cross-posted from: https://50501.chat/post/54068

Time to break free of traditional political ideological labeling and divisions. Time to abandon old, divisive sociopolitical labels like “liberal” and “conservative”.

A new political party based on a vastly, commonly held virtures lends itself to embrace over 66% of Americans, and it clearly embraces progressive principled thinking. In the most ideal American sense of unity, a political party should not be able to be defined or placed as “to the left” or “to the right” of where the Democratic or Republican parties currently are. Just let it exist organically based on present-day principled thinking. The American Progressive Majority.

Originally Posted By u/Atlanticbboy At 2025-03-23 04:38:18 AM | Source

  • Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish
    1·
    2 days ago

    With proper education, sure. Maybe 1000 rounds is a bit much though.

    My opinion is you should have to put in a certain number of hours of range time with your weapon (per year probably, not just one time) in order to have it. You should also have to demonstrate knowledge of maintanace and proof of proper storage available for it, especially if there are younger people in your house.

    We require a license for a car, which has utility and is almost required in the US. We don’t have anything like that for guns for some reason. Why not? The 2A specifically states “well regulated” so it should be fine even with the most generous interpretation.

    • fux@piefed.socialEnglish
      0·
      1 day ago

      “well regulated” in this context means properly educated and trained, not regulated by laws.

      I can agree with some of your other points but especially the range time and training requirements price out a lot of poor people which often are minorities with a higher need for personal security. If you consider owning firearms a right this would be a clear infringement in my view.

      • Cethin@lemmy.zipEnglish
        1·
        1 day ago

        It means properly educated and trained, and also the weapons were stored in armories, not at home, and organized into regiments and ready to be called up for active duty. Essentially, what the national guard is, with less organization between groups.

        I did not mean regulated by laws. I meant that home gun ownership without any training or organization is not part of a well regulated militia, so it is not protected by the second amendment. Random people just owning guns at home is not “well regulated” by any definition.