Thread: Conservative Pundit Calls For Repeal of 2nd Amendment

Leave it to the FAKE NEWS NYT to utilize some no-name, govmnt hack, to put out their propaganda.

Originally Posted by HayJenn

Good ideas although I'm always wary on the "mental" health issue. That's a pretty slippery slope.

One cannot allow citizens with a history of violence access to these weapons. 'Mentally Ill' may have been a little 'broad'.

For the life of me I don't understand why we don't treat guns like we do cars.

Since regulations on cars, the deaths by cars has gone way down

And nobody is suggesting we get rid of all cars.

Exactly.

Originally Posted by HayJenn

Why can't conservatives also support some gun restrictions?

This is what he said in the link.

“Gun ownership should never be outlawed,” he writes. “But it doesn’t need a blanket Constitutional protection, either.”

I don't think that's a particularly controversial stand to take.

BTW, for sure he is a conservative. Some were cancelling their NYT subscriptions because of his views on climate change.

He's not a conservative on the issue of the second amendment is what I said.

To be conservative means you are traditional and averse to change or innovation - which is the opposite of being liberal - which means you are open to change and willing to discard traditional values.

So if he's arguing for change and the discarding of tradition (i.e. repealing the second amendment) then he is clearly not conservative on this issue.

As to whether or not the majority of his political views are conservative or liberal I haven't a clue.

Originally Posted by Blues63

One cannot allow citizens with a history of violence access to these weapons. 'Mentally Ill' may have been a little 'broad'.



Exactly.

History of violence is different than mental illness so I agree with you there. Especially men who have been convicted of domestic abuse.

Originally Posted by HayJenn

History of violence is different than mental illness so I agree with you there. Especially men who have been convicted of domestic abuse.

Yes, only some of the mentally ill would qualify, but those that did would have to be excluded.

Originally Posted by Jeremy

He's not a conservative on the issue of the second amendment is what I said.

To be conservative means you are traditional and averse to change or innovation - which is the opposite of being liberal - which means you are open to change and willing to discard traditional values.

So if he's arguing for change and the discarding of tradition (i.e. repealing the second amendment) then he is clearly not conservative on this issue.

As to whether or not the majority of his political views are conservative or liberal I haven't a clue.

That does not describe some conservatives I know. Things change, nothing stay static and you have to adapt to those changes. We are very far pass 1776 and many of our laws reflect that.

No, he is conservative. I've read his columns.

Originally Posted by HayJenn

That does not describe some conservatives I know. Things change, nothing stay static and you have to adapt to those changes. We are very far pass 1776 and many of our laws reflect that.

No, he is conservative. I've read his columns.

Let me try this again:

He is not conservative on the issue of the second amendment. That is simply a fact.

No one is conservative on every issue or liberal on every issue.

No one said it was still 1776. And like I just got done telling you - I am not familiar enough with this individual to say whether or not the majority of his political views are conservative or liberal. What I do know is that his position on the second amendment is not conservative.

Now he may very well be conservative on other issues. But that really has nothing to do with what I posted.

Originally Posted by Jeremy

Let me try this again:

He is not conservative on the issue of the second amendment. That is simply a fact.

No one is conservative on every issue or liberal on every issue.

No one said it was still 1776. And like I just got done telling you - I am not familiar enough with this individual to say whether or not the majority of his political views are conservative or liberal. What I do know is that his position on the second amendment is not conservative.

Now he may very well be conservative on other issues. But that really has nothing to do with what I posted.

So if he's not "conservative" on the gun issue - why do 90% of the people in this country support background checks?

Just like liberals, not all conservatives agree in lockstep on all issues.

You do know that right? I have conservative friends that support gay rights and some gun restrctions. Last time I checked, that did not take away their "conservative leaning" credentials.

Originally Posted by HayJenn

So if he's not "conservative" on the gun issue - why do 90% of the people in this country support background checks?

Just like liberals, not all conservatives agree in lockstep on all issues.

You do know that right? I have conservative friends that support gay rights and some gun restrctions. Last time I checked, that did not take away their "conservative leaning" credentials.

I already explained to you why he was not conservative on the gun issue.

Because to be conservative on an issue means you are traditional and averse to change or innovation - which is the opposite of being liberal on an issue- which means you are open to change and willing to discard traditional values.

I'm aware not all conservatives agree in lockstep on all the issues. I just got done telling you that. Here I'll repeat it again for you:

Originally Posted by Jeremy

Let me try this again:

He is not conservative on the issue of the second amendment. That is simply a fact.

No one is conservative on every issue or liberal on every issue.

No one said it was still 1776. And like I just got done telling you - I am not familiar enough with this individual to say whether or not the majority of his political views are conservative or liberal. What I do know is that his position on the second amendment is not conservative.

Now he may very well be conservative on other issues. But that really has nothing to do with what I posted.

And I said nothing about taking away anyone's "conservative leaning" credentials - so God only knows why you decided to put such a phrase in quotes as if I had said them. In fact I just got done telling you the opposite - and that I have no idea what the majority of his political views are. They could very well be conservative I told you (refer to the second bold portion of my last post).

All that I said.... again - is that this individual is not conservative on the issue of the second amendment. And that is just a fact.

Originally Posted by Blues63

One could start with paid amnesties conducted regularly, and the government pays above market value for the weapons.

Destroy the weapons handed in.

Restrictions on availability of the more military style weapons and ban auto and semi-auto as unnecessary.

Make gun storage in safes mandatory subject to Police inspection.

Make licencing mandatory and disqualify convicted criminals and the mentally ill from owing guns.

Stiff penalties for infringements.

These measures would show a decrease in availability over time and slowly modify the culture. The US needs to fall out of love with guns, and this will take a few generations. But it really needs to be done yesterday.

Despite pesky details these are all make-sense ideas.