What is going to come of our 2nd amendment?

[Sam1911]

I posted this list a while back, but let's take a look at what's been going on recently, shall we?

Since the sunset (death) of the '94 AWB:

Concealed carry theoretically possible in every state, and now practically available in nearly every state -- even ILLINOIS, just this year!

Recall of the Colorado State Senators in response to their ram-rodding strict new gun control laws after Sandy Hook.

Utter repulse of all federal gun control legislation in the "one last great gasp" moment provided by Sandy Hook.

Heller

MacDonald

Washington DC forced to allow handgun ownership

Federal Courts of the 9th District strike down CA's "good cause," "may issue" carry permit system, forcing "shall issue" permitting.

Repeal of the ban on concealed carry in national parks.

Various shifts for the better in BATFE technical opinions (pistol-to-rifle conversions, SIG "arm brace" stock, 3MR trigger groups and slide-fire stocks ok, etc...)

Numerous states passing anti-confiscation and "firearms freedom" acts.

Numerous states passing laws removing places from their concealed-carry-prohibited lists.

ASTOUNDING record sales of guns and ammunition, one effect being to bring "evil black rifles" into the spot as the most common type of gun sold and used in the US.

Discussion (at least...that's something!) of a national CCW reciprocity bill in US Congress.

Increasing numbers of states removing their prohibitions against silencers and SBRs/SBSs.

(Only somewhat related, but I'll mention it: Various states strengthening their protections for lawful defenders. So-called "stand your ground," and/or "castle doctrine" laws.)

And the list goes on!

Seems like we're heading into the toilet, fer shure!

Our RKBA hasn't been so strong since 1967!

Debbie Downers indeed!

 

[Midwest]

Self defense and concealed carry are much bigger reasons for interest in firearms than sport shooting or hunting. Like I mentioned, in my previous post. My cousin in laws are interested in firearms purely for self defense. Out of everyone in my family or related through marriage, only one is really interested in hunting.

If it wasn't for the concealed carry movement and interests in self defense, I think the future Second Amendment would really be in trouble. But that isn't the case. More and more people are carrying to protect themselves and their loved ones. One of the biggest increases in firearms ownership and carry permits are women. And I'll bet that pisses off Bloomberg and Feinstein to no end.

.

 

[AlexanderA]

I don't think the divide is generational; it's urban vs. rural. As more of the population concentrates in big cities, support for guns declines. Young people, especially, tend to gravitate to the cities because that's where the jobs are.

The ray of hope (for guns), though, is that city dwellers need guns for self-protection more than their country cousins do. As they become more aware of this, the antigun bias of urbanites could be reversed.

The future of gun ownership is definitely not tied to hunting and other rural pursuits.

 

[Tirod]

I'm going to say it - the older guys are consistently the problem children who don't support 2A as much as they think.

First, I don't see any carrying open. 99% of the locals who carry open are under 50. Then add cops, most of whom are - yep - under 50. That's because the sociological upbringing of the older generation restricted open carry, CCW was rare, and the older crowd just doesn't see a lot of the crime and conditions that cause others to worry about it. Older Americans don't live in young aggressive lower income neighborhoods. We got smart and moved up in earnings and moved out of the hoods. We're all suburbanized in safe developments and gated communities. Our jobs, experience, and age segregate us from rubbing elbows with younger workers, and our demeanor chills having open conversations with younger people because we just don't want to hear about all the fun they are having breaking all the rules of life - like we did.

Gun loving hipsters and Elmer Fudds don't mix well.

Plus all that other stuff already posted about the 2A being better off than ever. Nope, the future of the 2A is looking pretty rosy, we have National Concealed Carry on the horizon, it's just a matter of time. After that, there are more issues, like the illegal closing of the machine gun registery, and eliminating the NFA restrictons on silencers, which are patently stupid - deafness is a major health care issue. The average Ace Hardware store should be selling silencers right alongside water hammer arresters and Briggs and Stratton mufflers.

But, they don't, because the oldsters throw up their hands in resignation and keep saying "it can't be changed, things are getting blacker, the world is coming to an end!"

I'm 61, and there's a saying - lead, follow, or get out of the way. We need the oldsters in Congress and our state legislatures to get out of the way. This isn't the America I planned to live in, no. But it could be worse, it could be just like it was in 1969. Guns weren't so good back then, and neither were all the restrictive laws.

 

[huntsman]

The interest in hunting may be waning but I believe the need for personal protection is increasing, regardless of what indoctrination is being implemented. The old saying about no atheists in a foxhole applies to SD also.

 

[JustinJ]

The gun community better find a way to be more inclusive or the second amendment can be put on the endangered species list. The roster of NRA speakers at the last convention might have whipped up the base but it also alienated pretty much all but the far right. Right wing conservatives can not alone preserve gun rights in the long run.

 

[Skribs]

Good point re: congress and a new constitution. The problem is we have laws that require masters and doctorates in law to understand, when the law should be sufficient for someone with a middle school reading level to understand. We've got so many loopholes and this's-and-that's that it's ridiculous. We need to trim down the regulations that our government has, not just with firearms.

Sam, we might be winning, but we are on the cusp of losing the two branches we actually control. If that happens, bye bye rights at an alarming rate.

 

[Sol]

Glass half empty or full it doesn't matter. Remember the glass was full in the first place and then dumped, and a long, tiring and expensive fight to fill it back up. The glass is easily tipped, but refilling it is a long arduous road.

We should enjoy and fight for our rights while we are here. Nobody is 100% what the future holds.

Here's my hypothesis:
Our constitution doesn't align with many other countries declarations. I believe that we are trending towards a global community. The right to keep and bear arms doesn't fit in to globalization. Globalization isn't going to happen in our life times and it's doesn't have to be "bad" (how ever you choose to define it).

In theory, globalization will put a stranglehold on personal freedoms for the benefit if the collective.

It's all speculation, but if you look at the big picture you'll see that some of the most freedom hating people hold an elected office. People have to realize that when they see or hear anti-constitutiona rhetoric, it's not their neighbor spouting off, it's some bureaucrat.

 

[Skribs]

I'm not sure about that, Sol. A global community with limited government would be just fine. A lot of places around the world have lenient firearms laws.

But you are right, if we have a global government bent on controlling everyone on Earth, there will be restrictions.

I like you glass tipping over analogy.

 

[Hunterdad]

Firearms used to be a way of life. You never walked into the woods without one, now you can't get kids to even walk in the woods. The liberals have taken over the entire education system and is turning this generation of kids into a bunch of pansies. I give it another 50 or so years and the 2nd amendment won't mean a damn thing to anyone.

 

[Bexar]

I posted this list a while back, but let's take a look at what's been going on recently, shall we?

Since the sunset (death) of the '94 AWB:

Concealed carry theoretically possible in every state, and now practically available in nearly every state -- even ILLINOIS, just this year!

Recall of the Colorado State Senators in response to their ram-rodding strict new gun control laws after Sandy Hook.

Utter repulse of all federal gun control legislation in the "one last great gasp" moment provided by Sandy Hook.

Heller

MacDonald

Washington DC forced to allow handgun ownership

Federal Courts of the 9th District strike down CA's "good cause," "may issue" carry permit system, forcing "shall issue" permitting.

Repeal of the ban on concealed carry in national parks.

Various shifts for the better in BATFE technical opinions (pistol-to-rifle conversions, SIG "arm brace" stock, 3MR trigger groups and slide-fire stocks ok, etc...)

Numerous states passing anti-confiscation and "firearms freedom" acts.

Numerous states passing laws removing places from their concealed-carry-prohibited lists.

ASTOUNDING record sales of guns and ammunition, one effect being to bring "evil black rifles" into the spot as the most common type of gun sold and used in the US.

Discussion (at least...that's something!) of a national CCW reciprocity bill in US Congress.
That could go SCOTUS

Increasing numbers of states removing their prohibitions against silencers and SBRs/SBSs.

(Only somewhat related, but I'll mention it: Various states strengthening their protections for lawful defenders. So-called "stand your ground," and/or "castle doctrine" laws.)

And the list goes on!

Seems like we're heading into the toilet, fer shure!

Our RKBA hasn't been so strong since 1967!

Debbie Downers indeed!

Remember...a lot of those lifting of restrictions were based on SCOTUS decisions. It will take all of about five minutes for more restrictive and possibly confiscation firearms cases to hit the Court if one conservative judge is replaced by another Sotomayor/Kagan...or worse.

Political crapper rumor is Hillary would nominate Bill if she is elected to the presidency. Probably to keep him out of the Oval office side office. Almost absolute power in the hands of two people.

 

[Ryanxia]

I'm 27 and most of my friends also in their 20's-30's are very much gun enthusiasts. And since Sandy Hook we have become much more vested in the political climate of the US, tracking gun laws, contacting representatives, encouraging others to do the same and to vote for pro gun politicians (most of us are single issue voters, our Freedoms via the Second Amendment are what matter above all else).

