3 ms·

I'd argue that the proliferation of guns in the US is an example of the opposite of "modern society". I think politicians in general have trouble with newer te

by myko 5y ago

I'd argue that the proliferation of guns in the US is an example of the opposite of "modern society". I think politicians in general have trouble with newer technologies and seems to have more to do with the age of the average person in Congress than political leanings (e.g.: Al Franken's questioning of Eric Schmidt years ago and not understanding how Amazon could run Android on their own devices without Google's input).

giantg2 5y ago
What I mean is that there are well established laws and case law but they consistently introduce contradicting laws rather than change the law at the higher level (similar to abortion restrictions for other groups). For example, things like cities ignoring state level preemption. Or using the Trayvon Martin case as a talking point against stand your ground laws even though that law was not invoked as his defense (just standard self defense). On a side note, why would proliferation of firearms be the opposite of modern society? There are other modern countries with firearms. And by proliferation do you mean simply higher total numbers or more widespread?
- myko 5y ago
  > why would proliferation of firearms be the opposite of modern society? In the past, guns and weapons generally were required to survive for folks outside of cities. That is not the case today. I see this as a move towards the modern - a society that can solve problems without the use of guns. I mean a combination of both higher numbers and how widespread guns are. That said, I think the case law supporting the 2nd amendment to the level it is today is flawed, but I understand that given past rulings the only legal things to do are: a) allow basically any and all guns with no restrictions or b) overturn past decisions on the matter. Even with all of that the cat is out of the bag in the US - there are too many guns to remove. Beyond the US, 3D printing will make creating a gun at home somewhat trivial in the near future. I don't know how we dig out of that hole societally.

by myko 5y ago

giantg2 5y ago

What I mean is that there are well established laws and case law but they consistently introduce contradicting laws rather than change the law at the higher level (similar to abortion restrictions for other groups). For example, things like cities ignoring state level preemption. Or using the Trayvon Martin case as a talking point against stand your ground laws even though that law was not invoked as his defense (just standard self defense). On a side note, why would proliferation of firearms be the opposite of modern society? There are other modern countries with firearms. And by proliferation do you mean simply higher total numbers or more widespread?

myko 5y ago
> why would proliferation of firearms be the opposite of modern society? In the past, guns and weapons generally were required to survive for folks outside of cities. That is not the case today. I see this as a move towards the modern - a society that can solve problems without the use of guns. I mean a combination of both higher numbers and how widespread guns are. That said, I think the case law supporting the 2nd amendment to the level it is today is flawed, but I understand that given past rulings the only legal things to do are: a) allow basically any and all guns with no restrictions or b) overturn past decisions on the matter. Even with all of that the cat is out of the bag in the US - there are too many guns to remove. Beyond the US, 3D printing will make creating a gun at home somewhat trivial in the near future. I don't know how we dig out of that hole societally.