2nd amendment is written for something that doesn't exist. Therefore, the 2nd amendment shouldn't exist.

or Pandora - Box, take your pic.

Whats the solution here then,
A war on guns? Another reason for authorities and police to detain, harrass and violate our rights?
Because you know damn well, only a fraction of people possessing arms now would surrender their firearms, and there is plenty of them in circulation now to keep things ballistic.

Not clinging onto any metaphorical firearms as much as I am advocating pragmatism and wincing at the thought of another reason for police overreach. I think advancing mental health care would be time and energy better spent

Word: Australia.

for all the righteous preaching that, for all intents and purposes, could never be implemented.

But by all means, ignore practical measures that could save lives such as stricter purchasing laws or gun buyer mental health screening. Just swing for that ideological fence of eliminating the second amendment and pat yourself on the back.

The gloried 'your either 100% with us or against us' mentality..
bravo!

Practical steps need to be taken. It's a holy war with regard to guns, mostly on the side of the gun owners. They would rather die, which is a testament to their state of mind.

I agree with the mental health issues. I also think it needs to be way way harder to buy certain types of guns. Some not so much. Licensing? Why not, I gotta have a license to do plenty of things. Training courses? Sure. Mental health screening? Why not? Have a restraining order on you, lose the guns and your license until that gets worked out.

It just needs to be impossible for unstable people to get their hands on a gun.

Despite tragic events that make headlines, overall gun violence peaked in 1993 and has fallen since then.

Even people being shot live on the air. That doesn't sound much like a low to me.

That is what works for them and the NRA says so!
...end of discussion

A well educated public being necessary to the function of a democratic republic, the right of the people to keep and read books, shall not be infringed.

This sentence is grammatically identical to the Second Amendment. Who gets to keep and read books: a well educated public, or the people?

Because the right to keep and bear arms belongs to the people, not a well regulated militia. Like just up thread, I often read on DU that the Second Amendment limits the keeping and bearing of arms to members of the militia. That is not what it says. Please stop claiming that.

Flawed premise: The bill of rights restricts only government, and authorizes nothing.

All rights belong to the people.

and there is some sleazy guy with a gun?
What could possibly go wrong?

Its not my job to tell you what you should feel, anymore than its yours to tell me what I should feel.

Me, personally, I'd be staying aware of your hypothetical 'sleazy guy' whether he visibly has a firearm or not.

Wait... I guess that's not guaranteed in the Constitution.
Every man, woman, and child for themselves! Yay, 2A!

Or you chose not to educate her how to exercise it?

The only person responsible for changing how you feel, and indeed the only person capable of changing how you feel, is you.

But that never happens. Does it?

Even though I had nothing to do with it?

Why could they use the phrase "well regulated" when writing the 2A, but it is heresy to use the word "regulated" in 21st century America?
If I could actually "choose" as you suggest, I would choose that there were common sense regulations on who, what, and where guns could be carried.
But my daughters and I don't get that choice.

The answer is:

Its irrelevant because amendment 2 restricts only government and authorizes nothing, so as such, your question and the premise it is based on, are flawed.

Regulate the militia to your hearts content, in line with the authority congress was actually granted to do so:


(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

https://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311

But those wingnuts who presume to interpret it are Neanderthals.

all the changes to the firearms laws on the federal level that they want, it's just not going to happen.

The fact that after Newtown with the vast, overwhelming majority of citizens in favor of sensible, minor, anemic changes and it STILL couldn't happen should drive that point home to even the staunchest opponent of the 2A. The idea of repealing the 2A gets mentioned and makes me chuckle every time. I fail to see how any logical person thinks that's even remotely possible given the current state of our political system.

Until we change campaign finance there can be no actual representation. They don't work for us. The notion of any change or new law that doesn't directly benefit their donors is just a pipe dream. Getting behind the movement to amend for finance reform seems the only pragmatic first step towards any fundamental change.