The Second Amendment is an important part of the Bill of Rights. It’s designed essentially as an insurance policy for the rest of our rights. Until you can deprive a people of their arms, you can’t really deprive them of any other right to any significant degree.
It also means gun control advocates can’t run the table on our right to keep and bear arms as they’d prefer.
That’s even more true after the Bruen decision. In that case, Justice Clarence Thomas put down a pretty significant test to determine if any gun control law can be considered constitutional. Basically, if the Founding Fathers didn’t have something similar, you can’t either.
And since there weren’t many gun control laws back then, that’s an issue for the anti-gun zealots.
So now, it seems some of those folks want to change the rules of the game so they can win.
It is long past time to repeal the Second Amendment.
Why?
…
To become a civilized country. Civilized countries enact laws that actually protect their children. Unlike every single other developed or large country in the entire world, the number one cause of death for children in the US is firearms. If this works for some states, let them remain the Wild West gun toting free-for-all that the Second Amendment has produced. If other states or counties or cities wish to join the civilized world, take away the Second Amendment and give them the chance to do so.
It’s funny how being part of the civilized world means giving up your rights in exchange for the fleeting chance of safety when there’s not really any reason to believe that to be the case.
Yes, we have loose gun laws compared to the rest of the developed world and tend to have higher crime. Of course, we have higher non-gun crime than the rest of the world has in total, so I’m not sure making guns go away will do all that much.
That’s because despite being developed and an economic powerhouse, we also have some challenges they don’t have in Europe.
So no, banning guns won’t make us suddenly see crime disappear.
But as stupid as this claim is, this one is even dumber:
To prevent Civil War 2.0. With approximately 400 million guns floating around US society and an armed MAGA-driven polarization met by an increasingly armed leftist radical wing, along with evermore virulent rhetoric and escalating numbers walking around open-carrying war weaponry in public, half of America believes that civil war is coming. Tossing out the Second Amendment would free legislatures and city councils to begin seriously ending such belligerent displays of combat weapons. Curbing gun sales in all the places that voted to do so would begin to dial down at least some of the terrible tension flaring up by the Oathkeepers and others who have called for civil war.
Oh, that’s just so cute.
Do you honestly think banning guns will prevent a civil war? That’s just adorable of you.
It won’t, but it may well spark one.
The author, of course, has a lot more of his “points” on why we supposedly need to repeal the Second Amendment, but they all boil down to “I don’t like guns and I think we should be able to pass all the gun control we want.”
Which is fine. It’s perfectly acceptable to want things.
All he’s got to do is get two-thirds of a fairly evenly divided House and Senate to agree to pass a repeal, then get three-fourths of the state–most of whom are not interested in repealing it–to ratify it.
Conversely, one needs to get two-thirds of the state to ask for an amendment that would repeal the Second.
Take a good look around at the political landscape. If anything can come of just how divided we are right now, it’s that there can be no repeal of any part of the Constitution because not enough people can begin to agree that there needs to be one.
But what else can you expect from the side of the debate that routinely stomps their feet and demands we capitulate to their wants?
