• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

Do you think the second amendment needs amended?

  • Yes

    Votes: 12 18.2%
  • No

    Votes: 53 80.3%
  • Not sure

    Votes: 1 1.5%

  • Total voters
    66
  • Poll closed .
M

mdw99

I am from Scotland and doing a modern studies assignment at school on the second amendment of the US constitution and would like to gather views from US citizens.
Could you tell me if you think the second amendment needs to be changed or not and give reasons why.
Many thanks
 
It really doesn't need to be changed- just strictly adhered to. As it was written, it provides plenty of rights- we just don't hold our politicians accountable for supporting and upholding them.
 
Hell no. Don't touch my 2nd Amendment.





Not unless you're going to strengthen and clarify it even further as an individual right not to be infringed upon.
 
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Yes, take out the underlined part, it will make it more clear.
 
Yes it should be changed to this, so we can stop debating it endlessly:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
 
I am from Scotland and doing a modern studies assignment at school on the second amendment of the US constitution and would like to gather views from US citizens.
Could you tell me if you think the second amendment needs to be changed or not and give reasons why.
Many thanks




You really need to clarify: "changed" TO WHAT.
 
"From my cold dead hands"

Nuff said?
 
I'm happy to adopt a system more like the UK. Less guns means less gun deaths.
 
I am from Scotland and doing a modern studies assignment at school on the second amendment of the US constitution and would like to gather views from US citizens.
Could you tell me if you think the second amendment needs to be changed or not and give reasons why.
Many thanks

question not clear/defined enough.

amended to give less rights? NO
amended to clarify or give more rights? yes
 
No, there is no reason that universal background checks can't pass with the 2nd Amendment in place, and the need for further gun control measures in order to reduce crime is exaggerated. Proper mental healthcare as a solution to violence in the United States is certainly underrated.

But if you're doing this for an assignment, please find a source that shows a more accurate representation of America's views. Although the U.S. is a libertarian leaning nation in regard to international politics, the internet will lean far more libertarian than the average American voter.
 
No, there is no reason that universal background checks can't pass with the 2nd Amendment in place, and the need for further gun control measures in order to reduce crime is exaggerated. Proper mental healthcare as a solution to violence in the United States is certainly underrated.

But if you're doing this for an assignment, please find a source that shows a more accurate representation of America's views. Although the U.S. is a libertarian leaning nation in regard to international politics, the internet will lean far more libertarian than the average American voter.

the federal government does not have the proper power-even under the idiotic contorted commerce clause to demand background checks of sales that are limited to INTRA-State

what the Second Should say is as follows

The federal government has no proper power to regulate small arms sales, possession or use in the United States of America except on federal facilities.
 
I'm happy to adopt a system more like the UK. Less guns means less gun deaths.

then why has England's gun deaths increased since they banned handguns and USA gun deaths decreased as the number of guns in private hands has increased

and why is it that every anti gun poster on this board is a supporter of MORE GOVERNMENT?
 
No, there is no reason that universal background checks can't pass with the 2nd Amendment in place, and the need for further gun control measures in order to reduce crime is exaggerated. Proper mental healthcare as a solution to violence in the United States is certainly underrated.

But if you're doing this for an assignment, please find a source that shows a more accurate representation of America's views. Although the U.S. is a libertarian leaning nation in regard to international politics, the internet will lean far more libertarian than the average American voter.

Universal background checks require that you give complete strangers your social security number. They end up having access to all your private information if they choose to abuse that.

Forget it.
 
I am from Scotland and doing a modern studies assignment at school on the second amendment of the US constitution and would like to gather views from US citizens.
Could you tell me if you think the second amendment needs to be changed or not and give reasons why.
Many thanks

I think that it will be amended, in time. Maybe two generations from now. I think that it will be amended because the amount of and technology of modern arms has created a situation in the US wherein mass shootings are almost too easy to pull off. Moreover, the divide that now exists between the conservative 2nd Amendment political movement and most of the US who are for a safer and more secure society is being pushed to it's brink.

I don't have concerns about pistols and rifles, but as I said, it's the high capacity magazines and the devil-may-care attitude about their use in assault weapons that will eventually tip the balance. As I say, it's the political 2nd Amendment will eventually sacrifice the amendment itself.
 
then why has England's gun deaths increased since they banned handguns and USA gun deaths decreased as the number of guns in private hands has increased

and why is it that every anti gun poster on this board is a supporter of MORE GOVERNMENT?

