How to Rewrite the Second Amendment by Michael S'moores

From his Facebook page:

My Proposal to Repeal the Second Amendment and Replace It With This:

PROPOSED 28th AMENDMENT TO THE US CONSTITUTION
“A well regulated State National Guard, being helpful to the safety and security of a State in times of need, along with the strictly regulated right of the people to keep and bear a limited number of non-automatic Arms for sport and hunting, with respect to the primary right of all people to be free from gun violence, this shall not be infringed.”

I, Michael Moore, along with all who support an end to this epidemic of gun violence, propose a new Amendment to our Constitution that repeals the ancient and outdated 2nd Amendment (which was written before bullets and revolvers were even invented), and replaces it with a new 28th Amendment that guarantees States can have State militias (a.k.a. State National Guards which are made up of citizen-soldiers who are called upon in times of natural disasters or other State emergencies), allows individuals to use guns for sport and gathering food, and guarantees everyone the right to be free of, and protected from, gun violence (i.e., the public’s safety comes ahead of an individual’s right to own and fire a gun).

This amendment would allow states and the federal government to pass laws that would regulate gun ownership in the following manner:

• As over 90% of gun violence is committed by men, in order for a man to purchase a gun, he must first get a waiver from his current wife, plus his most recent ex-wife, or any woman with whom he is currently in a relationship (if he’s gay, he must get the waiver from his male spouse/partner). This law has greatly reduced most spousal/domestic gun murders in Canada.

• All automatic and semi-automatic guns are banned.

• No gun or clip can hold more than 6 bullets.

• To activate a gun for it to be used, the trigger must recognize the fingerprint of its registered owner. This will eliminate most crimes committed with a gun as 80% of these crimes are done with a stolen gun.

• One’s guns must be stored at a licensed gun club or government-regulated gun storage facility. Believing that having a gun in your home provides you with protection is an American myth. People who die from a home invasion make up a sad but minuscule .04% of all gun murders in the US. And over a third of them are killed by their own gun that the criminal has either stolen or wrestled from them.

• To own and operate a gun one must obtain a license (like one does to operate a car). To get a license you have to complete a gun training and safety course and pass a thorough background check.

• As nearly half of all gun deaths are suicides, mental health care must become a top national health priority and must be properly funded. And by making it more difficult to purchase a gun - and requiring its storage outside the home - easy access during a suicidal moment is denied.

• Current restrictions placed on the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), due to successful lobbying by the NRA, have prohibited them from studying the gun violence epidemic in the US. These rules need to be removed and the funding restored. Science will then be free to find out why we are ALONE among nations in killing each other at such a massive rate (hint: It’s not just the guns - it’s us as Americans).

Reasons below.

These are a few of the regulations that can be enacted to both protect society yet not deny hunters and sportsmen their fun. This is the sane approach that meets everyone’s needs – everyone, that is, except those of the serial killer, the mass murderer, the violent ex-husband, the disgruntled employee or the disturbed and bullied teenager. We will never eliminate all murder; that’s been with us since Cain killed Abel. But we CAN join the community of enlightened nations where gun violence is that rare occurrence — as opposed to the daily tragedy we now suffer here in the United States of America. This can come to an end with the repeal of the 2nd Amendment and replacing it with the 28th Amendment.

For those who believe it will be impossible to do this, let me close by sharing with you two important facts that should give us hope:

  1. We are not a country of gun nuts. 77% of all Americans do NOT own a gun! If three-quarters of the country has decided they have no need for a gun, three-quarters of the country may also decide they have no need for an archaic amendment that allows retired accountants to own 47 assault weapons. LET’S ORGANIZE THE 77%!

  2. When President Obama tried to get Congress to pass simple, common sense gun control legislation after the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary, polls showed 90% of the country backed him! But the NRA beat him. LET’S ORGANIZE THE 90%!

We can start with the upcoming midterm election. Let every candidate know: If you take NRA money, we will
remove you from office.

Then do it.

Discuss.

[QUOTE=It is Fake;2951951]From his Facebook page:

Reasons below.

Discuss.[/QUOTE]

Don’t drink and write, Michael…

Why? It worked with Bowling for Columbine. Yes, I liked the movie until I realized, thanks to Bullshido, all the lies and misdirection he used in the movie. This movie is why I began my distrust with all media and vet anything I can.

[QUOTE=It is Fake;2951954]Why? It worked with Bowling for Columbine. Yes, I liked the movie until I realized, thanks to Bullshido, all the lies and misdirection he used in the movie. This movie is why I began my distrust with all media and vet anything I can.[/QUOTE]

Also how he ambushed Charlton Heston. By all means invite someone to a discussion and and let them fight their corner but to con your way into an individuals home and then set them up is just cheap. I’ve never taken him seriously since.

Man’s a hypocrite stretching to be relevant. I went back and read it all a second time and can’t one point of agreement.

http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/surprise-gun-ownership-rises-to-44-of-all-homes/article/2600319

Here it’s giving a rate of 44% ownership. It would be greater if ownership was easier in places that make it difficult to near impossible. Looking at you NYC.

[QUOTE=hungryjoe;2951958]http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/surprise-gun-ownership-rises-to-44-of-all-homes/article/2600319

Here it’s giving a rate of 44% ownership. It would be greater if ownership was easier in places that make it difficult to near impossible. Looking at you NYC.[/QUOTE]

Do spouses count as another owner? My “wife’s guns” are in my name and one of mine is in “hers”. So lets say she never got me a pistol for a gift she wouldn’t technically be a gun owner because the pistols in the collection that are “hers” are in my name. I do the quotes because really it’s Team Us, not his and hers.
So basically any married couple should by default count as two gun owners. I am not sure if that is the case with these numbers.

Common sense gun control.

