# Time to change 2nd Amendment **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [December 15, 2012, 10:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102 "2012-12-15T10:46:26Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![bup](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/6bbea6/32.png) [@bup](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bup)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 1:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/161 "2012-12-17T01:50:42Z")
Well, Obama’s going to try. Let’s see what happens. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 1:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/162 "2012-12-17T01:54:47Z")
> [@jasg](#): > > Why? History and lack of political will. We are far from the beginning of a fight… (and characterizing this as a fight gets us off on the wrong foot) > > I would argue that the mentally ill may never be responsible, but in the current case, the mother was irresponsible for allowing her son access to the weapons. If she was mentally ill, then the sales process failed. In my ideal world, if she had survived she would be prosecuted for felony murder. > > As for anger, I have nothing better than the waiting periods and background checks we already have. When I was younger we had mental institutions that locked people up. It was decided at some point that many of the people didn’t need to be incarcerated so they were released. The institutions are pretty much gone now. I’m sure somewhere there are still places like that but the standards have been changed and I assume for the better. Maybe not. I have no way of knowing unless an older mental health expert weighs in. but other things have changed since I was a kid. We played outside with other kids without adult guidance from a very early age. there was no pee-wee anything-ball. All games were pickups with other neighbor kids. I walked or rode my bike to kindergarten with with sister who would have been in the 3rd grade at the time. TV was watched at night with my parents with only 3 networks to choose from. They signed off in the evening. The shows were probably hokey by today’s standards. It seems a lot has changed in my lifetime. ---
**Author:** ![FE3O4ENAIL](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/f/ba9def/32.png) [@FE3O4ENAIL](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FE3O4ENAIL)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 2:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/163 "2012-12-17T02:00:39Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > I was pointing out that YOUR so-called argument is not worthy of respect, and that YOU had to resort to avoiding the point entirely instead. :rolleyes: > > Sometimes one is wrong. That’s life. Accept it. > **FE3O4ENAIL** , since you’re having trouble with this cognitive dissonance stuff too: At its base, it’s about saving the most lives possible, isn’t it? The number of lives saved by guns is small enough that you have to list individual incidents in order to tell yourself you’re making a point. The number of lives cost by guns is much, much higher, of course, as the previous links show. So, your belief that you’re making a good point is true, it’s just the opposite of the point you think you’re making. Thanks, I think I now have a better understanding of your point of view. ---
**Author:** ![jasg](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/j/f0a364/32.png) [@jasg](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/jasg)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 2:11am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/164 "2012-12-17T02:11:10Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > OK, what foot would be the right one? Something gradual, reasoned and effective. Bans and amendments are fights too unlikely to succeed. > [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > How about not letting the damn things be available in the first place? Is that an option for you? Actually, I would love that - but in the real world… How about things already working in other countries, which avoid bans and acknowledge the existence of millions of weapons we have to live with? - Canada has tough [requirements](http://www.rcmp-grc.gc.ca/cfp-pcaf/fs-fd/moving-emmenager-eng.htm) before you can buy or move there with a gun including personal references and notification of spouses/conjugal partners. - Buyback programs were quite successful in Australia, at least in reducing death by suicide. - Stringent education, annual licensing, fees and storage requirements - with periodic reviews - works for machine guns (and automobiles). and way out there… - Tort reform to facilitate lawsuits against irresponsible owners/sellers whose weapons are involved in crimes. Perhaps even manufacturers and those you provide as references. ---
**Author:** ![stui\_magpie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stui_magpie/32/11010_2.png) [@stui\_magpie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stui_magpie)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 2:22am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/165 "2012-12-17T02:22:44Z")
Apart from Police, Military and Security, why does anyone need to own a hand gun or any kind of self loading rifle, whether semi or fully automatic? I’ll make exceptions for handguns for target shooters, but the kinds of handguns used in Olympic type competition are not the same as the ones that “normal” people own. Surely a bolt or lever action rifle is sufficient for hunting? ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 2:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/166 "2012-12-17T02:27:53Z")
> [@stui\_magpie](#): > > Apart from Police, Military and Security, why does anyone need to own a hand gun or any kind of self loading rifle, whether semi or fully automatic? That’s not a legitimate question. The Second Amendment does not require any showing of need to own a gun. ---
