Guns, The 2nd Amendment and the Legitimacy of Their Necessity

[Lany Freelove Cassandra]

I'd like to know what law makes having a 33 round mag a "right"?

Having a limited size magazine does not infringe upon you owning the gun.

[Buckwheat]

FNR,

how and why should your "right to own a gun" trump other people's right to life? For example the right of schoolchildren to be educated in a safe environment.

The way I see it, it is not about the "rights" of gun owners. It is just not about them. It is about the right of their potential vistims not to have to fear random mass shootings in schools/shopping centres/on the streets.

[butterbumps!]

Are those who're advocating for "mandatory" gun lessons/ safety in public schools and as critical "lifestyle lessons" seeing this as being mandatory for everyone regardless of one's desire to ever own/ touch/ look at a gun irl, as well as regardless of geographic location?   I can't say I'm super thrilled with the idea of my 8.5 million neighbors becoming super proficient with guns, nor the idea of gun use becoming super normalized in my incredibly densely packed area.

[JonSnow4President]

Are those who're advocating for "mandatory" gun lessons/ safety in public schools and as critical "lifestyle lessons" seeing this as being mandatory for everyone regardless of one's desire to ever own/ touch/ look at a gun irl, as well as regardless of geographic location?   I can't say I'm super thrilled with the idea of my 8.5 million neighbors becoming super proficient with guns, nor the idea of gun use becoming super normalized in my incredibly densely packed area.

I don't believe the argument is everyone should be proficient in guns so they can defend themselves, etc.  The argument as I understand it (and what I am in favor of) is safety.  Point it in a safe direction, education about very basic ballistics (ie up is a safe direction for a shotgun filled with birdshot.  It is not for a rifle or a pistol. Shooting without a backstop, etc.), and very basic "This is a trigger.  Don't touch it until you are ready to destroy something.  Don't point it at something you're not willing to destroy, etc."

At least that's what I hope they mean.  That's what I mean when I say something like mandatory training in schools.  

 

[Bennis of the Brown Shield]

Are those who're advocating for "mandatory" gun lessons/ safety in public schools and as critical "lifestyle lessons" seeing this as being mandatory for everyone regardless of one's desire to ever own/ touch/ look at a gun irl, as well as regardless of geographic location?   I can't say I'm super thrilled with the idea of my 8.5 million neighbors becoming super proficient with guns, nor the idea of gun use becoming super normalized in my incredibly densely packed area.

Eh. Lots of countries still have mandatory military service, and even more did during the Cold War era and earlier. During that you not only learn how to handle weapons safely, but also how to actually fight with them, as well as being a soldier in general. Yet mass shootings were and are still mainly an American phenomenon. In the developed world at least. 

 

[The Anti-Targ]

I think that in the US it is necessary. It can be assumed that people will at the very least encounter a firearm in their lifetime, and a very large minority of the US will actually have a firearm. I understand the objection. I figure the NRA can pay for it. (said in my best Trump voice)

If you're curious, I'm modeling a lot of this off of countries where this has worked - Switzerland and Israel. Both of which have everyone have some familiarity with firearms and both of which have very little gun violence. 

And the Swiss one is also an interesting one, because their gun laws are specifically with the notion of making everyone an able-bodied member of the militia - you know, what the 2nd amendment actually says. 

Israel and Switzerland both have compulsory military service right? So compulsory firearms training makes sense in those countries. I don't agree with compelling everyone to learn how to use a gun. It should be compulsory to have a minimum number of hours of training in safety and use for anyone who wants a gun owners licence. Aside from that everyone should be left to make their own decisions.

[Larry of the Lawn]

On the whole, I like Kal's outline for gun policy.  I don't think magazine-capacity is much worth regulating, like he said it's easy to work around it and there are already tons of high-capacity mags out there.  

Not currently a gun owner but I have owned them in the past and learned to shoot around age 10.  My mom was on a women's pistol team and I'd get to shoot her .22 ruger and .38 colt revolver a couple times a week.  Once I have more freezer space and access to decent land I'd like to take up deer hunting again and will probably get a decent rifle.  Ethically sourced meat is something I've started caring about over the last few years and deer hunting is pretty much the best way to do that, imo.  

