First, to minimize 50-cents' involvement in this thread I've decided to write this in English. The topic of gun control has been discussed ad nauseam on this board and there's no way to fit all the points and counter-points in one post. I have been a gun owner and a firearm instructor for more than 10 years, and do believe I have researched the topic a bit more than most people. First firearm ownership in colonial days was survival necessity. American Revolutionary War and the birth of the nation provided the historical backdrop of myth, that civilians armed with prevailing military arms, could stand up to the mightiest military power of the day (the Great Britain). There are ample writings by founding fathers that they believed the Right for People to Keep and Bear Arms (RKBA) is a check against tyrannical government. So much so that it was codified in the Bill of Rights in the Constitution. If you read history, Bill of Rights were added because the original colonial states' concern of an overly powerful federal government. Many say that was then, 2nd Amendment is nothing more than an irrelevant relic in today's society, also some say 'we don't want to ban guns, we only want to control ***** (insert militarized, assault, whatever evil word du jour). For simplicity, let's just look at AR15: AR15 is popular among gun owners because it's light-weight, accurate and there is a huge aftermarket for parts and accessories. It even got the nickname 'a man's Barbie doll'. The median guesstimate for the number of AR15's in the US is 16 millions. Now let's ban it! Your first roadblock is 4th and 5th Amendments (also in that Bill of Rights) which state: 'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause' AND 'nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.' The emphasis is why there is so called 'grandfather clause' in Bill Clinton signed 1994 Assault Weapon Ban. The State cannot outright ban a property that was legally acquired so what's legally owned before the law was enacted stayed legal. So those 16 million AR15s are here to stay. Now some will say: what if we do an Australian style buyback, by giving a few thousand dollars to each AR15 handed in? If you don't hand them in, then the government goes after you! It's commonly known that after passing NFA, Australia has a compliance rate of about 5%, meaning about 5% of estimated total guns actually were handed in. People simply opt to ignore the law, despite the fact that they are considered criminals in the eyes of the law. Even lower compliance ratio has been shown in NY and CT where similar bans were instituted. Going back to the 16 million AR15's, let's say an average AR15 owner has two of it, and we have a similar compliance ratio. Now you have close to 8 million people who KNOW that they are felons in the eyes of the law. Currently, to get a fully automatic version of the AR15 (M16), you need to jump through hoops and pay almost $20,000 for a legal transferable one. If you make one yourself illegally, you face a 10-year sentence in federal prison. For the 8 million people who are felons-in-waiting, many might just consider 'in for a dime, in for a dollar' by ignoring all gun laws. And let's say 1% of them go for the hard way, 80,000 people who decided that the government wronged them and they want a payback. Now think: is that what you want?
First firearm ownership in colonial days was survival necessity. American Revolutionary War and the birth of the nation provided the historical backdrop of myth, that civilians armed with prevailing military arms, could stand up to the mightiest military power of the day (the Great Britain). There are ample writings by founding fathers that they believed the Right for People to Keep and Bear Arms (RKBA) is a check against tyrannical government. So much so that it was codified in the Bill of Rights in the Constitution. If you read history, Bill of Rights were added because the original colonial states' concern of an overly powerful federal government.
Many say that was then, 2nd Amendment is nothing more than an irrelevant relic in today's society, also some say 'we don't want to ban guns, we only want to control ***** (insert militarized, assault, whatever evil word du jour). For simplicity, let's just look at AR15:
AR15 is popular among gun owners because it's light-weight, accurate and there is a huge aftermarket for parts and accessories. It even got the nickname 'a man's Barbie doll'. The median guesstimate for the number of AR15's in the US is 16 millions.
Now let's ban it! Your first roadblock is 4th and 5th Amendments (also in that Bill of Rights) which state:
'The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause' AND
'nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use, without just compensation.'
The emphasis is why there is so called 'grandfather clause' in Bill Clinton signed 1994 Assault Weapon Ban. The State cannot outright ban a property that was legally acquired so what's legally owned before the law was enacted stayed legal. So those 16 million AR15s are here to stay.
Now some will say: what if we do an Australian style buyback, by giving a few thousand dollars to each AR15 handed in? If you don't hand them in, then the government goes after you!
It's commonly known that after passing NFA, Australia has a compliance rate of about 5%, meaning about 5% of estimated total guns actually were handed in. People simply opt to ignore the law, despite the fact that they are considered criminals in the eyes of the law. Even lower compliance ratio has been shown in NY and CT where similar bans were instituted.
Going back to the 16 million AR15's, let's say an average AR15 owner has two of it, and we have a similar compliance ratio. Now you have close to 8 million people who KNOW that they are felons in the eyes of the law. Currently, to get a fully automatic version of the AR15 (M16), you need to jump through hoops and pay almost $20,000 for a legal transferable one. If you make one yourself illegally, you face a 10-year sentence in federal prison.
For the 8 million people who are felons-in-waiting, many might just consider 'in for a dime, in for a dollar' by ignoring all gun laws. And let's say 1% of them go for the hard way, 80,000 people who decided that the government wronged them and they want a payback.
Now think: is that what you want?
很多支持禁枪控枪的网友没有考虑到实际操作的可能性。可能从来没有摸过枪，甚至只在电影电视里看到过枪。就是在街上看到警察身上带着的枪也是装在枪套里的。她们对枪的感觉大概是对蜘蛛或者毒蛇的感觉，恨不得离得越远越好。
枪当然不是蜘蛛毒蛇，它就是工具。美国和中国不同，民间已经有大量枪支存在。这个肯定是有利有弊。简单说，人家住在乡下的需要有枪对付熊，狼之类的野兽吧，也需要用来家防吧。农村地区经常地广人稀，出了什么事叫警察半小时一小时都赶不到。就是中国，直到80年代，民间也是有枪的。普通人允许持有猎枪，更不用说基干民兵了，人家连高射炮都有装备。这个是文革以后改开时代才开始严格控枪的。
我还很小的时候记得有几次长期不下雨，后来又云聚集，就是单位组织民兵用高射炮搞人工降雨来着。
现在国内农村地头蛇恶霸的现象又有所抬头（看看山西黑煤窑，还有数不胜数的拐卖妇女案例）。在美国由于普通百姓也能持枪，地头蛇恶霸出现的可能就会小些。我看到的案例是40，50年代某小镇，有几个恶人操纵选举，控制了当地政府和警察，当地村民组织武装最后推翻了这几个恶人。
[url]https://www.163.com/dy/article/FRKJK7H50528O6NJ.html
但是，有些人鼓吹连控枪也不能控，那就是别有用心！
根本不是祖宗法不能改的问题。宪法都可以改，而且改过很多次。2/3众议院，2/3参议院，加上2/3州立法机构就可以改。
二修之所以没变，正是因为代表了大多数公民的意志。这不是民主宪政的概念吗？
你说的别有用心在拥枪派看来是坚持原则。从1934年National Firearms Act以来，枪权不断被联邦政府侵害，更不用说各种州立法了。很多不懂枪的人根本不知道很多拥枪公民‘我们退让太多了，受够了！’这种态度。
Slippery slope听到过吗？
嗯，too long
如有提废二修的，就支持，其它都是忽悠，玩去！
只要有利益冲突，矛盾就肯定存在。对于平民百姓来说，枪是对抗国家机器的重要手段。
中国是严格禁枪了，理论上说人民公仆会好好照顾人民，实际上呢大量冤案错案受害的弱势群体唯一渠道就是上访告御状，希望上面的青天大老爷可怜一下他们。各地政府每年在开两会的时候蹲守火车站汽车站，拦截上访人士，武警清场，难道这不是矛盾么。弱势群体没有枪没有别的渠道，要不上访要不上网。网警事实以后跨省追捕的案件少了么？广东的医生因为批评某中医企业被绑架关押没有吗？这些社会矛盾只是暂时压下去了，一旦经济发展不顺，遇到什么动荡，一样会引爆啊。确实因为禁枪，中国的mass shooting很少见，但是中国报出来的“反社会分子”持刀去幼儿园杀无辜小孩的例子一样有啊 [url]https://www.bbc.com/zhongwen/simp/chinese-news-43818901[/url]
相比之下，平民能拥有武装，和国家机器的对抗就有更多的资本。可以看看2014年到2020年的Bundy对峙以及后续。美国至少有陪审团制度，不仅仅是靠青天大老爷来决定屁民命运的。要是没有枪，放牛娃Bundy一家早就被灭了
各位想想，你们自己也是屁民，不是赵家人！！
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bundy_standoff#2016_standoff