Is The Threat To Our 2nd Amendment Real?

[s1xty7]

Let me start by saying I'm very much a 2nd Amendment supporter and enjoy guns recreationally and for home defense. I do not believe in banning anything or limiting capacities, etc.

With that said, while I have grown up with guns as a part of my family and a common theme with others in the community, it's only been in the last 10 or 15 years I've really gotten into guns. One of the driving factors for a number of my purchases has been the threat to our 2nd Amendment and specific guns and features. For instance, I likely wouldn't own an AR-15 or as many standard capacity magazines as I do without continuously hearing about "the left" trying to take our guns. As I get older, I feel like this threat is always being pushed and we are always told about the restrictions looming just around the corner, even when, logically speaking, such legislation would likely not stand up to legal scrutiny if it did pass. There are certainly specific instances where we need to get out and vote to prevent regulation and there are plenty of opportunities to educate others to the truth about guns. However, the majority of the time, it feels like those screaming "The Anti's are coming!!" are just as out of touch as those that scream "All guns are evil!!". Maybe it's a case of the boy who cried wolf or Chicken Little insisting the sky is falling, but the rhetoric is losing it's effectiveness on me. All the hype starts to feel like strategic marketing to sell more guns and ammo than any actual threat to our rights. There are indeed legitimate issues to address (such as the recent Washington legislation) but I don't think it is to the degree and scope that is being portrayed nationally.

Am I alone in these feelings? How do others feel? Is it really as dire as it is presented to us? Since I've gotten more into guns, this feels like the same story repeated ad infinitum. Was it always like this?

I appreciate you taking the time to read this and look forward to having a good discussion. Hopefully I don't get ostracized for my thoughts. This seems like a thoughtful group that can discuss this civilly.

Read More

 

[notazombie]

Dude, seriously?

 

[Medic!]

tac. Where is tac.

 

[s1xty7]

If there was no threat to our 2nd Amendment, or not to an embellished scale, would the NRA make as much money? Would gun companies be as successful? A right leaning government destroys profit margins and breeds complacency. It feels like the narrative is being pushed for all the wrong reasons and it begins to feel disingenuous.

I'm personally trying to decide if this is just my perception or if the threat is real. Hence, this topic. You guys (and gals) seem like a thoughtful bunch that can give a grounded perspective.

Edit: I ask all these questions as an NRA Life Member, GOA Life Member, OFF supporter, SAF supporter, etc. I genuinely support our rights as a people.

 

[CamoDeafie]

On one hand, the threat to 2nd Amendment in several States are very real and tangible as witnessed in Washington, California, Colorado, Illinois, New York, and a few States I'm missing.... On the other hand....
It is only in the 2000s that an increasing number of States have gone towards Constitutional Carry following Vermont's historic decision..... and indeed, in the last 25 years, that the 50 States otherwise, have gone to "Shall Issue" for Concealed Carry licenses/permits, with the conspicuous de facto exception of California ("Shall issue" in name only), as opposed to "No Carry" and "May Issue".

So there's two sides here.

We are seeing better efforts on the part of carry rights of the 2nd A (the "to Bear Arms" clause), than before...and we also are seeing assaults on the 2nd A on a State to State basis related to specific classes of guns and ammunition, and magazine capacities. HOWEVER, the sunsetting of the 1994 AWB has been a boon to industry and consumers alike, and because of that, we now have an impressive number of guns on the market......and impressive pricing too, even accounting for inflation.

Never before have specific classes of guns be so wildly popular and best selling right after the ban, as AR15s have been, and yet...never before have the rhetoric and media message been so against guns in general...

So.... I guess one could say..."it depends"?

 

[slimmer13]

I have thoughts on this, but I'm too busy not doing a FTF transaction with a 20yo because its illegal now.
But when I have a chance to reply, I'll probably tell you to pay attention to the coming legislative session and you can get back to me in a few months.

 

[cigars]

Let me start by saying I'm very much a 2nd Amendment supporter and enjoy guns recreationally and for home defense. I do not believe in banning anything or limiting capacities, etc.

