John Oliver nails it on gun control

[Yo_Mama_Been_Loggin]

[Hoyt]

1. He sure does nail it. Makes you wonder about Congress and those selfishly supporting guns.

[AScott]

2. The right of individuals to bear arms is explicitly defended in a Supreme Court decision.

Shoe bombs...not so much.

Short of repealing the 2nd Amendment (which is a non-starter for the foreseeable future), don't expect meaningful reform of gun laws.

[Hoyt]

3. Guess you never read Stevens' Dissent. Add one more non-right wing Justice, and your 2nd Amendment

is practically worthless, save for a gun or two in the home.

[AScott]

4. Shouldn't that be "our" 2nd Amendment?

[Ed Suspicious]

8. It might be my right but I do not hold it dear.

Regulate the 2a like we regulate the 1a.

[Hoyt]

12. No, because I happen to not skip over "A well regulated militia" phrase like the right winger and

gun fanciers.

[Martin Eden]

6. Plenty of room for more regulations that can withstand SCOTUS rulings

The debate is not about prohibiting guns for law-abiding citizens, but those who oppose more effective regulations frequently jump to that conclusion.

[AScott]

7. In the short time I've been here, I've seen plenty of posts from people who do in fact want to

prohibit gun ownership by law-abiding people.

[Ed Suspicious]

9. Sounds good to me . The only constant in gun deaths is the presence of

guns . Remove the guns you remove the gun deaths. Sounds great to me.

[spin]

18. Perhaps you can develop a magic spell and wave your wand and ...

all civilian owned firearms will simply vanish.

Short of that I can see no practical way to ban and confiscate all firearms in our nation. Many gun owners would simply refuse to turn them in and since most firearms are not registered it would be very difficult to know who owned firearms.

The effort could split the nation in half right down the middle as many of the red states might chose to secede from the union. A number of states already have movements to do so.

Another problem is that some extremely conservative gun owners have suspected that eventually the government will try to confiscate firearms and have buried caches of guns and ammo in PVC pipes. Such people might react violently to any effort to confiscate firearms and engage in terrorist activities to disrupt our nation. They might fail but they definitely could create a lot of havoc and violence. Remember that we spent an enormous amount of money training our military and many vets are "patriotic" and have actual combat experience. I'm not talking about an army of rebels trying to overthrow the government but instead guerrilla warfare.

Guerrilla warfare is a form of irregular warfare in which a small group of combatants such as armed civilians or irregulars use military tactics including ambushes, sabotage, raids, petty warfare, hit-and-run tactics, and mobility to fight a larger and less-mobile traditional military.

How would you go about confiscating firearms? Would you personally volunteer to attempt to disarm gun owners in your town and risk your life to break down the doors and make entry with a swat team? Would your local police support such an effort? Would our military be willing to cordon off neighborhoods and search each home for illegal firearms if it meant they might have to shoot fellow Americans who had done nothing wrong except to refuse to be disarmed?

You also ignore the fact that firearms are used many times every year for legitimate self defense. Often home invaders are chased off or shot by homeowners before they can terrorize a family. If someone breaks into my home and threatens me, I would rather have a 12 gauge shotgun in my hands than a baseball bat.

I realize that firearm tragedies occur and indeed one has happened in my own family. I support rational, reasonable and well thought out changes to our national and state gun laws to help insure as much as possible that only honest, responsible and sane citizens can buy and own firearms. I also strongly support major improvements to our mental health care system. I support strong punishments for anyone caught illegally carrying a firearm in public. I feel we need to improve our NICS background check system and insure that it is up to date. I feel we should increase the punishment for anyone involved in the straw purchase of firearms or smuggling these weapons into our cities for sale.

But I do not support banning and confiscating all civilian owned firearms as I feel it is a pipe dream.

I am not going to miss any sleep worrying that the government is going to confiscate my firearms any time soon. Gun control advocates were unable to even pass another assault weapons ban.

[Martin Eden]

10. In the 12 years I've been here I've seen plenty of posts aimed at strawmen

Did John Oliver , the OP, or anyone in this thread advocate prohibiting gun ownership by law-abiding people?

If not, then please don't jump to that conclusion. IMO, it's better to respond to the actual content of what someone wrote.

on edit:
Well, someone has now. But not at the time of your first post in this thread.

[TinkerTot55]

11. Then stay longer and see.....

....that the majority of us just want common-sense regulation....along with tight regulation and/or banning of military weapons, bazookas, tanks, death-ray guns, phasers, photon torpedoes, and other weapons of mass destruction.

[Hoyt]

13. Heck, in most states you can't legally walk down the street with a sword or large knife, but

just about any yahoo can carry a gun. That makes no sense.

[Major Nikon]

14. You have no constitutional rights which are absolute

Even the dipshit Scalia did not say the right to keep and bear precious couldn't be regulated by local government. In fact, he specifically said it could.

[rickyhall]

5. Depends on how "we" read it

[ConservativeDemocrat]

15. That's a good argument for not doing those stupid shoe security scans

- C.D. Proud Member of the Reality Based Community

[SheilaT]

16. That does rather sum it up.

And the gun enthusiasts love to point out that gun deaths are (supposedly) going down every year. Well, that's nice, but how about they get a fuck of a lot closer to zero before anyone starts thinking fewer gun deaths are so good.

[needledriver]

17. No change in the regulation of guns?

Try to buy a magazine fed semi automatic sporting rifle with a pistol grip in California or New York.

[appal_jack]

19. Yup, and too many DU'ers want to take that nation-wide.

Yup, and too many DU'ers want to take those sorts of unconstitutional bans nation-wide (all the while saying that they're not banning guns). Cosmetic regulations of firearms do not improve safety or security, but they (legitimately) inflame firearms enthusiasts' anger. Similarly, mandatory removing of shoes at airports does not improve safety or security. I oppose both.

A healthy respect for the Second Amendment (and all the rest of the Bill of Rights) is a necessary precondition for Democrats to regain the South and garner the passion of Americans nationwide. Many of us southern DU'ers speak-up on this issue, but too often it falls on deaf or hostile ears.

-app

[geardaddy]

20. Completely nails it.

Saw this on Twitter. Thanks for posting!