**Author:** ![stui\_magpie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stui_magpie/32/11010_2.png) [@stui\_magpie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stui_magpie)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 2:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/167 "2012-12-17T02:42:52Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > That’s not a legitimate question. The Second Amendment does not require any showing of need to own a gun. But the second amendment also doesn’t specify what type of guns. If the legislature limited the kind of “arms” that were legal to “Bear”, that could be done without infringing the amendment. When determining what type of “arms”, it is a perfectly legitimate question IMO. ---
**Author:** ![Magiver](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/4491bb/32.png) [@Magiver](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Magiver)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 2:44am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/168 "2012-12-17T02:44:15Z")
> [@stui\_magpie](#): > > Surely a bolt or lever action rifle is sufficient for hunting? they’re great for shooting people too. Ask a Kennedy. Do you honestly think someone can’t kill you without a gun? ---
**Author:** ![stui\_magpie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stui_magpie/32/11010_2.png) [@stui\_magpie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stui_magpie)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 2:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/169 "2012-12-17T02:47:57Z")
> [@Magiver](#): > > they’re great for shooting people too. Ask a Kennedy. > > Do you honestly think someone can’t kill you without a gun? Absolutely not. But it takes no special skill or strength to pull a trigger. Convenient access to firearms make it so much easier for unhinged people to kill multiple people. ---
**Author:** ![Oakminster](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/o/77aa72/32.png) [@Oakminster](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Oakminster)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 2:55am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/170 "2012-12-17T02:55:38Z")
> [@stui\_magpie](#): > > But it takes no special skill or strength to pull a trigger. Unless, of course, you want to actually hit your intended target, which is harder than it looks. Also takes considerable strength to control the recoil. ---
**Author:** ![stui\_magpie](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/stui_magpie/32/11010_2.png) [@stui\_magpie](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/stui_magpie)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 3:04am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/171 "2012-12-17T03:04:27Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > Unless, of course, you want to actually hit your intended target, which is harder than it looks. Also takes considerable strength to control the recoil. I’m aware of the aiming bit, disagree with the recoil. I used to own quite a number of firearms and hunted regularly when I was younger. Now I do neither. ---
**Author:** ![kidchameleon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/898d66/32.png) [@kidchameleon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kidchameleon)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 3:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/172 "2012-12-17T03:25:20Z")
> [@stui\_magpie](#): > > Absolutely not. But it takes no special skill or strength to pull a trigger. Lynnette Fromme might disagree. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/173 "2012-12-17T03:58:36Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > Really? No one uses guns for hunting? Target shooting? Competitive shooting? Skeet/Trap/Sporting Clays don’t exist? Certain Olympic events don’t exist? Yes, there are other, very minor, secondary uses for guns. Rifles are good for hunting deer and pheasant, no doubt about it. But that is not the reason for the widespread use of guns in our culture. But these very minor, ancillary uses hardly justify the carnage that are done with guns. ---
**Author:** ![Evil\_Captor](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/f17d59/32.png) [@Evil\_Captor](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Evil_Captor)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 4:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/174 "2012-12-17T04:00:32Z")
> [@Oakminster](#): > > That’s not a legitimate question. The Second Amendment does not require any showing of need to own a gun. /me points to the thread topic. That particular line of argument is a non-starter in this case. We are talking about rewriting or entirely dumping the Second Amendment. ---
**Author:** ![kidchameleon](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/k/898d66/32.png) [@kidchameleon](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/kidchameleon)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 4:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/175 "2012-12-17T04:16:39Z")
> [@Evil\_Captor](#): > > Yes, there are other, very minor, secondary uses for guns. Rifles are good for hunting deer and pheasant, no doubt about it. But that is not the reason for the widespread use of guns in our culture. But these very minor, ancillary uses hardly justify the carnage that are done with guns. Surely you have a cite then. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 4:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/176 "2012-12-17T04:20:43Z")
[QUOTE=Evil Captor] But these very minor, ancillary uses hardly justify the carnage that are done with guns. [/QUOTE] Justify to who? You? Who decides what is or isn’t a minor use, or what value there is even if it’s a single use item? Again, you? Tobacco has one and only one use…what justifies the carnage it does? Alcohol only has one use as well, at least on the consumption end…what justified the carnage it does? Which causes the most carnage of those three? Which causes the least? Who decides justification for our society? It constantly amazes me that every time (EVERY time) we have something like this tragedy happen the gun grabbers come out of the woodwork to try and justify their world view that we need to ban guns and change the 2nd Amendment. Doesn’t it get old, and don’t ya’ll knees get tired of all the jerking around on this stuff? [QUOTE=jasg] Something gradual, reasoned and effective. Bans and amendments are fights too unlikely to succeed. [/QUOTE] I agree with the last part of your statement