SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the anthropogenic-population-change dept.
We have a recent report by the US government that climate change is almost certainly caused by humans. However, we don't have the same rigor in gun death statistics; instead policy debate can rely only on FBI crime statistics which aren't directly comparable year-over-year due to changing measurement methodology (see "Caution to users").
This is because the NRA put pressure on the CDC through a Republican Congress to halt this research, under the logic that it promotes the cause of gun control.
But how likely is it that this is intentional, to use the US Second Amendment as an ongoing lightning rod for public attention (in a "bread and circuses" sense) while political business continues as usual on the back end (e.g. Paradise Papers)? Obama and a Democratic congress had the opportunity to restart this, which would presumably be just as "common sense" as the actual reforms they have been promoting on this issue, since whoever was actually supported by the facts would presumably have a motivation to set the program back in motion to improve support for their proposals.
(Score: 4, Insightful) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 09 2017, @03:12AM (13 children)
As the revolutionaries noted, rights predated the government; rights are endowed by the Creator (e.g., they are a natural aspect of being a sentient being), and many of those rights are not even listed explicitly by the Constitution (which is why the Constitution talks about unenumerated rights).
The People vest a government with authority by delegating to the government some of the authorities that go along with having a right; a government does not create rights, and can only restrict The People via their explicit delegation of authority.
The 2nd Amendment was the founder's way of pointing out that the right to bear arms is so important and fundamental that it should be mentioned explicitly as a right that must never be infringed—currently, the Constitution doesn't even allow The People to delegate to the government the attendant authorities of this right.
Were the US Government to alter the Constitution and then pass laws restricting the authorities of the right to bear arms, there would be so many people who felt that they had not legitimately delegated said authorities to the government that there would be, without a doubt, a second Civil War.
The tyranny would be the restriction itself of the right to bear arms.
(Score: 2, Troll) by jmorris on Thursday November 09 2017, @03:24AM (5 children)
DING!! DING!! DING!!
The AC nails it! Repeal the 2nd Amendment and blood will flow.
The theory of government we operate under says we have "certain inalienable rights" and any attempt to infringe them is automatically WRONG.
Progressives of course disagree with the American theory. Which is why I have so many times pointed this out by saying that is the primary political division today, Americans vs Progressives. If you are American the Progressives are not your Countrymen. They forfeit the right to call themselves Americans when they renounce every principle we live by.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 09 2017, @03:52AM (4 children)
> Repeal the 2nd Amendment and blood will flow.
But not one drop will be spilled by members of the NRA. Nada. Zero. Zip.
(Score: 2) by jmorris on Thursday November 09 2017, @05:12AM (3 children)
We are the children of Revolutionaries. The fire of Revolution lives on in us, we owe them the duty to uphold and defend what was given to us, that which was purchased so dearly in Patriot blood. Do not infringe our Rights. Do not confuse madmen and criminals with Patriots. If you were an American you would know these things.
If you want our arms we shall give the same answer Texas gave, "Come and take it" and the same as Sparta when they answered "Molon labe" and the same as the British received in reply to the question. How many times will free men supply the same answer to your question before you tyrants and cowards understand that NO MEANS NO.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 09 2017, @07:51AM
Fortunately is late in the evening, so my keyboard is safe from coffee.
But anyway, thanks for the laugh, has been a while since I had such a good one.
(Score: 2, Interesting) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 09 2017, @08:47AM
You know how's jmorris like potatoes? The best part of his family is underground.
Ah, memories. Can't say good memories but anyway old memories, from childhood.
That's exactly how the ruling communist party was teaching us why we should fight the enemy of the people. Revolutionaries and blood and our debt to their sacrifice, all the kit and caboodle. A pity you were born in US, you'd made a great politruk [wikipedia.org] with the fire in your belly and the spittle on the corner of your mouth.
If you weren't American, you'd realise how hollow this sounds.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 09 2017, @09:17PM
In Tejas, what they said was, "Moron Labia!" Being a gringo, you might have mis-heard.
(Score: 5, Insightful) by c0lo on Thursday November 09 2017, @03:36AM (6 children)
You already gave away you right to punch other in the face, remember that "your liberty ends where my nose begins"?
I'd say you did it willingly without the government needing to force you - which means it is possible to cede some of your rights without this implying tyranny.
And if the majority of people agree to repeal the second amendment, it would be tyranny for the government to continue to keep it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aoFiw2jMy-0 https://soylentnews.org/~MichaelDavidCrawford
(Score: -1, Redundant) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 09 2017, @03:43AM (1 child)
Indeed, such a right would be self-contradictory. Try again.
Also, tyranny implies restriction; a lack of restriction cannot be an example of tyranny. Try again.
Try again.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 09 2017, @04:06AM
Ah, the idiot libertarian again. I'll better stop here.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 09 2017, @04:45AM (3 children)
Indeed, such a right would be self-contradictory. Try again.
Also, tyranny implies restriction; a lack of restriction cannot be an example of tyranny. Try again.
Try again.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 09 2017, @04:55AM (1 child)
F/O
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Thursday November 09 2017, @05:40AM
Try again.
(Score: 3, Interesting) by maxwell demon on Thursday November 09 2017, @08:34AM
Such as the restriction of people from deciding what should be restricted and what shouldn't.
The Tao of math: The numbers you can count are not the real numbers.