Recent comments
ADHD: Hunter in a Farmer's World
Thom Hartmann has written a dozen books covering ADD / ADHD - Attention Deficit Hyperactive Disorder.
Join Thom for his new twice-weekly email newsletters on ADHD, whether it affects you or a member of your family.
Thom's Blog Is On the Move
By webmaster
Hello All
Thom's blog in this space and moving to a new home.
Please follow us across to hartmannreport.com - this will be the only place going forward to read Thom's blog posts and articles.
http://www.tmra2.org/images/democracyvsrepublic.pdf
Queenbeethat'sme, studies of the homeless and not homeless found that not homeless people make bad decisions too but what distinguishes them is that the homeless don't have family to back them up - and in the era of no social safety net that will make all the difference. The homeless are the surplus population that used to work in manufacturing. Now they are useful to keep private prisons well stocked.
The National Coalition for the Homeless, on its website, stated that the toughest states in the Union to be homeless are Florida, California and Hawaii. Travelling homeless people have told me that - and I didn't check it but - Florida has 500 prisons, most of the them private, and you can do six months for spitting on the sidewalk in Florida - if you're black, Hispanic and/or poor. Another told me it's a felony to sleep outside in Florida and when you're released after doing your time you got nowhere to sleep so you're back in like the old, southern vagrancy laws.
After manufacturing left the United States, not only were the good jobs for the uneducated and unskilled gone with them but also, the Federal, state and local tax base was gone. So the new tax base was property taxes. So good jobs were gone, the social safety net was starved and housing cost skyrocketed.
The inevitable result was mass homelessness. But the 1% is cool with that, no sweat off them. They got the Republican party AND the Democratic party.
Thom - you rattled off a bunch of politicians that accepted blood money from the NRA.
Where does the NRA get there millions of dollars? I can't believe its from dues paying NRA members. Is it from gun manufacturers?
There is a good article at The Guardian about how much larger America's gun violence problem really is.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2016/jun/21/gun-control-debate-mass-...
Absolutely Agree!
While we're at it - let's review the entire Constitution! Our country has obviously changed dramatically from the last 240 years.
The idea that each state still has two U.S. senators is woefully outdated. Let's re-configure according to state population size.
My proposal for guns in America:
Ban all guns completely at the federal level. Exceptions are U.S. military and other federal entities requiring firearms (i.e. FBI, CIA, Border patrol agents, etc.)
Then each state crafts their own gun laws. I would also allow counties and municipalities to craft their own unique enforceable gun laws. This would be very strictly enforced. Individuals would be held completely responsible for the applicable gun laws depending on their specific location in the country. I would like to think that the uncertainty of the various local gun laws would make people think twice about owning and carrying firearms.
Ideally, all guns should be banned in our country. With the obvious exceptions of military, police, other law enforcement agencies, etc. Hunters could apply for firearms and go through a very strict background check, with the added provision that their hunting shotguns and rifles be locked up when not in use - subject to random checks by local authorities. All other citizens possessing or using a firearm would be dealt with very severly. Eventually they would be rooted out of our society. The idea that "only a good guy with a gun can stop a bad guy with a gun" is both laughable and ludicrous.
Obviously these ideas, and some other good ideas presented on this blog, won't go forth until all money is removed from our political process, particularly the election process.
I suspect we will never know.
With Republicans in control you cannot pass sensible gun control. The Party of no solutions. Vote them out.
Thank you Thom, almost all of our social problems today can be linked to America's past with the "peculiar institution" that we know of as slavery, the only reason for the right to bear arms is so white men can oppress black men.
Sadly, we are all slaves in the USA, kept obedient and docile by a standing army: the police! All our weapons have not repelled this de facto coup de tete, engineered by a handful of corporate fascists.
Corrected first sentence
You noted that Madison said,
Madison put the 2nd amendment in the Constitution in the first place to arm the citizenary to protect the republic against a Federal standing army over throwing a state or the Federal Government, as standing armies have done to so many other government in the past. Madison was not at all concerned about slave rebellions when he proposed the original wording of the 2nd amendment. It was Patrick Henry and the other slave state representatives that wanted the new wording so the state governments could protect themselves from a slave revolt. Since we no longer have slavery, the first wording would be correct to protect the elected governments from a military coup. And don't deny that it can never happen to our nation as it has happened to other nations. All it takes is the economy to implode, and have mass riots in all the major cities, and in the name of restoring order the military takes over the government.