With that said, while I have grown up with guns as a part of my family and a common theme with others in the community, it's only been in the last 10 or 15 years I've really gotten into guns. One of the driving factors for a number of my purchases has been the threat to our 2nd Amendment and specific guns and features. For instance, I likely wouldn't own an AR-15 or as many standard capacity magazines as I do without continuously hearing about "the left" trying to take our guns. As I get older, I feel like this threat is always being pushed and we are always told about the restrictions looming just around the corner, even when, logically speaking, such legislation would likely not stand up to legal scrutiny if it did pass. There are certainly specific instances where we need to get out and vote to prevent regulation and there are plenty of opportunities to educate others to the truth about guns. However, the majority of the time, it feels like those screaming "The Anti's are coming!!" are just as out of touch as those that scream "All guns are evil!!". Maybe it's a case of the boy who cried wolf or Chicken Little insisting the sky is falling, but the rhetoric is losing it's effectiveness on me. All the hype starts to feel like strategic marketing to sell more guns and ammo than any actual threat to our rights. There are indeed legitimate issues to address (such as the recent Washington legislation) but I don't think it is to the degree and scope that is being portrayed nationally.

Am I alone in these feelings? How do others feel? Is it really as dire as it is presented to us? Since I've gotten more into guns, this feels like the same story repeated ad infinitum. Was it always like this?

I appreciate you taking the time to read this and look forward to having a good discussion. Hopefully I don't get ostracized for my thoughts. This seems like a thoughtful group that can discuss this civilly.

Go and take a look at the status of 2A in places like NY, NJ, Cali, MA, Etc. Why would you think that it's just hype when people fight for their 2A rights? Cali folded over almost completely over the last few decades. Now they are exporting their virus to other states. Texas will be largely blue in 5-10 years and their gun laws will resemble the above mentioned states.
The leftists wanting to remove our gun rights is no joke.

 

[notazombie]

If there was no threat to our 2nd Amendment, or not to an embellished scale, would the NRA make as much money? Would gun companies be as successful? A right leaning government destroys profit margins and breeds complacency. It feels like the narrative is being pushed for all the wrong reasons and it begins to feel disingenuous.

I'm personally trying to decide if this is just my perception or if the threat is real. Hence, this topic. You guys (and gals) seem like a thoughtful bunch that can give a grounded perspective.

Edit: I ask all these questions as an NRA Life Member, GOA Life Member, OFF supporter, SAF supporter, etc. I genuinely support our rights as a people.

I wasn't completely trying to be a smartass. The best indicator of a person or group's future actions is their past actions. Look at just the last 5 years in regards to legislation on the west coast. You really think they're satisfied now?

 

[Andy54Hawken]

I would say that the 2nd Amendment is threatened by four basic reasons :

Number One :
It seems that once one Ban , Law , Restriction , Requirement , etc , is passed or made , another Ban , Law , Restriction or Requirement is waiting to be passed or made , before the ink is dried on the last one to have been made or passed.

Number two :
The willingness of people to allow such measures as listed above to be passed through:
Not voting...
Or the "It won't affect me or the guns I own / like " type of thinking...

Number three :
The media stereotype gun owner...You know the ones that :
Trash public shooting lanes...
Open carry , to intentionally cause a fuss or "make a statement"
( Not referring to those who open carry for ease or other similar reasons )
The Mall Ninja / Teddy Tactical Types...
Those unsafe even with a squirt gun , types of gun owners...
Those capable of only parroting "sound bite wisdom" , or are the racist , government fearing blow hard , that is commonly shown on TV , etc...
( I am fairly sure that the last listed are few in number )

Number four :
A lack of understanding , of just what the 2nd Amendment actually means and the intent behind its meaning.

I think the above reasons , are indeed threats to how the 2nd Amendment is viewed and understood.
Andy

 

[Vendor Hidden]

It's hard to recognize incrementalism, because it moves so… incrementally.

