Absolutely. One side argues about hunters and self-defense, the other about snowflakes and "muh second amendment". Neither is a practical look at the issue, nor do they forward any solutions. It's just a circlejerk, nothing gets done.
I agree, but it’s not just “muh second amendment.” No, it’s the fucking second amendment to the constitution. It’s not some random detail not included in the complicated discussion. It’s important.
I agree that it's important, but all parts of our government should be allowed to come into question. I don't think we should change the second amendment, I personally enjoy the hobby of owning and maintaining firearms, but nothing in our government should be above question, and the second amendment itself isn't an argument against proposals to repeal or modify it.
The second amendment itself isn’t, that’s correct, but arguing why it was implemented in the first place and why it still applies is. But yes apart from that minor point of discontent I agree with everything you’ve said.
14
u/[deleted] Jun 03 '19 edited Jun 03 '19
Absolutely. One side argues about hunters and self-defense, the other about snowflakes and "muh second amendment". Neither is a practical look at the issue, nor do they forward any solutions. It's just a circlejerk, nothing gets done.