Changing the word back from state to country would be the correct thing to do to modernize the 2nd Amendment. We still would want an armed citizenary to defend against a military coup. How many democratic, or representative governments have been replaced by a military coup in the last 500 years where the citizenary had no weapons. One country is too many, and you sure wouldn't want it to happen in a state, or country you lived in. I don't own a gun of any kind. But I will agree that Madison knew what was needed to keep our nation free of a military coup.
Corrected first sentence of my comment.
It should read, You noted that Madison said,
I absolutley agree and disagree with Thom. You hit the nail on the head. When our current government allows 1% of the population to own 97% of the wealth, our government needs to be changed. When our government stops being the government for the people, that is congressmen are bought by the wealthy, it is a time for change. Repeal the 2nd amendment? Not a chance.
Since well regulated militias are not necessary for the security of a free state, and that militias have not been used to defend our free state since before the Civil War, the rest of the 2nd is bunk. Totally obsolete. Can't base law on a lie, and can't base law on a false premise. Thus there is no logical foundation for unfettered access to assault weapons. Or hand guns. SCOTUS needs to get schooled. No state level law with the text of the 2nd would survive the logic test. No law school teaches students to write laws based upon lies and false premises. The current 2nd is more senseless than the founders "other idea for the 2nd amendment": "A well maintained system of roads being necessary for the state's economy, the right of the citizens to own and operate draft animal powered vehicles shall not be infringed." What a mess our economy, freeways, highways and roads would be with horse carriages and pack mules rolling along side big rigs and autos. The the logic, stupidity and outcome of each are insane. Look at what a mess our country is in, being awash in modern military assault weapons instead of the manually loaded single shot musket.
Am I the only one who finds it strange that we live in a country where driving is considered a privilege but owning a gun is a right. I could probably kill as many people as were killed in Orlando just by driving a Hummer through an airport. Ooops, spilled the beans. Now they'll probably confiscate my vehicle. That's okay though; they'll let me keep my Uzi. It's my right.
"So long as governments set the example of killing their enemies, private individuals will occassionally kill theirs". Elbert Hubbard
We are made to feel that it is alright for the federal government to kill 27 civilian by-standers to get one "supposed terrorist" that we have never met which includes blowing up grandmothers and little kids. The environment inside the government is producing its share of "Adolph Eichmans" and "Ilse Kochs". We do nothing. But we are shocked when a single person shoots others-- not sane.
How profound and yet so simple, Thom! It likens the protection of slavery as a southern white obsession during our founding to that of gun ownership today - and for essentially the same paranoid base!
Unfortunately, I fear that repealing the Second Amendment will make the adoption of the Thirteenth Amendment look like a walk in the park. (It's already lagging 150 years behind.) There is no Lincoln out there to even dream of taking up the cause. If elected, Hillary will dare not touch the concept of repeal (or "abolition" in Trump's limited vocabulary).
Only the presence of an Elizabeth Warren in the VP's office might bring us somewhat closer to a national conversation on repeal. Thom, (sorry to digress) she would have been sooooooooooo much better on guns and many other issues. Why didn't the Dem pols let her run???
As my blog of June 17 suggests, the most pernicious opposition to ANY gun reform legislation (forgetting about amendment repeal) can come from fearful red-state Democrats, with Heidi Heitkampt of North Dakota a prime example.
https://www.thomhartmann.com/users/brooklynmike/blog/2016/06/where-president-lost-war-nra
"Gun violence has reached a breaking point." .....The Orlando shooting "breaking point" just happens to be a mass shooting the FBI was well aware this shooter could carry out. They were not only on to this guy before he tried to buy an arsenal of ammo and body armor, the gun store employees called the FBI and alerted them about this attempted purchase three weeks before the shooting. In addition, the corpse media reported the on duty police officer at the club, engaged the shooter, and then "retreated" ???? No other mention of him since the day of the shooting. Did he charge up behind the shooter as the shooter entered the club??? ..guess not. Maybe the shooter had eyes in the back of his head too? At any rate, the good guy with the gun lost.
