Where do you stand on Gun Control?

[MarkD]

Repeal the second amendment, confiscate all privately-owned firearms, improson anyone who resists.

Precisely why we need the 2nd Amendment ^^^.

I'm opposed to this kind of thinking^^ about the 2nd Amendment: that people need guns to be able to shoot at government officials who intend to confiscate their guns. If all three branches of the federal government have decided to ignore the 2nd Amendment and confiscate guns, the right way to react to is comply, not rebel and get violent. I think it was Abe Lincoln who said that in a democracy there is no successful appeal from the ballot to the bullet.

[MarkD]

Repeal the second amendment, confiscate all privately-owned firearms, improson anyone who resists.

Precisely why we need the 2nd Amendment ^^^.

I'm opposed to this kind of thinking^^ about the 2nd Amendment: that people need guns to be able to shoot at government officials who intend to confiscate their guns. If all three branches of the federal government have decided to ignore the 2nd Amendment and confiscate guns, the right way to react to is comply, not rebel and get violent. I think it was Abe Lincoln who said that in a democracy there is no successful appeal from the ballot to the bullet.

You stated the issue exactly right, but came to the wrong conclusion. When government  ignores and abuses the rights of its citizens, that is when the citizenry has a duty to resist. It was Thomas Jefferson who wrote on how the people should respond when government engages in this kind of abuse, saying "it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government".

You used the word "rights" in plural form, but I ask you whether you are willing to hold a civil war, as Kingpoleon is suggesting, solely over one "right," the 2nd Amendment right? Is it really worth having a war between a heavily armed minority and a not-as-well-armed majority solely because the majority wants to confiscate arms?

[MarkD]

Repeal the second amendment, confiscate all privately-owned firearms, improson anyone who resists.

Precisely why we need the 2nd Amendment ^^^.

I'm opposed to this kind of thinking^^ about the 2nd Amendment: that people need guns to be able to shoot at government officials who intend to confiscate their guns. If all three branches of the federal government have decided to ignore the 2nd Amendment and confiscate guns, the right way to react to is comply, not rebel and get violent. I think it was Abe Lincoln who said that in a democracy there is no successful appeal from the ballot to the bullet.

It has often been said that those who make peaceful revolution impossible will make violent revolution inevitable. How much more, then, do those who make armed peace impossible make armed civil war unavoidable?

It says a great of a government - that it fears weapons in the hands of a few of its citizens.

I'm trying to avoid having a civil war but you're telling me that civil war will be inevitable. Perhaps you already know who the winner will be, since one side will have lots of armaments and the other side won't.

[MarkD]

Repeal the second amendment, confiscate all privately-owned firearms, improson anyone who resists.

Precisely why we need the 2nd Amendment ^^^.

I'm opposed to this kind of thinking^^ about the 2nd Amendment: that people need guns to be able to shoot at government officials who intend to confiscate their guns. If all three branches of the federal government have decided to ignore the 2nd Amendment and confiscate guns, the right way to react to is comply, not rebel and get violent. I think it was Abe Lincoln who said that in a democracy there is no successful appeal from the ballot to the bullet.

You stated the issue exactly right, but came to the wrong conclusion. When government  ignores and abuses the rights of its citizens, that is when the citizenry has a duty to resist. It was Thomas Jefferson who wrote on how the people should respond when government engages in this kind of abuse, saying "it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such government".

You used the word "rights" in plural form, but I ask you whether you are willing to hold a civil war, as Kingpoleon is suggesting, solely over one "right," the 2nd Amendment right? Is it really worth having a war between a heavily armed minority and a not-as-well-armed majority solely because the majority wants to confiscate arms?

“First they came for the gun owners, who wanted to bear guns, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a gun owner.

“Then they came for the journalists, who wanted freedom of the press, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a journalist.

“Then they came for the Muslims, who wanted freedom of religion, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Muslim.

“Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me. Not only that, but they had destroyed any potential armed opposition by seizing guns. Not only that, but they had destroyed any written, intellectual opposition by seizing journalists. Not only that, but they had destroyed all religious places of worship not loyal to them.”

Anyone who will not protect even one right for others can have no claim to any protection of their own rights.

*sigh*

Well, this theory we're debating is kind of moot anyway because the hypothetical that Chris Murphy 2020 talked about -- the hypothetical that all three branches of the federal government are going to render such a narrow interpretation of the second amendment that they will begin a monumental effort to try to confiscate all guns -- is quite far-fetched, not likely going to happen, and I would be contacting my federal legislators to say that I do not support confiscating guns. I just wanted to go on record that I do not support going to war solely over the issue of gun control. I also want to go on record that I get bored with debates that include slippery slope arguments.

[MarkD]

I've thought this through some more and what I really should have said is that I'm against both extremes of the gun control debate: I'm opposed to this extreme ...

Repeal the second amendment, confiscate all privately-owned firearms, improson anyone who resists.

... and I'm opposed to the other extreme of If the federal government takes away my right to own a gun, I'll use my gun(s) against them to defend my right.