• Kit Sorens@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    39
    arrow-down
    5
    ·
    7 months ago

    It’s not a bad counterargument to that claim, we’ve just moved so far past that into the cost-benefit-analysis stage. The cost to keep the 2nd ammendment as it is is pretty fucking high.

    • Jax@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      16
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      edit-2
      7 months ago

      These conversations always stunlock me. We are months away from living in a dictatorship in the U.S. and ya’ll are talking about what exactly? Revising the 2nd amendment? Can you please explain that to me?

      Because you simply must be out of your fucking mind if you think disarming yourself in the face of Ya’ll Queda is the course of action.

      • A_Very_Big_Fan@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        7 months ago

        I hear you but also: school shooters

        Plus the dictator thing isn’t a guarantee, and even if he does win there’s still the possibility of impeachment when he’s prosecuted for inciting an insurrection

        • Fal@yiffit.net
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          7 months ago

          I hear you but also: school shooters

          Would not be impacted whatsoever with any proposed legislation. The only possible thing that could stop school shooters is going door to door collecting all firearms. If you’re proposing that, see the comment you’re replying to.

    • Iceblade@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 months ago

      Yeah, what needs to happen is changing those laws. The constitution has been changed many times before, and there’s no reason it can’t be changed again.