08T03:32:26Z")
> [@aceplace57](#): > > Veterans do have excellent training in firearms. They know how to handle them safely. They should, anyway. But you know what? Some people who’ve served are big fucking morons. That’s the way life is. Serving in the military does not and should not give you special rights. ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 3:49am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/146 "2013-01-08T03:49:09Z")
Summary, not the specific wording, from her [website:](http://www.feinstein.senate.gov/public/index.cfm/assault-weapons) > [@](#): > > Following is a summary of the 2013 legislation: > > Bans the sale, transfer, importation, or manufacturing of: > 120 specifically-named firearms; > Certain other semiautomatic rifles, handguns, shotguns that can accept a detachable magazine and have one or more military characteristics; and > Semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds. > Strengthens the 1994 Assault Weapons Ban and various state bans by: > Moving from a 2-characteristic test to a 1-characteristic test; > Eliminating the easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test; and > Banning firearms with “thumbhole stocks” and “bullet buttons” to address attempts to “work around” prior bans. > Bans large-capacity ammunition feeding devices capable of accepting more than 10 rounds. > Protects legitimate hunters and the rights of existing gun owners by: > Grandfathering weapons legally possessed on the date of enactment; > Exempting over 900 specifically-named weapons used for hunting or sporting purposes; and > Exempting antique, manually-operated, and permanently disabled weapons. > Requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, to include: > Background check of owner and any transferee; > Type and serial number of the firearm; > Positive identification, including photograph and fingerprint; > Certification from local law enforcement of identity and that possession would not violate State or local law; and > Dedicated funding for ATF to implement registration. ---
**Author:** ![Ethilrist](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ethilrist/32/4604_2.png) [@Ethilrist](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ethilrist)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 3:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/147 "2013-01-08T03:52:39Z")
nm ---
**Author:** ![scratch\_llll](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9fc348/32.png) [@scratch\_llll](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scratch_llll)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 4:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/148 "2013-01-08T04:04:06Z")
> [@faithfool](#): > > And Charles Whitman, the you know, Marine. And Oswald who was one hell of a shot. And my uncle who was at Iwo Jima and so sickened by it he never picked up a gun again. And my brother who was in Nam and doesn’t own one. Of the two reactions to killing people I prefer the second. ---
**Author:** ![Bouncer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9d8465/32.png) [@Bouncer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bouncer)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 5:32am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/149 "2013-01-08T05:32:12Z")
> [@Greg\_Charles](#): > > I have an important (though tangential) question here. Is the thing marines say really, “Hoo-rah”? I’ve been hearing it as boorah all this time. Marines “Oorah!” Army “Huaah!” They don’t take it deadly seriously, but you won’t catch either branch using the other branch’s acknowledgment yell. Regards, -Bouncer- ---
**Author:** ![Bouncer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/9d8465/32.png) [@Bouncer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Bouncer)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 5:48am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/150 "2013-01-08T05:48:37Z")
> [@China\_Guy](#): > > I agree with you. Feinstein’s bill is probably the NRA’s wet dream. The bill doesn’t have a chance of passing, won’t really do much and obfuscates the any real discussion we should be having on meaningful gun reform debate. It allows the NRA to fundraise and rathole the real debate. Makes me wonder if Feinstein isn’t actually on the NRA payroll? Nope, it’s a fairly standard ploy in DC politics, or negotiating with a six year old about bedtime. Ask for something outrageous, and negotiate down to what you want anyways. This is an opening bid, to see who the serious players are, that’s all. Regards, -Bouncer- ---
**Author:** ![Dave\_Hartwick](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/7feea3/32.png) [@Dave\_Hartwick](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Dave_Hartwick)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 7:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/151 "2013-01-08T07:16:44Z")
> [@Stealth\_Potato](#): > > I have heard of the Turner Diaries, but I’m still not sure what you’re trying to say. Which part of my talk was “big,” and how could that lead to somebody shooting a cop? You said that if there was an attempt to restrict semi automatics in the US, that there will be a “full-on gunpocalypse that will be fought to the last breath.” I guess that could just be a crackpot prophecy-- as another poster put it, a paranoid fantasy. Lumpy has much the same to say, that gun owners will fight in the streets if a “hard-line gun ban” comes to be. What’s that mean? A ban on semi automatics? Handguns? The nonsensical AWB? I see _The Turner Diaries_ as a work of paranoid fantasy. It could be that somebody right now is reading this and thinking, yeah, they’re right. Let’s fight in the streets. I don’t think that person is you or Lumpy, though. > [@Lumpy](#): > > Who’s pretending? The gun control faction themselves are saying it. They’re openly singing Hosanna to the heavens, “at last, we have a mandate to ban guns!”