Mark Cuban wants to change the Second Amendment to protect the rights of gun owners?

[JeffG]

Cuban is great at telling people what to do. He is a blowhard and a loudmouth.

 

[Old Stumpy]

What next? Changing the first amendment regarding freedom of speech?

 

[reddog81]

His proposal would have interesting results. If I’m reading it correctly the federal government wouldn’t be able to ban or confiscate guns but states could. Wouldn’t this allow Republican controlled states to legalize full auto firearms, short barreled anything, and suppressors and other similar items, while Democrat controller states would ban everything?

Not that his proposal matters at all, but it seems like it’d open the flood gates in each direction. I’m sure he’d balk at the idea of states allowing the sale of M16’s but that seems to be exactly what he’s proposing. 24 states have republican control of the legislature and governors office. Democrats have 6. Montana passed the Firearms Freedom Act in 2009 and 8 states passed similar laws since then according to Wikipedia. These laws have minimal impact today but would be the starting point under this proposal.

 

[Alte Schule]

"In order to become the master, the politician poses as the servant." Charles de Gaulle

 

[psyopspec]

Mmmmm, it said he backed Hillary in 2016. Hard to trust some one like that.

I feel the same way about those who claim to be pro-2A while supporting the current administration.

 

[Pudge]

First off, anyone who believes the way to protect an individual's rights and freedoms is to give more authority to government is intellectually challenged. Second Mark is from Pittsburgh, PA, and obviously has a poor understanding of PA's firearms regulations.

 

[Texas10mm]

Own A gun. Here's your single shot .22 rifle. BTW, ammo is $50 a round and you're limited to 6 rounds per year.

No thanks.

 

[sherrick13]

Gee, let's see a super rich guy who runs with folks that I find questionable at best... proposes a change to the second amendment...

Why am I not impressed?

This. He is a liberal. He is lying. Where is the rest of the story?

 

[BigBore44]

We don’t need the rest of the story. Cuban won’t change the 2A. Seriously? The co-host on a tv show is going to change the constitution. He’s not even in office. And even if her were, it takes a couple more votes than Mark Cuban to get an amendment changed.

 

[Robert]

At the risk of being called a JBT, yet again, I am closing this one. Mr. Cuban is entitled to his opinion, however wrong it may be, just the same as we are. We, however, have the Constitution and the law on our side. We are drifting in to politics in a fairly non THR manner.

We, staff, recognize that politics and firearms are so intertwined that it is nigh impossible to discuss one without the other in this day and age. How we go about that conversation is far more important and why THR has such high standards. We, the THR community, should know that there is no one side that fully supports or decries our rights and position. Yes, one side of the political spectrum supports our rights more than the other, and yes, one side seeks to deny our rights more than the other. But bandying Liberal or Conservative about as if they are in and of themselves weapons does us no good. All that will do is push those away that may have been allies had we not been so arrogant. If we wish to discuss the associated politicians and politics that surround our rights then we must do so in an adult, intelligent manner without the addition of emotion and name calling.

Some people will never change their mind, but some will. We are to be that beacon for those seeking knowledge and truth. So we must ask ourselves, are we presenting gun owners and gun ownership in the best possible light?