Can't say I necessarily support gun-training in schools.  The best advice you can give a kid about a gun, is not to touch it unless they are under the direct supervision of a responsible adult.  That's really all the gun safety anyone needs to know.  Mandatory gun safety / training before you buy one?  Sure.  Taught in schools?  Pointless.   I can't imagine a real life situation where a kid is going to need to know how to handle a gun.  If their parents feel otherwise, fine.  But seems to me to be a waste of public resources -- if the goal is to reduce accidental or intentional gun deaths, best to just teach kids to not handle a weapon at all.  I wouldn't want mandatory chainsaw training in schools either, even though if I ever have a child he or she will be damned proficient with one.  If anyone can explain to me how this mandatory safety training would help I'm all ears.

These mass shootings also seem to be self-perpetuating - there's a correllation between the number of guns out there and frequency of mass shootings.  And you know what spurred gun sales?  The post-Sandy Hook fear of guns being taken away.  There were fucking ammo shortages in the US after Sandy Hook, because they demand was that high.

I like the insurance idea.  If there's anything that people universally understand and respect in the US, it's money.  Hit them where it hurts.  Not going to stop someone with a death wish, but might make someone think twice about not reporting a private sale, etc.  

A lot of this stuff is shit the NRA was totally cool with in the 90s.  I think a registry is a great idea, and i think confiscation is completely impossible logistically, so if it's something you rationally fear, I have no issue labelling you a gun-nut.  I can understand your frustration with the anti-gun crowd, especially the people in that group that haven't been around firearms.  It is frustrating to hear terms like 'semi-auto' thrown out as a synonym for dangerous (all guns are fucking dangerous).

 

I also think it's stupid to deny that mass shootings are anything other than exactly what to expect from the current gun culture in the US.  Honestly I'm kind of surprised there aren't more of them.

 

[butterbumps!]

<snip>

At least that's what I hope they mean.  That's what I mean when I say something like mandatory training in schools.  

ok, so is this being suggested as mandatory for all Americans regardless of their intention to ever own/ touch/ look at a gun, and regardless of said American's location and local attitude toward guns?   As in, if I'm in an area where pretty much no one owns guns or cares about them, is the idea that our kids would be getting this training too?  I'm asking if those advocating for this are advocating for universal mandatory training.

Meh. Lots of countries still have mandatory military service, and even more did during the Cold War era and earlier. During that you not only learn how to handle weapons safely, but also how to actually fight with them, as well as being a soldier in general. Yet mass shootings were and are still mainly an American phenomenon. In the developed world at least. 

idk if this is that relevant to what I was originally asking, but as it applies, I kind of don't see the wisdom in understanding this condition of mass shootings in the US and then making guns even that much more normalized and ubiquitous.

[Bennis of the Brown Shield]

 

this isn't that relevant to what I was originally asking, but as it applies, I kind of don't see the wisdom in understanding this condition of mass shootings in the US and then making guns even that much more normalized and ubiquitous.

It probably wouldn't help against the mass shootings, but it might bring down the deaths from accidents and general carelessness. Aren't those a lot more numerous? 

[butterbumps!]

It probably wouldn't help against the mass shootings, but it might bring down the deaths from accidents and general carelessness. Aren't those a lot more numerous? 

are we talking about compulsory training for gun owners (and perhaps their families)?   or are we talking about educating each and every American on the practicalities of gun use/ safety regardless of desire to own or operate a gun?

i'm in favor of compulsory training for gun-owning families.   i see less wisdom in making gun operation normalized and ubiquitous for everyone.   not to mention I think it's an astounding misuse of resources.    

[OldGimletEye]

Are those who're advocating for "mandatory" gun lessons/ safety in public schools and as critical "lifestyle lessons" seeing this as being mandatory for everyone regardless of one's desire to ever own/ touch/ look at a gun irl, as well as regardless of geographic location?   I can't say I'm super thrilled with the idea of my 8.5 million neighbors becoming super proficient with guns, nor the idea of gun use becoming super normalized in my incredibly densely packed area.