 

[CountryGent]

Go and take a look at the status of 2A in places like NY, NJ, Cali, MA, Etc.

^ This. There are some states in which trying to exercise your right ranges from annoying to a nightmare. The anti-freedom crew that is working to end 2A rights have shifted to the states and Washington and Oregon are being targeted now. Take a look at the recently defeated IP-43 in Oregon and the recently passed I-1639 in Washington. And considering the make-up of the legislatures and who is in the governor's office in both states and things look pretty grim. The governor of the Beaver State even included new proposed restrictions in the 2019-2021 agenda.

While it is true there has been years of gridlock at the Federal level, there have been some nasty Federal laws in history that continue to restrict us or did so for a while (e.g., NFA34, GCA68, the Hughes amendment to FOPA86, AWB94, etc.). (Two of those are within my lifetime and I'd wager a third is within that of many of our member's here.) And each and every session new draconian laws are proposed, though with the current congressional insanity, they aren't going anywhere. Alas, laws designed to expand our rights (e.g., national reciprocity, deregulating silencers, et al.) are also never going to see the light of day.

So, yes, there is most certainly a very real threat.

 

[Medic!]

Wow. Who said that degree in liberal arts wouldn't pay off.

 

[BSG 75]

As I get older, I feel like this threat is always being pushed and we are always told about the restrictions looming just around the corner, even when, logically speaking, such legislation would likely not stand up to legal scrutiny if it did pass.

But the post-Heller gun control laws ARE withstanding legal challenges.

Supreme Court upholds ban on assault rifles like those used in Las Vegas and Texas shootings
U.S. judge upholds Massachusetts assault weapons ban | Reuters
High Court Lets Connecticut, New York Assault Weapons Bans Stand
U.S. appeals court rejects challenges to California gun laws | Reuters
Supreme Court Rebuffs Challenge to California Gun Restrictions

Gun control groups employ lawyers to craft gun control laws that will withstand legal challenges. For example, the proposed Oregon "safe storage" law will allow gun owners to keep functioning firearms on their person, within their immediate control, or in a locked container, which the Washington DC law found unconstitutional in the Heller decision didn't allow. They are carefully crafting their laws to be consistent with the Heller and McDonald SCOTUS decisions.

Remember, in order to get Justice Kennedy's swing vote Justice Scalia had to add language to Heller that made it very pro-gun regulation:

2. Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose: For example, concealed weapons prohibitions have been upheld under the Amendment or state analogues. The Court's opinion should not be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. Miller's holding that the sorts of weapons protected are those "in common use at the time" finds support in the historical tradition of prohibiting the carrying of dangerous and unusual weapons.

Lower courts have used that language to uphold all kinds of gun control.

There are certainly specific instances where we need to get out and vote to prevent regulation and there are plenty of opportunities to educate others to the truth about guns. However, the majority of the time, it feels like those screaming "The Anti's are coming!!" are just as out of touch as those that scream "All guns are evil!!". Maybe it's a case of the boy who cried wolf or Chicken Little insisting the sky is falling, but the rhetoric is losing it's effectiveness on me. All the hype starts to feel like strategic marketing to sell more guns and ammo than any actual threat to our rights. There are indeed legitimate issues to address (such as the recent Washington legislation) but I don't think it is to the degree and scope that is being portrayed nationally.

The national threat isn't at a crisis point with Trump in the White House and Republicans in control of the Senate (for now), but just wait and see what happens in Oregon in 2019 and 2020. You are in for a rude awakening. The Democrats now have the governor's office and supermajorities in both chambers of the Legislature. They can pass anything they want and the Republicans can't stop it. And guess what's on the agenda:

Now we are ready to ramp up for the coming 2019 legislative session around the two issues we are championing. We are working with legislators to put forth bills to prohibit the sale of assault weapons as well as to prohibit the sale of large capacity magazines.

Lift Every Voice

Am I alone in these feelings?

Unfortunately, you aren't. Many won't realize what is happening until it is too late.

