Subject:
|
Re: National vote on handguns?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Mon, 23 Jul 2001 01:34:55 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
612 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Daniel Jassim writes:
> The point I would like you to grasp, Larry, is that laws and rights about
> handguns and automatic weapons are currently controlled, for the most part,
> by the lobbyists and politicians in Washington D.C., not by the Joes and
> Janes in Anytown, U.S.A.
>
> The accepted approach is through your senator or rep but it never fails that
> the movement stalls and fizzles when it reaches Washington and the endless
> committees and sub-committees. And the lobbyists keep the politicians palms
> well greased so that these teensy l'il gun control issues can slip by
> easier. Is that the system you prefer for our laws about handguns and
> automatic weapons?
It's not the system I prefer for our laws about ANYTHING, Dan, and you know
it, or you would if you were paying attention.
So you can skip the soapbox parts about how bad the government is, because
I'm already convinced our current system is broken, we have way too many
laws about way too many things and what always seems to happen is that
whoever paid the most to campaign funds gets special deals (can you say
Archer Daniels Midland? Can you say Baseball owners and their stadiums? etc,
etc, and I really do mean etc... there are so many examples it makes me ill).
But what I really really would like you to do is not do *this* sort of thing:
> You work out the technical details on my statements Larry and decide how YOU
> think it would work better.
You seem to have made a proposal a few posts back. I asked *you* how you'd
like to get it accomplished, bearing in mind how our government works. I
assumed you knew how it works, giving you the benefit of the doubt, despite
your confusion about how the Electoral College works. Referendums do *not*
get to override the constitution, unless you first get the constitution
changed to let them do so. I'm not sure how many times that needs to be
pointed out before you get it.
So what *are* you proposing? Or are you just blowing hot air?
If the latter, just say so, that's fine, we all do it here, but don't expect
ME to figure out how to implement YOUR idea for you. I happen to think that
referendums are a terrible idea at the national level, because I think a
more representative and less straight democratic government is better.
Which, again, you'd know about me if you've been paying attention.
I put all my cards on the table and when questioned about what I mean I try
to clarify and explain, and I even admit I don't know all the answers.
I'm asking you a serious question. How do you want to see this referendum
idea implemented? Or do you just want to say you *want* to have one with no
regard whether it's practical or constitutional or not?
Me, I'd love to see a constitutional convention. We've never had one of
those. It would give a chance for wholesale change to the constitution
rather than one amendment at a time change.
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
| Number one: I am not blowing hot air. Number two: I am not confused about the electoral college. I was, however, hasty and unspecific in that post but I hope I've clarified to your satisfaction. Number three: Regardless of how detailed or unspecific (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
| (...) I think I disagree, though I'd invite anyone to convince me. I think we should do away with all our laws, start over, and put everything up for straight democratic vote. And each and every law/issue would need 75% in favor in order to pass. (...) (23 years ago, 23-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: National vote on handguns?
|
| The point I would like you to grasp, Larry, is that laws and rights about handguns and automatic weapons are currently controlled, for the most part, by the lobbyists and politicians in Washington D.C., not by the Joes and Janes in Anytown, U.S.A. (...) (23 years ago, 22-Jul-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
110 Messages in This Thread:
(Inline display suppressed due to large size. Click Dots below to view.)
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
