• Donjuanme@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    10
    arrow-down
    9
    ·
    1 year ago

    Because it wasn’t the reauthorizing of the assault weapons ban, it was an entirely new version of… The same measures we had 2 decades ago…

    The fuck are you talking about it would never pass Congress or the supreme Court, it’s the same damn thing we already had you muppet.

    • bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      Are you under the impression the politics of 1994 are remotely similar to 2023? Have you read the Supreme Court cases of Heller (2008) or Bruen (2022)?

      Name call all you want, but you’re the one tragically out of touch. This Congress, especially the Republican majority in the house would NEVER pass this bill. SCOTUS has completely changed gun rights in this country since 2008. First finding an individual right to gun ownership, then drastically reducing those gun limitations that are allowable under the 2nd amendment.

      I suggest you do some reading before spouting nonsense. Your comment somehow states the bill is simultaneously “entirely new” and also the “same damn thing”. Muppet.

      • Hypx@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        4
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Those things will all vanish eventually. We currently have the most conservative SCOTUS in basically a century, and the Republican party is near-fascist politically. These are not sturdy foundations for a legal concept. The truth is, society has never accepted murder and cruelty as a necessary part of society. It’s always just a handful of elitists or bigoted fanatics holding society back.

        Eventually, many of our current laws and customs will become viewed as the next version of Jim Crow or anti-LGBT laws, and become so unpopular they get repealed. Some take decades to go down, but they always go down. The concept of gun rights will be one of them.

        • bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          8
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          1 year ago

          Eventually, eventually, eventually…

          Eventually a space alien from over 100 light years away will be named Steve and be president of Earth. You can’t prove me wrong, because… eventually!

          • Hypx@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            6
            arrow-down
            5
            ·
            1 year ago

            Because everything today is exactly as it was when the US constitution was first ratified…

            This is anti-progress thinking. It’s laughable that you actually think basic legal reforms can’t happen.

            • bostonbananarama@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              5
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 year ago

              This is anti-progress thinking. It’s laughable that you actually think basic legal reforms can’t happen.

              No one said basic legal reforms can’t happen, you’re creating a strawman. I said that this Congress and this Supreme Court will not allow gun control. If you disagree, by all means let me know where my error lies.

              Also, let me know the path to passage rather than vague statements about eventually. Eventually is weasel language that means you have no confidence in what you’re saying; if you did, you’d tell me when and how that can be accomplished.

              • Hypx@kbin.social
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                arrow-down
                3
                ·
                1 year ago

                No one said otherwise. But you won’t have this congress and this SCOTUS forever.

                And again, it is basic legal reform. It is not some hard problem. And since nearly every Western country has both universal health care and gun control, it is pretty feasible for those ideas to spread to the US at some point. All your doing is apologizing for the modern incarnation of racist violence.

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

        The court’s opinion swung one way in 15 years. It can swing back in another 15. Three of the 4 oldest justices are Republicans and it only takes 2 being replaced with Democrats to flip the court. Totally within the realm of possibility.

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

          You have to change Congress too. But you’re still talking about 15+ years, and multiple conservative justices dying, and being replaced by liberal justices, and the reverse not happening.

          So can we agree that we can hold off on the AWB for like 20 years?

          • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            No, we can’t even agree on that unfortunately. This country is divided in several ways where there is no acceptable compromise and gun control is one of them.

        • prole@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Scalia’s vote in Heller (singled him out because it was openly against his so-called “originalist” school of thought) undid far more than just fifteen years of precedent.

          • ChonkyOwlbear@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 year ago

            Oh absolutely. Heller was exceptional in its stupidity. My point was just what the current court does, a future court can always undo.