We carry every day, help out new shooters and try to get non shooters out to the range. I've personally gotten two friends in the last two months to purchase their first firearm (wish I was that good at being a Christian ).

The key is to invest time in getting new shooters out to the range and to protect kids from anti-gunner influences when they're younger.

 

[Bexar]

As mentioned by others the mainstream Media is hard at the gun control agenda.

One of the planks in this MSNBC platform is "To stop gun violence."

http://www.msnbc.com/msnbc/growing-hope-change-begins-you

Watch the video...liberal democratic agenda using the same words Hope and Change.

 

[larryh1108]

It is interesting to note that a large part of new gun ownership is for the SD pieces, with women making up a big part of that as well. I feel the shift of gun buying has moved from hunting to SD and it makes me wonder if the newly armed moms are erasing the brain-washing the kids get in schools or if they are keeping their firearm ownership quiet to avoid PTA shame. If you combine all the new people who flocked to the evil black rifles with all of the new people who have purchased the new wave of small pistols to make CC easy, we may begin to see the tide turn our way. Maybe there is hope for our future generations after all.

 

[Sol]

Limited government is a dream of the less populous past.

Limited government needs a limited population.

 

[Skribs]

The amount of population is irrelevant. The idea of big government basically is that people are stupid and need the government to tell them what to do. The government believes they are the superior master race that are going to benefit their moronic subjects by telling them how to live their lives, and the people who support big government vote for people who agree with their philosophy so the people they vote in will tell people to live by their philosophy.

I don't need the government to tell me what food to eat, what weapons to carry (or not carry), what to believe in, or who to respect. I can figure that out for myself, and if something bad happens (i.e. I get sick from eating too much candy or fat from eating too much Mickey Ds) then I can either learn from that experience or continue to fail myself. I don't need the government to make life decisions for me, and it's insulting to the rest of the human race to assume they need that.

 

[George Dickel]

In years past, I'm 66 and have seen a few, the clientele of most gun shops I visited were older men. Granted I live in Clarksville, TN where the 101st Abn Div is stationed and that means a lot of young people living here also, but when I go into the local gun shops the young people out number the oldsters. We have a very nice indoor shooting range and when I go there the majority of the shooters are young people and a lot of them are young women that are shooting not watching their husband or boyfriend shoot.

There is a very nice outdoor shooting range managed by the state where I go occasionally and the same scene there, young people far out numbering the older folks. I have seen the same thing in Knoxville, where there is not large military presence, when I go there to visit the daughter and grandkids. My grandson and I and my granddaughter's boyfriend go shooting at an indoor range and the majority of shooters are young people, and again a lot of female shooters.

The AR is definitely the long gun of choice that I see the younger people shooting and it is surprising how many women shoot that type of rifle. My granddaughter learned how shoot using her then boyfriend's AR. My grandkids are 24 and 22 and both are ardent 2d A supporters as are their friends.

Try to find .380 or .32 ammo in the gun shops, it just isn't there. I don't believe that it is all men buying pistols in those calibers which is driving the demand for ammo. Local CCW class providers have enough women wanting a carry permit that they hold women only classes. I think the 2nd A is a lot safer than the media and Democrats want to accept.

 

[barnbwt]

"Limited government is a dream of the virtuous past.

Limited government needs a virtuous population."

That is more accurate a representation. The belief that humans are such lowly animals to deserve herding and domestication is, a philosophy of man being devoid of virtue. In which case, taking the notion at face value, I would have to have very little faith in the few self-proclaimed 'superior beings' that would desire to lead the flock. Collectivism only makes sense if you don't think very hard.

More people packed together typically means more temptation to pull one over one another, and the whole system degrades toward brutality as resources become ever more competitive. I personally don't believe as unassailable the conventional wisdom that urban areas have to be dens of corruption and despotism; I personally think the historical cycle is primarily due to the profits of social living (the added efficiency, pooled resources, specialization, sharing & caring) enabling self-destructive social habits (centralization, corruption, coercion, decadence, subjugation of the individual) that inevitably crash out the system. I personally think that if you can find a way to ensure people remember who they are after they get rich, a virtuous society is possible. I think it is possible, it just hasn't been discovered yet, though humans have apparently been chasing the idea for quite some time...

