General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsDavid Hogg corrects Fox: 'I'm not against the Second Amendment'
BY JOHN BOWDEN - 03/24/18 05:56 PM EDT
Link to tweet
Parkland Fla. shooting survivor David Hogg criticized Fox News by name on Saturday for misrepresenting his views on gun control, accusing the right-leaning news network of portraying him as against the second amendment.
In remarks to a Fox News reporter, Hogg said the network had "messed up" his views and those of his fellow Parkland students, 200 of which attended the March For Our Lives in Washington, D.C. on Saturday.
"What a lot the media, and especially Fox News, has messed up with me is theyve made it seem like Im trying to take away peoples guns that Im against the Second Amendment, Hogg said. My father is a retired FBI agent. I have guns in my house. Im not against the Second Amendment.
Hogg went on to say that he supports "common sense" reforms to both gun laws and America's mental health system, though he didn't name any specific provisions in the interview. "Im trying to push for common sense gun reform and mental illness reform so we can make sure that these individuals that have a criminal background that are mentally unstable and have a history of domestic violence are no longer able to get a gun," he said.
http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/380135-parkland-student-corrects-fox-im-not-against-the-second
Oneironaut
(5,504 posts)aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)Once you start advocating for banning [currently legal to own via form 4473 semi-auto] rifles, shotguns, and handguns in certain configuration. It hard to see how youre for the second amendamnt.
Sure, youre allowed to say what ever you want, but consistency matters.
Edited to include the []
Shipwack
(2,162 posts)Desiring better regulation of firearms is not inconsistent with being pro 2nd Amendment.
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)Not the people.
But yes I agree that regulations can happen, but gun bans are an extreme and in my view unconstitutional form or regulation.
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)Military-style assault rifles in the hands of civilians. But you can frame it like you want, obviously.
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)With arms that wouldnt be useful for military action
NastyRiffraff
(12,448 posts)Nobody is saying that assault rifles should be banned for the military, as you know.
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)In Heller is just arms that are popular.
OliverQ
(3,363 posts)The 2nd Amendment was written for State militias, because there was no standing federal military. That situation no longer applies. Your guns will do absolutely noting to stop the US military.
Bettie
(16,110 posts)the function of the State Militia is served by the National Guard. We're not in a situation anymore where every male citizen of a certain age is expected to show up for militia service.
But, people are so afraid that "the gub'mint is gonna take mah gunz" that they see a bunch of dead kids as acceptable and a good outcome if they can snuggle up at night with an AR15 or similar.
renegade000
(2,301 posts)Speaking as a gun-owner myself, I think it's ludicrous to say that "any configuration" of firearm should be protected. And it's not the current interpretation of the 2nd either, seeing as how there are a variety of "configurations" heavily regulated by the ATF....
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)Currently legal to own via form 4473 semi-auto rifles, shotguns, and handguns.
XRubicon
(2,212 posts)But, I am ok with you keeping and bearing non repeating arms- that is your only right.
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)Thank you for your transparency.
XRubicon
(2,212 posts)See, i don't need a card or a gun to be a man.
Thank you for self identifying as part of the problem.
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)Who said anything about being man based on a card or gun.
Thats awfully presumptuous - or worse.
Angry Dragon
(36,693 posts)Squinch
(50,955 posts)XRubicon
(2,212 posts)Edited...
Squinch
(50,955 posts)aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)Youll have to wait longer.
shraby
(21,946 posts)aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)At least we partially agree.
TubbersUK
(1,439 posts)I think that's what I recently read anyway.
world wide wally
(21,744 posts)You need to look in the mirror because you have far too many enemies.
Nevernose
(13,081 posts)If you need an AR15 for protection, youre either vastly overestimating the threat in which case an AR15 wont help you or youre vastly underestimating the threat, in which case no number of AR15s you own is ever going to make a difference.
Why dont these people ever stop to think about all the shit theyre scared of?
kentuck
(111,102 posts)It's difficult to see him as a high school student. He seems to have the wisdom of a much older person.
rainin
(3,011 posts)means "without any regulation, restrictions, or laws". What an absurd and self-serving (for gun sellers/manufacturers) interpretation of the 2nd amendment.
We need to elect representatives who can govern in the best interest of human lives.
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)... the 2nd Amendment means no regulations, restrictions, or laws concerning firearms.
TubbersUK
(1,439 posts)rainin
(3,011 posts)OliverQ
(3,363 posts)They don't even want stronger background checks.
Response to OliverQ (Reply #30)
Post removed
OliverQ
(3,363 posts)The NRA specifically pays off Republicans to block any form of gun restriction and they've mentioned many times they oppose gun regulation.
The NRA is a sponsor of domestic terrorism. Hopefully soon the entire organization will be destroyed either by the rising anti-gun movement, or their FBI investigation linking them to Russian funding.
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)...after this weekend.
OliverQ
(3,363 posts)A Florida GOP candidate came out last week as pro-NRA. Then he dropped in the polls.
And the NRA is currently under FBI investigation as they're being funded by Russians.
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)even extremely popular ones like universal background checks, or restrictions on those with non-felony domestic violence convictions.
It's getting tiresome, and frankly indefensible. Maintaining what amounts to a hobby should not override the safety and rights of others, and it does, far too often.
aikoaiko
(34,170 posts)Its just not true that they "lobby against any politician who so much as sneezes in the direction of regulation"
Phoenix61
(17,006 posts)Way before the Manchin-Toomey proposal.
rainin
(3,011 posts)I'm ready to ride that slope all the way to regulating guns strictly, so strictly that it is difficult to get them and ownership comes with obligations such as licensing and training.
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)Gothmog
(145,303 posts)Hogg is correct. Read the Heller opinion
Humanist_Activist
(7,670 posts)no other developed nation has the firearms violence we do, and firearms are hundreds of times more effective at killing than damn near any other device individuals can possess.
X_Digger
(18,585 posts)Careful, I don't think Heller means what you think it does.
That phrase is about what the second amendment protects.
As one of, if not the best selling rifle in the US at the moment, I'd say it certainly qualifies.