Without commenting specifically on whether mandatory gun training is good or not good policy, I think it's interesting that we've gone from "I have a right to own a gun" to "Everyone has a duty to learn about guns, whether they want to or not."

Is this the conservative version of big guberment? 

[Bennis of the Brown Shield]

are we talking about compulsory training for gun owners (and perhaps their families)?   or are we talking about educating each and every American on the practicalities of gun use/ safety regardless of desire to own or operate a gun?

i'm in favor of compulsory training for gun-owning families.   i see less wisdom in making gun operation normalized and ubiquitous for everyone.   not to mention I think it's an astounding misuse of resources.    

Well, considering how very widespread guns are in the USA I'm not sure that it would actually be more resource effective to do as you say rather than just having some mass education on it via the school system. At least not in the more gun-heavy states. 

[JonSnow4President]

ok, so is this being suggested as mandatory for all Americans regardless of their intention to ever own/ touch/ look at a gun, and regardless of said American's location and local attitude toward guns?   As in, if I'm in an area where pretty much no one owns guns or cares about them, is the idea that our kids would be getting this training too?  I'm asking if those advocating for this are advocating for universal mandatory training.

idk if this is that relevant to what I was originally asking, but as it applies, I kind of don't see the wisdom in understanding this condition of mass shootings in the US and then making guns even that much more normalized and ubiquitous.

I planned on being a US military pilot and transitioning that to a civilian pilot job when I was 17.  When I was 22 (graduated from college with a masters), I planned on being an accountant.  I'm 24, and I'm trying to get out of the accounting world into something operational.  

I think this is about giving the information for safety should they encounter it.  I've been over at a friend's house before and come across one.  I had a classmate in school whose tenant shot himself playing with one (as a fucking adult in a gun-loving state btw).  

The goal of course is to try and prevent the accidental deaths.  I would hope gun owners would educate their own children sooner (like with sex), but this is an area where a little bit of education goes a long way.  Given the number of accidental deaths/injuries, it seems like a fair use of resources for a basic safety course (week long at the max IMO), just like we have determined that some level of sex ed is necessary (and I think rational people argue for more).

[butterbumps!]

Well, considering how very widespread guns are in the USA I'm not sure that it would actually be more resource effective to do as you say rather than just having some mass education on it via the school system. At least not in the more gun-heavy states. 

to be paid for entirely by gun-owners as part of the price of owning guns?    or is that yet another externality of gun ownership that others will be paying for?

forgive me if this is an obvious question, but why is something that will serve to render guns more ubiquitous and normalized being seen as an answer, rather than the opposite?   

 

I planned on being a US military pilot and transitioning that to a civilian pilot job when I was 17.  When I was 22 (graduated from college with a masters), I planned on being an accountant.  I'm 24, and I'm trying to get out of the accounting world into something operational.  

I think this is about giving the information for safety should they encounter it.  I've been over at a friend's house before and come across one.  I had a classmate in school whose tenant shot himself playing with one (as a fucking adult in a gun-loving state btw).  

The goal of course is to try and prevent the accidental deaths.  I would hope gun owners would educate their own children sooner (like with sex), but this is an area where a little bit of education goes a long way.  Given the number of accidental deaths/injuries, it seems like a fair use of resources for a basic safety course (week long at the max IMO), just like we have determined that some level of sex ed is necessary (and I think rational people argue for more).

and the answer is to educate everyone in case they encounter guns rather than just making guns rarer?

that line of thinking reminds me a lot of how much money and effort i wasted as a smoker buying all these air purifiers and the like to contain the smoke rather than just not putting the smoke there in the first place.

[Lordsteve666]

Being in the UK I don't really have much experience of guns but my father-in-law has several and I've been out hunting with them and fired them so I know exactly what they can do.

I think the biggest challenge to bringing in any changes in he US is the way guns are perceived in general. In the UK the general view is a gun is a tool used by a limited number of people (farmers, gamekeepers, pest control) or in some situations it is a leisure item used in highly controlled situations (target shooting etc) by a tiny minority. Outside of that most people will only ever see a gun if the police are carrying one or they are in the armed forces. 
So the general view in the UK is that guns are not items to be treated the same way you'd treat a musical instrument you play for fun, or a sports car or sailing boat you take out at weekends.

