Karl Rove: Only Way To Stop The Violence Is To Repeal Second Amendment

[edporch]

Meet a domestic enemy of the US Constitution who CLAIMS to be a Republican.
And he's gonna push the Republican Presidential candidate on us?

Karl Rove Only Way To Stop Gun Violence Is Repeal 2nd Amendment | The Daily Caller

 

[BogWalker]

Kindly sodomize yourself with a pineapple, Mr. Rove.

 

[OutdoorDad]

His observation is correct. He wasn't advocating for repeal.

But out I do think he is a tool and would do/say anything to find relevance in today's political landscape.

 

[IndyDave1776]

Rove has never been any damned good. I suppose he has reached the point where he no longer feels the need to make any pretense about what he is.

Declaring that the only way to stop this is to eliminate guns and then making the analytical statement that he does not believe it possible to repeal the Second Amendment sure sounds like an endorsement of the idea to me.

 

[pudly]

His observation is correct. He wasn't advocating for repeal.

Actually, he said that it wasn't politically feasible at this point. And he did bring up repeal unprompted by the interviewer.

I mean basically the only way to guarantee that we will dramatically reduce acts of violence involving guns is to basically remove guns from society, and until somebody gets enough “oomph” to repeal the Second Amendment, that’s not going to happen.

 

[KG1]

I'm no fan of Karl Rove and this isn't meant to defend his statement in any way. I think he may have been sarcastic in referring to an ineffective "magic law" to prevent these kinds of incidences. So short of embarking on the daunting task of totally removing guns from society by repealing the Second Amendment there must be an attempt made to deal with the underlying causation of these heinous crimes against society. At least that's how I wish he would have worded any such statement and not leave it open to ambiguous interpretation by gun grabbing advocates to use in support of their cause.

Maybe he truly was advocating for a repeal of the Second Amendment but I find that to be too easy of a take at face value on what he was getting at.

 

[edporch]

His observation is correct. He wasn't advocating for repeal.

But out I do think he is a tool and would do/say anything to find relevance in today's political landscape.

His observation is not correct.
Repealing the 2nd Amendment would do nothing but allow disarming the law abiding.
There's all kinds of places that have no right to keep and bear arms, yet they still have PLENTY of violent criminals with guns who care NOTHING about the law.

 

[chipbennett]

His observation is correct. He wasn't advocating for repeal.

But out I do think he is a tool and would do/say anything to find relevance in today's political landscape.

No, his observation is not correct. Name one country that has reduced gun violence to ZERO?

Singapore is pretty close:

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/singapore

But bear in mind that Singapore is an island nation, barely larger than the Indianapolis metro area, with complete control of imports (and strict state control of individual liberties). And even then, it does not have zero gun violence.

 

[Twangbanger]

At least the elites are coming to grips with the fact that the Constitution presents an obstacle to them, on gun control. That's progress, because pre '08, they saw it as irrelevant.

(Thank you George W. Bush, for two good Court appointees, without whom this would not have been possible).

 

[KG1]

I will amend my take in a previous post by admitting that if Rove meant anything other than advocating a repeal of the Second Amendment he did a horrible job of conveying it and a great disservice to all law abiding Second Amendment proponents by providing fodder to the opposition.

 

[OutdoorDad]

His observation is not correct.
Repealing the 2nd Amendment would do nothing but allow disarming the law abiding.
There's all kinds of places that have no right to keep and bear arms, yet they still have PLENTY of violent criminals with guns who care NOTHING about the law.

I disagree.
The only way to eliminate gun violence is to eliminate guns. All guns.

And in order to do that, you have to repeal the 2nd.

Then you start confiscation of all previously legal and previously illegal guns.

I dont see any way to stop all gun violence without the repeal of 2A. It's just not workable as a plan, otherwise.

I think Rove is correct in his observation.



Now I'll say again. I think he is a tool. And I think he is searching for relevance. And I'll add that I think he would happily lobby for and recruit followers to implement such a plan if someone were willing to pay him to do so.



Im definitely not in favor of it. But I think he is correct. That's why we need to be very diligent in defense of 2A. It's the obvious lynchpin.

 

[OutdoorDad]

No, his observation is not correct. Name one country that has reduced gun violence to ZERO?

Singapore is pretty close:

http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/region/singapore

But bear in mind that Singapore is an island nation, barely larger than the Indianapolis metro area, with complete control of imports (and strict state control of individual liberties). And even then, it does not have zero gun violence.

singapore was going to be my next example!.

How do you keep the streets clean of chewing gum?? Ban the importation and sale of chewing gum!!
as long as there is a single stick of gum, the streets aren't safe. It's the same idea. Give it a few generations and gum violence and gun violence will both be a thing of the past in Singapore.

So IF ZERO GUN VIOLENCE IS THE GOAL (and I'm not claiming it as a goal...I might argue that zero is actually a bad target to have). But if it is a goal, I don't see it happening without a total ban of all firearms.

That's why we need to remain vigilant.

 

[BogWalker]

You'd also have to confiscate pretty much all metal items in existence. And all 3-D printing capabilities. Heck, a sufficiently motivated person could make a gun out of a hunk of wood.

The cat is out of the bag. You can never remove firearms from society. You can severely restrict them and their capabilities I'm sure, but they'll always be there.

 

[KG1]

Magic laws have been proven to be ineffective and a total repeal of the Second Amendment is not and never will be politically feasible. So you might as well learn to deal with causation instead of the tool used to carry out the evil act. Knee jerking gun grabbers flailing about will never get that point.

 

[Trigger Time]

Let them try

 

[Lowe0]

We have a lot of gun violence problems, and the right to bear arms comes with the responsibility to solve them. Repealing the Second Amendment is not that solution.

 

[IndyDave1776]

We have a lot of gun violence problems, and the right to bear arms comes with the responsibility to solve them. Repealing the Second Amendment is not that solution.

I would say that this depends upon where that responsibility is assigned. For example, I feel no more responsibility for gun violence than I do for arson by virtue of having the freedom to buy matches. That said, we put arsonists in prison. No one ever suggests banning matches, lighters, or other flame-producing devices. The failure in responsibility so far as I am concerned is a failure to effectively deal with criminals.

 

[KG1]

I would say that this depends upon where that responsibility is assigned. For example, I feel no more responsibility for gun violence than I do for arson by virtue of having the freedom to buy matches. That said, we put arsonists in prison. No one ever suggests banning matches, lighters, or other flame-producing devices. The failure in responsibility so far as I am concerned is a failure to effectively deal with criminals.

It's the failure to effectively deal with criminals that leads them in their attempts at restricting the freedoms of law abiding citizens. We cannot control the criminal element so therefore we must control everyone but in doing so all you are really doing is controlling those of us whom are lawfully inclined to begin with. We are the punished ones in the end.

 

[ChristianPatriot]

Let them try

Wasn't it already tried 200-something years ago? Isn't that why we are a nation today?

Government: Give us your guns.
People: No.
Government: We'll send an army to take your guns.
People: Ok.
Government (after many, many deaths): We surrender. You're free.
People: We know, and we're going to put laws in place that give the people the right defend themselves against tyranny.

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

Since we're commenting on the Rove comments in 2 places:

Yeah, that Rove headline is misleading, I think. The only way you can constitutionally remove guns (well...a great many of them, in theory anyway) from society is by changing the constitution. Then, you can enact all the utopian laws and institute the remedies the gun grabbers have fantasized about for so long. As we know, at least most of here on INGO know, that's just a kumbiya-pipe-dream. Violence has always been amongst us and it always will be.

Laws do not stop those sufficiently motived to do evil...but a gun is a proven tool to help even the odds.