Yes. The right is for the people, including the ‘well regulated’ part. You don’t have rigorous regulation, and kids get shot, which also infringes on their very same right to the system being well regulated enough to keep them protected.
If you have an 18/19 year old lad with a legally purchased gun entering a school, guess what. It infringes on all the rights of those kids and teachers in the line of fire because the regulations aren’t up to standard enough to stop these things.
@therevenantrising. I’m frustrated because Tumblr won’t let me tag them, but their whole post doesn’t respond to OPs point one iota. Focus in their response was all on military, which wasn’t even something OP was referring to. As much as the term is overused theses days, this does appear to be a case of strawmanning. At least @siryouarebeingmocked is addressing the actual point made by OP, even if we do disagree.
I’d suggest stepping back before responding, recognise the person you want to reply to does not have the power to take away any of your weapons. A knee-jerk or passionate reaction is not required. You have time to think the response through, read and take time to properly understand the post you are reading, and maybe figure out ways to persuade OP, or any other potential readers. Getting overly defensive, and so emotionally driven that you don’t even respond to the actual points being made won’t help your cause.
What I’ve noticed happening a lot, since chiming in myself. The extremely pro-gun crowd have a habit of putting words in the mouths of those who are pro-stringent regulation. The impression is that we are probably more disliked than those who actually do want all guns, or all forms of weaponry banned. I guess gun-centrists are more threatening, since we want to find middle ground and a degree of compromise. I’ve personally been treated as though I’d see all Americans without their precious guns, but that simply isn’t true.
Rather, guns should be kept away as much as possible from children and teenagers. Full, strict background checks should be in place, with a focus on all health, not just mental. Should require taking safety courses, first aid, a licensing system similar to cars. Something needs to be done about these gun shows I keep hearing about, too.
I’ve heard regulation of ‘assault rifles’ is impossible because it’s a meaningless term. In that case, regulate by gun specs instead. Determine limits in performance, such as range and speed, then limit the sales of guns accordingly. No one needs a gun with hella range or hella speed or never ending mags.
When I adopted my dog, someone came around to my house to have a conversation, and to check we had and adequately sized garden for him. Same should happen here in which someone calls around to a person’s house, has a sit-down conversation. Inspects where the gun will be kept. Inspects non-lethal, passive forms of house/person defence that could and should be taken before gun ownership, so that guns are kept as a last resort measure.
Guns are highly dangerous tools, and should be treated as such. Owners need to be proven to be responsible, and if they are passionate about guns, and defence, and protection, then they should desire measures like these, because regulation is also about defence and safety, and ensuring people are protected by the second amendment.
Now, before responding, consider: I am not American. I am not a threat to your ownership in any capacity. I don’t want to take any good person’s guns away. I want guns and weaponry and the ability to harm or kill others to be treated in a respectful, carefully considered manner. The second amendment is clearly a balancing act between regulation to preserve people’s freedom to not get killed, and the freedom to protect one’s self in an emergency. There has to be some middle ground. There has to be some recognition that armed humans are dangerous.
Before responding, take a step back, and consider first whether it would be worth your time to. I’m not going to reply again, because the subject is honestly pretty tiresome, and I very likely won’t be swayed because I’m British and mostly (but not entirely) happy with the way in which my country handles guns. Not so much happy with how we deal with personal defence in general, but that would be broadening the issue to an irrelevant extent.
If you do choose to reply, I suggest it be for the purposes of convincing readers, and a feels before reals, sjw-like approach will not convince anyone.
I’m personally always happy to agree to disagree on complex, subjective issues like this one, to save on an unhelpful back and forth, but feel free to respond to get your own points across to anyone who might read and be convinced one way or another.
origamiaround
vaporwave
amandla
yousharknotpass
kianamaiart
theartofmadeline
gummygunk