In the US they are seem as a much more mundane and often unfortunately trivial item so the general population can't gets it's head round any change to that. The influence and presence of guns is so ingrained into your society. And that's before you even get into the constitutional side of things or the gun lobby or conspiracies about guns being tracked & confiscated.
To change anything you're going to have to change the way you view the things first.

I think also as others have suggested some sort of familiarization teaching in schools would be good. The kids don't need to know how to shoot the things but teach them about safe storage, usage and all the dumb things not to do. Heck i'd even include a part on the consequences of things going wrong, take them to see the A&E dept. and see what a mess a gun can do. Get kids to see gun as a potentially highly dangerous item that should be handled with respect so they go home full of the knowledge of what a gun really is and not just some cool macho toy you get to play with at the weekends.

[TerraPrime]

The mandatory safety lesson in schools is not a bad idea.

 

But what makes us think that's remotely feasible when we can't even have a decent sex ed curriculum because some parents don't want their kids exposed to those ideas?

[Commodore]

leftists love their mandates and prohibitions

NRA is a good resource for safety/training, voluntary of course

http://training.nra.org/

[Free Northman Reborn]

Being in the UK I don't really have much experience of guns but my father-in-law has several and I've been out hunting with them and fired them so I know exactly what they can do.

I think the biggest challenge to bringing in any changes in he US is the way guns are perceived in general. In the UK the general view is a gun is a tool used by a limited number of people (farmers, gamekeepers, pest control) or in some situations it is a leisure item used in highly controlled situations (target shooting etc) by a tiny minority. Outside of that most people will only ever see a gun if the police are carrying one or they are in the armed forces. 
So the general view in the UK is that guns are not items to be treated the same way you'd treat a musical instrument you play for fun, or a sports car or sailing boat you take out at weekends.

In the US they are seem as a much more mundane and often unfortunately trivial item so the general population can't gets it's head round any change to that. The influence and presence of guns is so ingrained into your society. And that's before you even get into the constitutional side of things or the gun lobby or conspiracies about guns being tracked & confiscated.
To change anything you're going to have to change the way you view the things first.

I think also as others have suggested some sort of familiarization teaching in schools would be good. The kids don't need to know how to shoot the things but teach them about safe storage, usage and all the dumb things not to do. Heck i'd even include a part on the consequences of things going wrong, take them to see the A&E dept. and see what a mess a gun can do. Get kids to see gun as a potentially highly dangerous item that should be handled with respect so they go home full of the knowledge of what a gun really is and not just some cool macho toy you get to play with at the weekends.

But in the UK you also have a fundamentally different view on self defense, to the point where you can get into deep shit if you were to kill someone who has invaded your home in the middle of the night.

My articulation of it is that in general your citizens are encouraged to flee from evil, rather than confront it.

 

[Lordsteve666]

But in the UK you also have a fundamentally different view on self defense, to the point where you can get into deep shit if you were to kill someone who has invaded your home in the middle of the night.

My articulation of it is that in general your citizens are encouraged to flee from evil, rather than confront it.

 

Probably true to some extent although that is changing to some extent after some high profile cases involving home defences ending in a fatality. 

The idea of a gun being great for home defence is one thing but does the number of home intrusions in the US really warrant such a large proportion of the country using it as justification for owning one? I have no idea what your crime figures are but I've always looked at that side of the argument as more exaggerated scare-mongering from the gun lobby to drum up sales. Are there really so many break-ins where the intruder wants to kill you that justifies everyone having a loaded gun ready?  Plus in the UK, if you confront someone and do attack them the chances are you'll injure them not kill them outright. Which means cases of mistaken identity, or intentionally attacking (as has happened in some of your own high profile cases) when you know the person is no threat are not as likely to have a fatal outcome. 

[Free Northman Reborn]

At its most basic level, a gun is a force equalizer. Without guns, large, young men will almost always have an advantage over women, older people, and less physically powerful young men.

With a gun, the dominance of the physically powerful is removed, and anyone has a fair chance to defend the lives of themselves and their loved ones. The gun is ultimately empowering to the weak, and arguably a fundamental part of the triumph of civilization over brute force.