. I haven’t seen that. I’ve seen gun control advocates expressing disgust at the situation. I’ve also seen what I consider to be overreactions to the situation on the control side right on this board. I have not seen anyone rejoicing over Sandy Hook. > [@Stealth\_Potato](#): > > Well, try to understand that it _is_ a rational position if you hold the second amendment to be as important as the first. I would certainly hope, if word ever came down to “give up your blogs or go to prison,” that it would never enter the minds of my countrymen to obey the law. Compliance with the law is not always a virtue. A lot of people have seen videogames as a probable cause for massacres. If there was evidence of a connection between games and violence, I, as a gamer, would support restrictions on games. Responsible gun owners do the same-- note that I do not consider the leadership of the NRA to be responsible. > **[A Sportman's Viewpoint: We Need A Moderate Alternative to the NRA](https://ideas.time.com/2012/12/19/viewpointwe-need-a-moderate-pro-gun-alternative-to-the-nra/)** > > Many hunters would support sensible reforms against large-magazine firearms, but have no organization speaking to or for them If guns are a defense against tyranny or misrule, why have they been used that way so seldom? Rights were eroded under the PATRIOT act. No guns. The US government screwed up most of the world’s economy in 2008. No fighting. There was a widespread (incorrect and conspiracist, IMO) belief that the 2000 presidential election was crooked. No blood in the streets. The only right that NRA types are prepared to fight to defend is the right to own guns, which seems circular. Lumpy mentioned how California tightened her laws when the radical left-- the Black Panthers, namely-- embraced guns. The NRA supported the new laws, which sounds like about what you’d expect. > [@Stealth\_Potato](#): > > There is a whole continuum of illegal methods to apply for redress of grievances, beginning with civil disobedience and ending in armed rebellion. A well-designed political system will make violence unnecessary most of the time, but violence is still justified in extreme cases. When in the course of human events… And here you go again. Why is it that you haven’t been saying, “if there’s a serious attempt to ban guns, there will be widespread civil disobedience?” But no, with you it’s straight to full on gunpocalypse. Big talk, don’t you think? I guess it’s OK because ocassionally you put that winky emoticon in there. > [@Dewey\_Finn](#): > > And in the aftermath of the events at Sandy Hook Elementary School, why is the discussion solely about potential new gun control measures? Why is no one talking about mental health treatment and research? Because there are _two_ things in common to most of the recent mass murders; guns and mental illness. If you’re serious about keeping guns out of the hands of the mentally ill, you’ll need a national registration system for guns anyway. You’ll have a national database of the mentally ill to keep them from buying a gun after they’ve been identified. I guess you’d need to also know who already owns guns in case they are identified as too crazy to be a gun nut. It actually would be good to keep guns away from people who have been diagnosed with depression, although just that wouldn’t, IMO, justify the enormous expense of the exercise. ---
**Author:** ![Stealth\_Potato](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/d78d45/32.png) [@Stealth\_Potato](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Stealth_Potato)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 8:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/152 "2013-01-08T08:54:32Z")
> [@Dave\_Hartwick](#): > > You said that if there was an attempt to restrict semi automatics in the US, that there will be a “full-on gunpocalypse that will be fought to the last breath.” Ah, I see what you mean now. I apologize; I was being too dramatic. I didn’t mean gun owners would be fighting in the streets over it; I was just being cute with the phrase “gunpocalypse.” I meant only that semiautomatics are such a big piece of the pie, rights-wise, that if a ban on all semiautomatics were ever passed, a large number of gun owners would feel that they had lost pretty much the entire battle. It would be a bit like losing a divorce settlement where your spouse gets 90% of everything you own and keeps the kids too. That is, so far from seeming “fair” or “reasonable” that most of us will oppose it to the very last vote, and might well punish its passage by trying to sweep another batch of bass-ackwards republicans into Congress. Heck, I know that if any of my representatives voted for such a measure I’d vote against them in the next election without question, even if they were running against Sarah Palin and Mitt Romney’s bastard lovechild. > [@Dave\_Hartwick](#): > > A lot of people have seen videogames as a probable cause for massacres. If there was evidence of a connection between games and violence, I, as a gamer, would support restrictions on games. Hm, we’ll have to differ here, too. No amount of evidence that violent games contribute to violence would convince me to erode the first amendment enough to permit censorship, not even in video games. About