RamaSchneider OP t1_je49cg7 wrote
Imagine how much good we could do if we'd view guns with even half the suspicion we view marijuana.
Rogers_Ebert t1_je59cwn wrote
Its called State law Rama, you should know especially if you want to represent us in the State government. As a legal gun owner in Vermont, if I travel across State lines with my gun doesn't mean the laws are the same.
Its not really that complicated, though I realize your argument isn't in good faith.
Just-Education5532 t1_je8vw78 wrote
-- all the points
Human802 t1_je4xe65 wrote
Like it or not their is no constitutional right to have cannabis.
For at least 12 years now the Supreme Court’s decision says citizens have the right to a fire arm for self defense. While can say I am not a fan of that ruling, I also know any attempts at “gun control” will be limited to that ruling.
Apathetic_Optimist t1_je59tda wrote
Like it or not, guns are only constitutionally protected because of an amendment, so there’s nothing stopping another amendment from enshrining the right to have cannabis or the right to healthcare.
Human802 t1_je5go7z wrote
Yes I totally support the idea of making heath care a right. Adding and repealing amendments would be great if we had a functional Federal Congress.
cpujockey t1_je6ep1p wrote
> Like it or not their is no constitutional right to have cannabis.
truth right there. a lot of folks might not like that, but it is literally the truth.
endeavour3d t1_je7ewx2 wrote
when you don't understand the difference between enshrined rights and unenumerated rights, read the 9th amendment
Human802 t1_je6i3hs wrote
The down vote ratio is really interesting.
Do people disagree with this statement?
Do they just not want to acknowledge this is the current reality?
We have to start where we are if we hope to make meaningful reforms. We can’t just regulate guns like cars, or chemical’s because we don’t have a right to access those. Even reinstating the assault weapons ban might not be possible with the current SCOTUS balance.
cpujockey t1_je6m3kq wrote
> Do they just not want to acknowledge this is the current reality?
The current reality is no matter what laws are in place, there's always some asshole with a lathe and the ability to do their own machining to curtail laws against owning firearms. Additionally, criminals care not what the laws tell them, they'll pay top dollar for the things they want.
Also, I aint giving up my guns because of a bunch of assholes can't be bothered to be decent. I like hunting, I like gun culture, and I like having guns. There are many responsible gun owners out there and they heavily outweigh the terrible fucks that use guns to commit mass murders.
Human802 t1_je6perp wrote
Ah yes, the why bother having any rules approach.
I assume you also support legalizing all drugs?
cpujockey t1_je6s1ac wrote
not all of them. safer drugs like mushrooms and cannabis are ok in my book. the addictive potential of opiates is not to be fucked with.
I am just saying - you cannot just expect a law to fix the inherent problems with society.
Human802 t1_je6vj75 wrote
Yes that is definitely true and no one is claiming that a law will fix everything.
When I think about the effectiveness of a law I think about how many falcons and eagles I see these days. Their populations were decimated by DDT pollution, but when the government banned its use they didn’t end pollution, but they did reduce harm to the ecosystem.
cpujockey t1_je6w00b wrote
And I will cite the prohibition which started my dad's family in Vermont due to our grand father being caught smuggling liquor from canada and being jailed state side.
I am not saying that laws wont help - but outright banning of firearms is going to piss off more people and cause a lot more problems than regulation. Most responsible gun owners (myself included) are for common sense regulation, psyche evals and all that shit. But outright banning firearms is a slippery slope that will reveal the same fallacies as alcohol prohibition: criminals will most definitely find a way.
Human802 t1_je7buey wrote
And once again you argue against the strawman. An outright ban is constitutionally prohibited, anyone calling for one shouldn’t be taken very seriously.
Yet that is the framing I see so often in the many failed discussions about gun in our society.
Personally I’d like to see more enforcement of existing laws, and any new laws focused on own accountability. Safe storage laws and biometric identification technology should be considered. The fact that guns kill so many kids, many due to storage failures, is a goddamn disgrace.
HillRatch t1_je8mqfz wrote
If you like "gun culture" so much, and there are so many responsible gun owners out there, how about you start working on fixing your community and supporting policies that would keep these mass murderous assholes from having guns. Sorry, but "I like them" is not a good enough argument for something killing thousands of people every year.
lantonas t1_jebr0p3 wrote
Vermont Constitution, Chapter 1 Article 16
That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State
mattgm1995 t1_je4pitq wrote
We do.
sicknutley t1_je4s3si wrote
funny how I need to show my I.D. when immediately entering a dispensary yet I can go browse any gunshop or firearms section of a store without any verification.
whaletacochamp t1_je4zwyb wrote
When I was 15 my dad brought me to the kmart parking lot to sell a random dude from a local hunting forum a gun.
Granted I've also bought weed in the kmart parking lot.....
mattgm1995 t1_je4si1u wrote
Browse? Sure. Every transaction needs a background check on the FBI system. No FFL is going to risk their business by not doing that.
sicknutley t1_je4sy1m wrote
And do tell me the laws regarding private firearms sales in VT vs. private weed sales in VT.
mr_chip_douglas t1_je4uqfq wrote
I think private sales are no longer allowed in VT. Gotta go through an FFL holder and do a background check
whaletacochamp t1_je563rk wrote
Well private sales are restricted for both....you can't sell a gun via private sale anymore in VT (legally) without going through an FFL to do a transfer including background check. You also can't (legally) sell weed privately.
Kixeliz t1_je5i5m2 wrote
Not only that, but two people were just busted for making off with two handguns from Parro's in Waterbury. Just showed up, took the guns and left. They were trading guns for drugs, which I'm told hardly ever happens here. But as you said, can't take two steps into a dispensary without someone stopping you.
gmgvt t1_je5l8qb wrote
>They were trading guns for drugs, which I'm told hardly ever happens here.
I don't know who told you that, but I would bet that nobody's even scratched the surface of how often this does in fact happen. A good friend's brother is a cop in CT (about an hour outside NYC), and he says it's pretty widely understood among law enforcement down there the degree to which VT is effectively supplying the guns used in drug and gang wars in NY/NJ/CT. Woodchucks act like it's all one-way traffic of drugs coming here, when lol nah -- it's absolutely a two-way situation.
Kixeliz t1_je5llnd wrote
Oh, I know it happens far more than people want to admit. What's wild here is it happened at a gun shop, not someone's unattended gun cabinet. Talk about poor business practices if someone can just make off with guns from your store while it's open. But I'm sure much of the ire will be directed at the addicts, far easier to swallow that way.
gmgvt t1_je5lxuh wrote
Yeahhh it does indeed seem like a bit of a hole in the security system there, yikes ...
Kixeliz t1_je5m6k7 wrote
And yet, the owner of that very store is always one of the first to bemoan any proposed gun control measures. Actively lobbies against them. Dude can't even control his own inventory, but he won't abide any gun grabbers...gotta love it
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments