• RaoulDook@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      That’s not going to happen in the lifetime of anyone who can read this comment.

      Because it requires more than a majority of Congress, it also requires 3/4 of the 50 states to vote to ratify it. Only takes 13 states voting NO to prevent it, and there are plenty more red states than that who would never give up our rights so foolishly.

    • Doomsider@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      10
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It has taken on a life of its own and has been twisted to the breaking point by gun nutters. It is never enough for them and any push back is like pulling teeth. They have become the terrorist at this point and there is no reason to negotiate anymore.

      • CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        See it from their perspective: every time they’ve given an inch, grabbers took a mile. If you want to get concessions you’re going to need to give some too.

            • Doomsider@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              Dunno, how do you convince a racist person not to be racist? A flat-earther that the world is round? An anti-abortionist that birth control is the most effective way to prevent abortion?

              The answer is you don’t. They are just wrong.

                • Doomsider@lemmy.world
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  1
                  ·
                  edit-2
                  1 year ago

                  When women got the right to vote did they try and rationalize with the misogynist? Maybe they could meet them half way and say women only get half a vote instead of a full vote? Does that sound like a good compromise to you!

                  It is like every major social change could have never happened because they would have to “enforce what they thought was right”. Slaves would need to convince the slavers and find some middle ground. Maybe be slaves half the year to appease them.

                  The problem is your are not only dealing with someone who is wrong in the case of gun nutters but they are daring you to come get their precious guns threatening your life. It is in essence terroristic in nature. There is no compromise with terrorists.

                  So yes, we tell them they are wrong. We grow up and stop giving in to terrorists. Laws are changed but more importantly society changes. Those that can reflect on this and accept they were wrong change or maybe the rest all die of old age. We move on and get past this.

                  • CancerMancer@sh.itjust.works
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    1
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    1 year ago

                    I think your take is exceedingly unwise, uneducated, and authoritarian. You are exactly the kind of person you claim to be against right now.

    • darq@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      It will never be enough. Look at the responses in this thread and elsewhere. It will never be enough. There is no price too high that it won’t happily be paid. There is no regulation small enough that it will be accepted. They have made that exceptionally clear.

      There is no negotiation with them. You will never convince them. It doesn’t matter if the regulation works or not.

        • darq@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          I don’t even think it’s a might-makes-right issue yet. They have guns, sure. But that’s still basically nothing in the face of government force.

          My point was more along the lines of that in all of these gun control discussions, there are mistaken expectations from a lot of liberal people.

          Liberals keep engaging in this conversation as if it were a negotiation between reasonable people trying to find common ground. That if the cost of a lack of regulation grows too high, that if they make the right arguments, that if they offer the right compromises, they can move towards moderate gun control.

          But that’s not what’s happening. The gun lobby has repeatedly shown that any regulation, no matter how small, will be viewed the same way as a complete forcible disarming, and will be opposed with the same vigour. And that there is no cost of human life that will ever change that.

          For the 2nd Amendment types, the conversation is already over. Everything they say is meaningless, because they don’t actually care if what they say is true, they don’t care if the regulation works or not. They are just saying things to shut down the discourse, and if you counter them, they’ll just move on to the next point like nothing has changed. Because to them nothing has changed.