as far as I’d go is agreement with “don’t sell these games to kids without the parental OK” policies. > [@Dave\_Hartwick](#): > > And here you go again. Why is it that you haven’t been saying, “if there’s a serious attempt to ban guns, there will be widespread civil disobedience?” But no, with you it’s straight to full on gunpocalypse. Big talk, don’t you think? I guess it’s OK because ocassionally you put that winky emoticon in there. If you’d look at the context around the text you quoted, you’d see that I wasn’t just talking about gun rights there. I was addressing the question of what happens when _any_ population of people begin to feel that “their” social system no longer represents them and will not allow them to regain their voice through peaceful means. They have two choices in such cases: knuckle under, and accept marginalization (or in extreme cases, extermination), or resort to unlawful means of changing their social order. I was neither approving nor speculating about the possibility that some gun owners might see their case as being so desperate. But, in fact, I would expect a tremendous amount of civil disobedience in the event of a gun ban. Nearly all of it along the lines of “Why, no sir, I lost all my guns in a water-skiing accident three years ago.” ---
**Author:** ![thelurkinghorror](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7c8e57/32.png) [@thelurkinghorror](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/thelurkinghorror)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 10:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/153 "2013-01-08T10:05:34Z")
> [@Dave\_Hartwick](#): > > A lot of people have seen videogames as a probable cause for massacres. If there was evidence of a connection between games and violence, I, as a gamer, would support restrictions on games. Responsible gun owners do the same-- note that I do not consider the leadership of the NRA to be responsible. I am not an NRA member but perhaps a fellow traveler. LaPierre’s scapegoating of video games was appalling. Perhaps there might be a case if video games were shown to cause functional violence (there is no evidence, by the way. Some studies have made the claim that there is a link; most are bullshit social psychology with poor operational definitions. There are also many that say no link). But both gun control advocates and video game banners often make the same claim: military weapons are effective and have certain features so let’s ban similar firearms that have similar features (shoulder thing that goes up) but aren’t shown to be any more dangerous than hunting rifles. Or let’s ban/restrict Mortal Kombat because somebody claimed GTA made them kill, or let’s sue Pac Man because someone ate pills and then ate somebody, because Jack Thompson or Gloria Allred said it’s relevant. But until the AWB can be shown to be anything but an arbitrary list of things that people who know nothing about guns decided are bad, I won’t support it. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/154 "2013-01-08T17:33:24Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > The strength and persistence of that paranoid fantasy never ceases to astonish me, but not nearly as much as does the number who embrace it. I didn’t claim they’d win; I claimed they’d fight. Confiscation (and yes, some people are openly calling for confiscation, not just registration of grandfathered weapons) would NOT be a matter of overwhelming compliance with a few nutcases making the news. Try fifty or a hundred Wacos or Ruby Ridges- that’s closer to what would happen. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > What that faction, whether or not it includes you, likes to call “oppression via tyranny” in this context is something \*most \*of us call “making a law via the democratic process”. Ample means to object to it, or modify or prevent it, are available via the democratic process to all of those who accept their responsibilities as citizens, _not requiring the use of deadly violence._ > > Why does that require explanation for anyone? :dubious: In a democracy yes, if you lose fair and square you’re supposed to submit. The problem is that laws are being proposed that the gun proponents- rightly or wrongly- believe were supposed to be guaranteed by the Constitution to be off the table. Short of an amendment to the Constitution “via the democratic process”, the possibility of a federal gun ban wasn’t supposed to be part of what was ever agreed to. Would you be so sanguine about a federal law banning Islam as inherently seditious, or a renewal of the Alien and Sedition Act, if either were passed by the simple three-fifths majority needed in the legislature? ---
**Author:** ![Ravenman](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/ravenman/32/2929_2.png) [@Ravenman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ravenman)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 6:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/155 "2013-01-08T18:56:22Z")
Retired General Stanley McChrystal, former commander in Afghanistan and longtime Special Forces soldier, takes the opposite opinion of the Marine who wrote that letter: > [@](#): > > “I spent a career carrying typically either an M16, and later an M4 carbine,” he said. “And an M4 carbine fires a .223 caliber round, which is 5.56 millimeters, at about 3,000 feet per second. When it hits a human body, the effects are devastating. It’s designed to do that. And that’s what our soldiers ought to carry.” > > The general added, “I personally don’t think there’s any need for that kind of weaponry on the streets and particularly around the schools in America. I believe that we’ve got to take a serious look. I understand everybody’s desire to have whatever they want, but we’ve got to protect our children, we’ve got to protect our police, we’ve got to protect our population. And I think we have to take a very mature look at that.” > **[Yahoo News: Latest and Breaking News, Headlines, Live Updates, and More](https://news.yahoo.com/)** > > The latest news and headlines from Yahoo News. Get breaking news stories and in-depth coverage with videos and photos. ---