anyway. Bans and amendment changes are unlikely to happen except in the fantasy world that some folks live in the anti-gun side. > [@](#): > > Buyback programs were quite successful in Australia, at least in reducing death by suicide. Except that their suicide rate is actually higher than here in the US. IIRC, EC mentioned Japan earlier…an attempt at another of his lovely apples to oranges comparisons about the fact that the Japanese have strict gun control laws and have much fewer incidents of these sorts of shooting sprees that happen in the US. Suicide rates in Japan, however, are also much higher than in the US…7th highest in the world, IIRC (the US is closer the the 40th highest). So, is it the gun control, or is it cultural differences we are seeing at play? Possibly the Japanese have a different outlook when they go nuts than to shoot up a school full of little kids, and instead they turn inward. They certainly don’t seem to need guns to whack themselves, however. At any rate, no…it’s not time to change the 2nd Amendment. No, we don’t need a rash of new knee jerking laws or regulations about guns or gun control. Yes, it’s tragic that this sort of thing happens. I feel terrible for the parents of these kids…and sickened by the people who are using this tragedy to try and push through their political agenda, especially considering how bone headedly stupid it is, and how unlikely it is to have any effect other than mental masturbation and world view validation. We aren’t going to ban firearms in the US…not today. Not 10 years from now. Maybe, if there is a sea change in attitudes, there might be a gradual stiffening of regulation over time, but if you tried to ban guns now it would be an epic fail. If you tried to change the 2nd it would be an epic fail. If you DID manage to ban guns (i.e. put in laws making it illegal to own or possess a fire arm) it would be an epic fail…there are literally hundreds of millions of the things in the US, and 10’s of millions of gun owners who wouldn’t give up their guns. It would be similar to bans on illegal drugs…basically, it would make a fairly large percentage of the population into criminals. You’d probably push MORE people over the edge, since attempts to grab guns in the last 50 years in this country have already made many on the pro-gun side touchy on this subject. So, it would be like the War on Drugs…it would be expensive, it would be resource intensive, and in the end you’d get maybe 5-10% of the ‘illegal’ guns…and probably spur currently law abiding citizens to purchase or sell guns on the black market or through illegal channels. ---
**Author:** ![Der\_Trihs](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/der_trihs/32/233_2.png) [@Der\_Trihs](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Der_Trihs)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/177 "2012-12-17T04:28:57Z")
> [@kidchameleon](#): > > Surely you have a cite then. You want a “cite” for whether or not something is justified? :rolleyes: > [@XT](#): > > It constantly amazes me that every time (EVERY time) we have something like this tragedy happen the gun grabbers come out of the woodwork to try and justify their world view that we need to ban guns and change the 2nd Amendment. Doesn’t it get old, and don’t ya’ll knees get tired of all the jerking around on this stuff? Don’t be ridiculous. It’s not a “kneejerk” or even slightly unusual thing for people to want to ban something that kills lots of people. > [@XT](#): > > I agree with the last part of your statement anyway. Bans and amendment changes are unlikely to happen except in the fantasy world that some folks live in the anti-gun side. More nonsense. The people who live in that fantasy world are the pro-gun people, who are incapable of admitting that they’ve won, they’ll get to keep their guns and the slaughter will go on indefinitely. They are always filled with paranoia that any moment now Obama is going to steal all their guns to the UN can take over the country and institute Satanism as the state religion. ---
**Author:** ![trabajabamos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/47e85d/32.png) [@trabajabamos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/trabajabamos)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 4:29am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/178 "2012-12-17T04:29:57Z")
Possibly dumb question: The Second Amendment alludes only to “arms” which seems like it ought to be a placeholder for any conceivable weapon. Why do we as a society agree that some weapons are improper for personal ownership and use? I can have knives, handguns, rifles, and the like, but I cannot have grenades or missles. I can’t drive around in a tank full of shells. But those things are “arms” too, right? Where is the line drawn and who drew it? ---
**Author:** ![trabajabamos](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/47e85d/32.png) [@trabajabamos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/trabajabamos)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 4:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/179 "2012-12-17T04:36:25Z")
Also, if the line is arbitrary (I believe it must be, to some extent), why is the idea of moving it to exclude a currently legal weapon so outlandish? Is it more or less outlandish to suggest making standards more permissive so I could own the anti-aircraft gun I’ve always wanted or mount a turret to my car? ---
**Author:** ![Terr](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/839c29/32.png) [@Terr](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Terr)\ **Post date:** [December 17, 2012, 4:43am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102/180 "2012-12-17T04:43:20Z")
> [@XT](#): > > It constantly amazes me that every time (EVERY time) we have something like this tragedy happen the gun grabbers come out of the woodwork to try and justify their world view that we need to ban guns and change the 2nd Amendment. Doesn’t it get old, and don’t ya’ll knees get tired of all the jerking around on this stuff? It’s called “dancing on graves”. A very common phenomenon. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102.md?page=8) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/time-to-change-2nd-amendment/644102.md?page=10)