• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    21 year ago

    We don’t care the least about what the founders meant. Both parties consistently reinterpret the words to mean whatever Will keep them in power.

    The things I wrote aren’t yes or no things they’re measures. They need to be investigated, studied, they need to be tried they need to see what effect the actually have. There’s a significant amount of pushback from gun rights advocates to not study those type of things for fear that some of them might actually work. And if you ask them why they say well they might not study it correctly they might just come up with whatever result they actually want to happen.

    It’s pretty common for people who are anti-gun law to simply say this won’t work, that won’t work, it’s a pretty low barrier to entry argument. I don’t have any data but I don’t like the outcome so I’m just going to say it won’t work and that’s the whole argument

    I would give my personal guarantee that implementing those would have an effect, the question is would any of them have enough of an effect to make it worth it. Hell, we’ve had police on site during shootings and they haven’t done a damn thing about what was going on. You don’t need any more indication than someone walking through a school shooting kids to know that they don’t need to be in there and need to be stopped.

    • Jordan Lund
      link
      fedilink
      English
      11 year ago

      They can’t be implemented because the Supreme Court has already made multiple key rulings o the topic since 2008 and have a few more in their case load for this year and next. It’s not going to get better, it will only get worse from here on out.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        21 year ago

        That used to be the case. But since they recently overturned Row v Wade, nothing is off the table anymore.