I lost count of the lies in about 30 seconds. Granted, I read fast, but still.

  1. Michael Moore is an opportunistic buffoon.
  2. The NRA is irrelevant, with a membership smaller than PETA.
  3. Dickey doesn’t prevent study, it prevents advocacy; Obama proved this after Sandy Hook.

[QUOTE=submessenger;2951961]1. Michael Moore is an opportunistic buffoon.[/quote]
agreed

  1. The NRA is irrelevant,

Lie

with a membership smaller than PETA.

True, but irrelevant when discussing real political power. You were trying to bullshit your way into pretending that the NRA is just a powerless underdog, weren’t you?
You sly dog… :wink:
I mean if you weren’t I am sorry, but it really looked like you were trying to serve me a plate of actual bullshit in point 2.a. and 2.b. .

  1. Dickey doesn’t prevent study, it prevents advocacy; Obama proved this after Sandy Hook.

WTF you talking about?

[QUOTE=BackFistMonkey;2951964]agreed

Lie

True, but irrelevant when discussing real political power. You were trying to bullshit your way into pretending that the NRA is just a powerless underdog, weren’t you?
You sly dog… :wink:
I mean if you weren’t I am sorry, but it really looked like you were trying to serve me a plate of actual bullshit in point 2.a. and 2.b. .

WTF you talking about?[/QUOTE]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dickey_Amendment_(1996)

[QUOTE=submessenger;2951961]
3. Dickey doesn’t prevent study, it prevents advocacy; Obama proved this after Sandy Hook.[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE=submessenger;2951966]https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dickey_Amendment_(1996)[/QUOTE]

Ok we are on the same page then, I think. The Dickey amendment was a NRA sponsored Rider that “did not preclude the CDC from doing research on gun safety, just that it defined the lines between the research of gun safety related incidents and the perceived advocation for control of those guns”.

So in other words there can be no data collection or analysis by the CDC using funds for the CDC where the end result would be “gun control” or promotion of gun control.

How does OBUMMER trying to take your guns prove anything remotely related to Sandy Hook?

[QUOTE=BackFistMonkey;2951967]Ok we are on the same page then, I think. The Dickey amendment was a NRA sponsored Rider that “did not preclude the CDC from doing research on gun safety, just that it defined the lines between the research of gun safety related incidents and the perceived advocation for control of those guns”.

So in other words there can be no data collection or analysis by the CDC using funds for the CDC where the end result would be “gun control” or promotion of gun control.

How does OBUMMER trying to take your guns prove anything remotely related to Sandy Hook?[/QUOTE]

His direction for the CDC studies to take place was a direct result of Sandy Hook. https://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/01/16/here-are-the-23-executive-orders-on-gun-safety-signed-today-by-the-president/#3bf4a3523120

[QUOTE=BKR;2951953]Don’t drink and write, Michael…[/QUOTE]

Drinking and writing go hand in hand. Ask any writer, and examine history’s writers. Most were lushes of extraordinary caliber.

[QUOTE=It is Fake;2951954]Why? It worked with Bowling for Columbine. Yes, I liked the movie until I realized, thanks to Bullshido, all the lies and misdirection he used in the movie. This movie is why I began my distrust with all media and vet anything I can.[/QUOTE]

Which lies and misdirection, specifically?

[QUOTE=submessenger;2951968]His direction for the CDC studies to take place was a direct result of Sandy Hook. https://www.forbes.com/sites/rickungar/2013/01/16/here-are-the-23-executive-orders-on-gun-safety-signed-today-by-the-president/#3bf4a3523120[/QUOTE]

Which is silly. The Law clearly states No CDC funds can be used for research which could lead to gun control. So … what’s your point again? Obama felt like he had to try to do something, even if it was an idiotic and clearly outlawed act.

the primary right of all people to be free from gun violence

Since when do “all people” have this right?

Armed bandits don’t have this right last I checked… they have the right to get lead in their ass.

We could make a pretty big list of exceptions.

I was exposed to Michael Moore early by an openly socialist teacher at a summer program for nerds in high school. I believe Roger and Me was the first one I watched. I liked him a lot until I enlisted and realized I had lived in a pretty one dimensional world most of my life. Michael Moore does not like guns, which is fine. Michael Moore is also an opportunistic jackass, which is not fine. I remember his nonsense posts after the Orlando Nightclub Mass Killing. Something 5.56 being against the Hague Accords for exploding or something. As opposed to reality, where violent fragmentation is one of the major bullet design “families.” And as far as I know, is the only family of bullet design currenty used for every main battle rifle for every military in the entire world. Other countries do what we do for non-uniform conflict and relax rules on expanding hollow points, but that is fairly limited in scope.

The gun control friendly America he’s describing is unlikely to exist anytime soon, but at least he’s calling for a new amendment to the Constitution.

[QUOTE=W. Rabbit;2951970]Which lies and misdirection, specifically?[/QUOTE]
http://www.hardylaw.net/Truth_About_Bowling.html
https://www.forbes.com/forbes/2002/1209/059.html
http://www.mooreexposed.com/bfc.html
https://elearning.kctcs.edu/bbcswebdav/institution/VLI%20Content%20Repository/Oral%20Communication%20and%20Writing/ENG%201023%20Module/ENG_1023_Unit_2_Lesson_Ethical_Analysis_of_Persuasive_Practices/mobile_pages/chalkethicsreview12.html
http://www.owl232.net/bowling.htm
http://www.rogerebert.com/answer-man/movie-answer-man-04062003

Have fun.

[QUOTE=DCS;2951995]Trolltastic.[/QUOTE]

I wonder if we can just skip ahead to the part where all domiciles are required to have at least one functioning long gun, and at least one person competent to shoot it. Before somebody incorrectly says “Switzerland,” check these out.