**Author:** ![VinylTurnip](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/b2d939/32.png) [@VinylTurnip](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/VinylTurnip)\ **Post date:** [January 8, 2013, 11:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/156 "2013-01-08T23:03:25Z")
Yeah, but who cares what that pussy thinks? He let a _black_ man order him around. ---
**Author:** ![gms453](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/g/50afbb/32.png) [@gms453](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/gms453)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2013, 12:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/157 "2013-01-09T00:34:45Z")
> [@VinylTurnip](#): > > Yeah, but who cares what that pussy thinks? He let a _black_ man order him around. …and allowed himself to be made a fool of by a reporter from the Rolling Stone. I mean, really, how clueless can you be? ---
**Author:** ![Nunzio\_Tavulari](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/b9bd4f/32.png) [@Nunzio\_Tavulari](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nunzio_Tavulari)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2013, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/158 "2013-01-09T11:59:29Z")
The soldier who wrote this letter was on Piers Morgan last night. He said: > [@](#): > > “The American people aren’t as gun-happy and trigger-happy as they’re being painted out to be by the media. They are smarter than that. They know when to hold their fire. They know when to fire,” said Boston. “We can increase the chances of success for these people that get caught in situations for their survival by education. We’ve got to stop making this a taboo subject to everyone because it’s scary. We can’t give up our rights because we are afraid.” I believe in more restrictions but not a ban on guns. I don’t think anyone plans to ban them anyway. I am definitely not afraid. I question how good a soldier this man was if he is afraid after all of the self-defense training he was given and the events that he experienced. ---
**Author:** ![ElvisL1ves](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/5daacb/32.png) [@ElvisL1ves](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ElvisL1ves)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2013, 5:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/159 "2013-01-09T17:56:26Z")
> [@Lumpy](#): > > Try fifty or a hundred Wacos or Ruby Ridges- that’s closer to what would happen. How did \*those \*work out for the gun fetishists there, huh? If there have to be some standoffs to apprehend fifty or a hundred violent criminals, well, why is that a good reason not to do it? > [@](#): > > The problem is that laws are being proposed that the gun proponents- rightly or wrongly- believe were supposed to be guaranteed by the Constitution to be off the table. Short of an amendment to the Constitution “via the democratic process”, the possibility of a federal gun ban wasn’t supposed to be part of what was ever agreed to That’s a problem of education in the face of ideologuism, which is a problem not constrained to the gun topic. There are \*no \*unlimited rights in the Constitution; there can’t be when they conflict with each other everywhere you look. The “right” to bear arms conflicts with the right to life, among others, for instance. Those conflicts are resolved by limiting rights, via the democratic process. ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [January 9, 2013, 6:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100/160 "2013-01-09T18:16:30Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > That’s a problem of education in the face of ideologuism, which is a problem not constrained to the gun topic. There are \*no \*unlimited rights in the Constitution; there can’t be when they conflict with each other everywhere you look. The “right” to bear arms conflicts with the right to life, among others, for instance. Those conflicts are resolved by limiting rights, via the democratic process. I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: when did private possession of firearms become such an existential threat to the population at large that allowing guns became contradictory to the right to life? We were fine with guns up until maybe the end of the 1960s- what changed? As to limiting rights, I’d like a straight answer to the following questions: give me an objective standard for limiting the right to own weapons that does not allow the limit to be set at zero. “Assault weapons” are “too dangerous”? Ok, since guns are by design supposed to be able to kill people, what makes assault weapons categorically different from revolvers or hunting rifles- what’s the qualitative difference rather than a quantitative difference? Explain the principle by which they could be banned that couldn’t be applied to all guns. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100.md?page=7) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/no-maam-a-marines-letter-to-senator-dianne-feinstein/646100.md?page=9)