Some Plato:
"If you can conceive a better life for your future rulers than office-holding, a well-governed society becomes a possibility. For only in such a state will those rule who are truly rich, not in gold, but in the wealth that makes happiness--a good and wise life."
-The Republic

I think the same sentiment goes double for the people at large (who are ultimately the rulers of the aforementioned republic); "if you can conceive a better life for your massed citizens than dissolution, a virtuous populace becomes a possibility"

TCB

 

[TennJed]

I am a high school teacher and do everything I can to involve my students in not only politics, which I think is important to our very structure, but pro 2A causes. I let my entire class take the afternoon to watch the S. 649 debate and vote, and let them see my enthusiasm when it got voted down.

We really NEED to get our youth involved.

I love your involvement with school kids, but I am curious as to how others here feel about this statement. I have seen posts here in the past, complaining about anti gun teachers making their opinions known. I think most of us would complain if a school teacher took our child to a gun issue vote and cheered if their side won, or could you imagine the outcry if a teacher took one of our own to a anti 2A cause?

So are we ok with just our side doing it, both sides doing it, or neither side doing it?

 

[barnbwt]

I don't resent anti teachers for indoctrinating children; I resent them indoctrinating them with idiotic ideas. Children are impressionable, they are meant to be impressed upon. Indoctrination is how we help them to become responsible, well adjusted adults. It's just there's a difference in opinion as to what a responsible, well adjusted adult is or should be, hence the differing indoctrination. I was half-raised in the North West, half in Texas, so I saw both sides; salmon, global warming, and indian studies (in lieu of American civics) up north, a gun totin' libertarian State Government teacher in high school and a States' Rights First-er civics professor in college down here in Texas. As a child I believed pistols should be banned so gangs would not have the ability to kill each other; as an adult I understand exactly what the motivations behind, and consequences of, those beliefs are.

The notion of kids raised in a morally neutral environment 'free to find their own way' is asinine; it's a recipe for all sorts of mischief (Lord of the Flies, anyone?). The best we can do is guide them toward the right path; our path.

TCB

 

[beeenbag]

I love your involvement with school kids, but I am curious as to how others here feel about this statement. I have seen posts here in the past, complaining about anti gun teachers making their opinions known. I think most of us would complain if a school teacher took our child to a gun issue vote and cheered if their side won, or could you imagine the outcry if a teacher took one of our own to a anti 2A cause?

So are we ok with just our side doing it, both sides doing it, or neither side doing it?

I didn't take them any where, I allowed them to watch the live debate on cspan. They were not obligated to watch it or form an opinion, the could continue with their work, or watch the debate. It was an important bill to the pro 2a, and equally important to the anti 2a folks.

 

[Tirod]

There's been a number of offsets in American society that are being missed - first, not everybody sends their kids off to be indoctrinated in pubic schools. There are thousands of home school academies nationwide, and millions NOT going to public schools. Many are going to private schools precisely because public schools are NOT doing the job they should be.

When those students mix with others, they salt the population with better informed views and educate them.

Second, I see the government, even with the present administration, as doing a better job at preserving my rights than I do my employer.

Corporate policy is a bigger enemy than any political party. We readily see and recognize the political arguments because politicians use the media to convince us of their views. Read the points of view on Benghazi going on now. What we don't see readily discussed are the policies we are forced to work under at our job. They are wide ranging and diverse, but in large part, most corporations are intensely anti gun at the workplace, and even go so far as to tell you that you can't store a gun locked in a container in the car while it's parked on company property. And if it's discovered, they terminate your employment.

Most have a no gun policy whatsoever - and that is rigorously enforced in retail. The few exceptions are banks, liquor stores, or specific retail locations in high crime areas. My employer has a blanket policy of no guns - which they enforce more strictly than no cell phones in company vehicles. Which is more dangerous? The cell phone, yet be discovered with a gun and you will never work there again, and it will be extremely hard to find a job among those they share it with - which none will ever admit doing. It's the background good ol boy network that passes that along, you are treated as a dangerous psychopath if you carry a gun into work.

Funny part is, a lot of employees have guns and we talk about them during the day, or with customers who come in open carry. And for those who were former employees now promoted to "customer," nobody thinks twice if you open carry.

Just HR and everybody who might hire you.

It's NOT Congress restricting my rights, it's Corporate Policy and the insidious "liability" that they dictate, based on what their insurance company says. Another corporation.

We are worried about 550 Congresscreatures and a few judges taking away our rights - when in fact they have been highly concerned as well, and work to restore them. But a Corporate Board issuing policy tramples those rights by superimposing theirs with no allowance. And when it boils down to the main reason that underlies all, they think you might impede them making a profit thru alienating anti gun people.