This all adds up to more, be very afraid Merica, better vote for the party that supports out of control military spy complex spending, which is exactly what the terrorists want us to do...bankrupt out country. Kind of like when we gave flying lessons to guys who said they didn't need to know how to land the planes. But hey, that's how our warfare economy works....keep the populous fearful. It's the ruinous economic direction Eisenhower warned us about for sure. Getting rid of the second amendment won't stop the violence it takes to justify this insane spending .
I agree. There are fewer people who own more weapons than was the case fifty years ago. We can do what was done in Australia and save the lives of tens of thousands of Americans every year. Since Australia changed its laws there have been no mass murders by firearms. We should follow the common sense of most of the world and get rid of these terrible weapons. the folks who believe that because they own a few firearms that they will prevent the United States Government from enslaving the population are merely conspiracy theory believers. There is no way that my owning a firearm will protect my freedom and liberty. We need to repeal the 2nd Amendment and replace it will a common sense provision that allows citizens to own handguns and long guns for specific purposes but each owner must have responsibilities for safety just as we do with automobiles. The priviledge to own a firearm ought to come with legal responsibilities. We need to keep weapons away from people who are crazy, angry with their spouse, and violent felons among others. To say that there is an unfettered right for every person living in the United States to possess a killing tool is crazy. An axe is used to cut wood but could be used to kill a person; however, a pistol's primary purpose is to maim or kill. You could use it as a toy for target practice only, but most people want to use a pistol for protection, that means to maim or kill.
We don't need to get rid of the second amendment so much as we nee to read it---the "A well regulated militia . . ." part. Everyone who wants to own a gun should be able to do so by joining a citizens branch of the National Guard where they receive a license for a given type of weapon AFTER they have had about six months of evening and weekend training similar to the training given soldiers and police officers. Along with the firearms training, the applicants would also receive psychological evaluations and background checks similar to those given to soldiers and police officers. This would eliminate 95%, maybe 99%, of these random incidents. How many of the shooters in the worst mass-murders in the US could have gotten through a psych eval AND a thorough background check? Close to none. I don't seriously believe this system will ever be instituted, but there it is folks, right there in the God-given Second Amendment: "A well REGULATED militia . . ."
Thom didn't say that standing armies are the number one threat to a democracy. Not at all if you actually read it, it was the Founders who sait that! You seemed to ignor the whole part of the real reasson for the second ammendment which was set up so state militias could keep slavery in place. And as per usual, it was the "people keeping of arms" in the context of a well regulated militia. Times have changed alot, we do have a standing army, in many forms. We still have, what is left of our democracy. The excuse you use; that everyone needs guns so that we may protect ourselves from an invasion. From where and who? And since commerce is involved with the sale of guns both the Federal Government and State and local goverments have every right to regulate the sale of guns. The Gun lobby has nothing to back themselves up in this, but does via lies!
Tom makes great points that support his surprisingly clear conclusion!
But as repubs dominate state legislatues, repeal of the 2nd is remote in our lifetime.
What might pass: give each state a voters choice to ban certain firearms, and allow extensive border checking.
Red states will remain free fire zones, and Blue states will enact civilized restraints.
Just as interstate freeway drivers are now checked for fruit/vegetables, they would be routinely stopped at state borders for a firearms check.
Canada does this at its border and their gun deaths are far below the US slaughter of 90 per day.
ct
You fall for CIA black ops to further disarament on our way to tyranny
You say that standing armies are the number one threat to democracy.
Many people know of this danger to our freedom. They realize that the only way to protect democracy is to have an armed citizenary to protect an elected government from a rogue standing army. When the citizenary is unarmed is when "a military coup" occurs. How else are the citizens of a nation going to over throw an unwanted government. This is how the founding fathers defeated the British government, by having an armed citizenary. As long as we have weapons to defend our civil liberties we will not have a military coup in this country.
We have to weed out the terrorists, that is the correct solution.
We taught these things in poli-sci courses o'er the years since I started proffing in 1964 {back before the gun-totin' problem became so urgently in need of solving}.