There's fluctuation in both, but the statistics say I'm still more likely to survive in England than in America.

homocides_g8_countries_640x360_wmain.jpg
 
There's fluctuation in both, but the statistics say I'm still more likely to survive in England than in America.

homocides_g8_countries_640x360_wmain.jpg
You are far more likely to die in a car accident than even on a battlefield.

The way I see it. If I drive on American streets, I am infar more danger.

Plus, people don't often run around and shoot people. Most folks that die from gunfire, are involved in something that is less than legal. It's rare that random people get shot.

Keep out of illegal stuff, and drive carefully, you should be okay.
 
I am from Scotland and doing a modern studies assignment at school on the second amendment of the US constitution and would like to gather views from US citizens.
Could you tell me if you think the second amendment needs to be changed or not and give reasons why.
Many thanks


As someone who believes in the right to bear arms, I do not think any congressional legislation would improve the safety of citizens as far as the second amendment goes. The leftists who claim to be 'anti-gun' I believe are emperors without clothes. They need the government to hire cops, give them guns, to go around and confiscate guns from people who have not been granted a government badge to carry. They believe in monopolizing access to weapons they have deemed unnecessary, and look to the state as a means of forcefully taking weapons from people who have acquired them; believing all are guilty because of the possibility they may commit a crime, and are to have their guns taken away by cops with guns.

If there's $1,000 dollars in a gas station register, and $1,000 in a register at a shooting range, which store is a criminal more likely to hold up? Cops are heavy to carry around, so I think people should carry guns, to make being a criminal more costly and less likely to commit crimes. Any restriction on the 'negative' right, or 'pro-choice' approach to guns I believe is more effective, than the 6% approval rated congress writing legislation too long for anyone to read.
 
I am from Scotland and doing a modern studies assignment at school on the second amendment of the US constitution and would like to gather views from US citizens.
Could you tell me if you think the second amendment needs to be changed or not and give reasons why.
Many thanks

No. The 2nd Amendment is just fine and quite clear.

It's the people that try to twist it to mean something different that cause the problems.
 
There's fluctuation in both, but the statistics say I'm still more likely to survive in England than in America.

homocides_g8_countries_640x360_wmain.jpg

You should have provided a link to that. Seems like old data or false data to me.

Wiki Link

Wiki is usually kept up to date fairly quickly. For the same countries listed here....

United States: 4.7 in 2012 which is higher than in your graph.
Italy: 0.9 in 2012 which is higher than in your graph.
Canada: 1.6 in 2012 which is higher than in your graph.
United Kingdom: 1.0 in 2011 which is higher than in your graph.
Japan: 0.3 in 2011 which is higher than in your graph.
Germany: 0.8 in 2011 which is higher than in your graph.
France: 1.0 in 2012 which is higher than in your graph.
Russia: 9.2 in 2012 which is most definitely higher than in your graph since it didn't even have it. It should be noted that Russia here has a far worse gun related homicide than most of the countries here combined. (leave out Germany and France and the rest have less gun homicide rates combined than Russia.)
 
Last edited:
I am from Scotland and doing a modern studies assignment at school on the second amendment of the US constitution and would like to gather views from US citizens.
Could you tell me if you think the second amendment needs to be changed or not and give reasons why.
Many thanks

It could use some clarification but if anything, it needs to be strengthened. Adam Lanza's idiocy shouldn't prevent my responsible and non-psychotic husband from having guns to protect his family.
 
I think that it will be amended, in time. Maybe two generations from now. I think that it will be amended because the amount of and technology of modern arms has created a situation in the US wherein mass shootings are almost too easy to pull off. Moreover, the divide that now exists between the conservative 2nd Amendment political movement and most of the US who are for a safer and more secure society is being pushed to it's brink.

I don't have concerns about pistols and rifles, but as I said, it's the high capacity magazines and the devil-may-care attitude about their use in assault weapons that will eventually tip the balance. As I say, it's the political 2nd Amendment will eventually sacrifice the amendment itself.

The high capacity magazine argument, like all anti-gun arguments, will do absolutely nothing to keep them out of the hands of criminals. Why does the modern liberal mind have such a difficult time understanding such a simple concept?
 
The second amendment is perfectly fine the way it is.
 
The high capacity magazine argument, like all anti-gun arguments, will do absolutely nothing to keep them out of the hands of criminals. Why does the modern liberal mind have such a difficult time understanding such a simple concept?

Says who?

Besides, let the people within every state vote for what regulations they want within their own state in terms of high capacity magazines.
 
Says who?

Besides, let the people within every state vote for what regulations they want within their own state in terms of high capacity magazines.

Please read the Constitution, and get back to us. The 2nd Amendment is not a states rights issue. States do not have a legal right to regulate firearms.
 
Back
Top Bottom