It's all about the money, not common sense or a respect for our Constitutional Rights. Rail against Congress or the Courts all you want, that is exactly how we have been getting our rights protected and restored. But Corporations - it's been a constant erosion every year, and the few battles we have won came from the courts.

Our government IS working to preserve our rights, our Corporations are working to remove them even more rapidly. Check your insurance policy and see how much coverage you get competing in a firearms match, or hunting, etc. Don't be surprised to find your coverage only extends to the point where you hold a gun - and then is cut off.

The sad part is that we don't even think to look.

 

[larryh1108]

Our government IS working to preserve our rights, our Corporations are working to remove them even more rapidly.

I cannot disagree any more than I do.
You can choose to work at a place of business which exercises their right of policies. You can choose to say "no thanks". If you agree to work there you took away your own rights, they didn't take them from you.

When the government decides they want to disarm you, your choice is to move to another country. Yes, the government does preserve our rights but do not think, for one minute, that there aren't people in our government who would like nothing more than to abolish the 2nd amendment. Leave your job is easier than leaving your country. You decide if you work for a company that takes away your rights. You want the money, or whatever, and put that above your rights. You decide.

 

[Pointshoot]

NavyLCDR: "Personally, I don't think there is any hope for saving any part of the Constitution. In the next 100 years we are going to see the collapse of the Federal government the same way the Soviet Union collapsed. The Federal government has already outgrown it's resources and it is only a matter of time."

Commander, that's why I'm actually hopeful about the US Constitution. The U.S. federal government and the fiat money & banking system that commands it will collapse. That's what happens to debt based financial systems which eat out the substance of a nation. Greed & corruption get out of hand; this has happened many times in world history. They will take as much from the American people as they can get their hands on, till we are completely impoverished. They will lie and try to masks this as 'benefits' - - - such as 'health care', 'retirement', etc, etc, They will steal from us and divert the money to themselves, just like social security and so much other spending. - - - Ours is a system ruled by monied oligarchs, the People have little say in what happens in 'their' government. This was even recently stated as the case in a position paper out of Yale University. This very subject was brought up in a hearing with the chairwoman of the Federal Reserve, (she feigned ignorance). These monied interests determine who gets campaign finance money and who runs for office. They determine who gets media coverage & what that coverage looks like. Their media tell people what to 'think' and who to vote for. No one becomes president and commander in chief, unless they want them in office. The federal government is no longer the government of the American People. The government (at the levels of command which control all the rest) has been purchased by these interests. - - IMO many people make the mistake of thinking that the collapse of the federal government would hurt the Constitution. Its those that use that very same federal government to push their agenda, - which are the greatest threat to the Constitution.
Perhaps, in the collapse, the American people will turn back to our founding principles and restore the Constitution. Perhaps power will be divided among government as originally conceived by the American founders. The danger is that they will look to 'safety' and a 'savior' and welcome even more obvious tyranny.

P.S. - and its going to take a lot less than 100 years for the current system to collapse. I doubt it'll last 10 years, maybe less than that.

 

[arizona_cards_11]

I cannot disagree any more than I do.
You can choose to work at a place of business which exercises their right of policies. You can choose to say "no thanks". If you agree to work there you took away your own rights, they didn't take them from you.

When the government decides they want to disarm you, your choice is to move to another country. Yes, the government does preserve our rights but do not think, for one minute, that there aren't people in our government who would like nothing more than to abolish the 2nd amendment. Leave your job is easier than leaving your country. You decide if you work for a company that takes away your rights. You want the money, or whatever, and put that above your rights. You decide.

Corporations don't have the right to use brute force against their customers. I don't have the right to use brute force against my neighbors.

The government is an instrument of force. When unrestrained, it is used for neighbor to rob neighbor, for corporations to crush competition, and for sociopaths to build their Dystopian nightmare.

The settling and founding of America was an experiment in forming the smallest government possible. In under 250 years it has turned into the largest, most powerful force in the world.

By nature, the type of people attracted to government will grow its authority and power. (Libido Dominandi) The freedom that allowed the rapid expansion of industry, innovation, and the explosion of prosperity, began being exploited for tax revenue at the dawn of the 20th century. The federal government has now used every invention of the market and tax revenues from the productive to enslave its youth through public education, and bribe its voters through entitlements.

Promise more, get votes, grow power - promise more, get votes, grow power.

This is not the fault of the youth; it is the fault of every prior generation, collectively, that traded liberty for security.