Since I've gotten more into guns, this feels like the same story repeated ad infinitum. Was it always like this?

The tragic mass shootings the past couple of years have changed the game in blue states. The gun controllers are energized and determined, while too many blue state gun owners are yawning, saying it's just the same old ploy by gun rights groups to raise money, or don't care or even worse support more gun control because their revolvers, bolt action and lever action rifles, and shotguns aren't threatened.

 

[JuglansRegia]

The threat is real and active. When I turned 18 in CA, you could still do face to face transfers with friends family or even at gun shows. Then they passed the assault weapon ban, then they passed a registration and 10 day wait for handguns, then they made a law where all guns except C&R's had to go through a dealer with a 10 day wait. The the national assault weapon ban went into effect. Once the sunset on that, smart guys came up with the bullet button so you could install it on one of the new AR's that wasn't listed in the original assault weapon ban, then they made a law to ban those. Now you can't buy ammo online, and next year you have to go through a background check to buy ammo. So now you are thinking, life sucks in CA glad I don't live there. Guess what, the folks that run this state are getting ideas from the train wreck happening in CA so buckle in and get ready.

 

[American123]

"I don't think"

When you include statements in your question that begin with "I don't think," that generally is a sign about the question itself.

Facts are painted all over the wall regarding the real threat to individual firearm rights, or have you not seen the facts that an increasing number of states are pushing and passing anti freedom laws.

 

[Nick Burkhardt]

The Second Amendment is essentially null and void in some cities and states where you have to beg government and/or the police for a permission slip just to hold a firearm.

 

[s1xty7]

There seems to be a concensus that it wasn't always this way. I appreciate all the enthuastic responses. It shows that you all deeply care about our 2nd Amendment rights. Please don't think I was being dismissive of the challenges we face and have faced before. Maybe because it's near the end of the year, the influx of cries for "you must donate now" seem to be nonstop. Along with all the sweepstake entries and "donate now to receive your free tactical pen", it begins to feel more like late night infomercials and less like legitimate concern. If I feel that way, odds are there are others that do too. I don't want to fall into complacency, but how do you wake up a population to a danger of losing a right when they hear that message continuously? At some point it becomes background noise to the workings of daily life. It loses meaning and weakens the strength of the response. Maybe that's the strategy.

Edit: Then again, maybe I'm just having a gun "existential crisis".

 

[eklarsen]

The threat is real and if you don't believe it, you will, once it is too late.

 

[Stomper]

Multi-national corporate fascism, run by billionaire oligarchs with no national allegiances are funding anti-2A (and anti- free speech) forces.

There's a war being waged to de-platform any and all opposition to their end goals. Eventually (if not sooner) this website will come under extreme overt political and financial attack in order to close it down.

Then you'll truly believe there's a war against the 2A...

 

[ma96782]

If you knew that it was The Democrats Platform to.........

Preventing Gun Violence
With 33,000 Americans dying every year, Democrats believe that we must finally take sensible action to address gun violence. While responsible gun ownership is part of the fabric of many communities, too many families in America have suffered from gun violence. We can respect the rights of responsible gun owners while keeping our communities safe. To build on the success of the lifesaving Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act, we will expand and strengthen background checks and close dangerous loopholes in our current laws; repeal the Protection of Lawful Commerce in Arms Act (PLCAA) to revoke the dangerous legal immunity protections gun makers and sellers now enjoy; and keep weapons of war—such as assault weapons and large capacity ammunition magazines (LCAM's)—off our streets. We will fight back against attempts to make it harder for the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms, and Explosives to revoke federal licenses from law breaking gun dealers, and ensure guns do not fall into the hands of terrorists, intimate partner abusers, other violent criminals, and those with severe mental health issues. There is insufficient research on effective gun prevention policies, which is why the U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention must have the resources it needs to study gun violence as a public health issue.

Taken from: Party Platform - Democrats

So then.....is the threat, serious enough?

Aloha, Mark