I have been reading the various pro and con articles related to gun control and ran upon this seeded article by a Newsviner.
When Any Fool Gets a Gun: 19 ‘Second Amendment’ Fails (VIDEO)
There was a great comment in the comments section that bears repeating...
If voters can be led and have their opinions skewed like consumers who are trying to decide which brand of detergent is best to use, I can easily become the victim of the politics of the unenlightened,unmeritorious and uninformed; on the other hand, my owning a gun has an infintestimal chance of effecting yours or anyone else;s life.
This is a brilliant observation by Huff-Po commenter Nick Sykes.
Lets apply this observation and recast some of the headlines here on the Vine in that spirit.
When Any Fool Can Vote: 19 Elected Official Fails
I think that we all can find 19 examples of complete idiots that voters have elected. Nick Sykes correctly observes that uninformed, easily led voters are far more dangerous to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness of our general society than someone with a gun is.
Here are a couple more headlines that are popular on Newsvine right now....
The NRA vs. America
How the country’s biggest gun-rights group thwarts regulation and helps put military-grade weapons in the hands of killers
Lets rewrite this shall we....
The Democratic Party Vs America
How the country's biggest anti-constutional rights party thwarts life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness and helps to put regulations in place that stifle commerce, foment domestic unrest, and to enable killers to murder defenseless Americans.
It is just as valid of a headline if not more so than the original.
Rather than belabor this point, we should look at what constitutional changes can be made to keep this from happening.
The first solution is the most interesting in that those who are clamoring at the top of their figurative lungs for the registration, background checks, and competency checks for gun owners are exactly the same people that figuratively scream bloody murder at the simple act of requiring proper identification to vote. Thus, voter identification and a state and federal check system to make sure that once a person votes that they cannot vote again makes all the sense in the world.
The second solution would be a competency test. You simply would not be allowed to vote, i.e. you would not be entered into the voter rolls unless you pass a basic competency test on your knowledge of the constitution and government. How in the world can you possibly cast an informed vote unless you understand how the government works?
The third solution would be a mental health check. Do you seriously want to have a mentally unstable person casting vote? A vote in the hands of the mentally unstable is a far more dangerous weapon for our body politic than a gun. Thus anyone currently under the care of a mental health professional would not be allowed to vote. We could even mandate under Obamacare that Doctors would be required to ask questions about the mental state of their patients and if in his or her professional medical opinion the person is not competent to handle a vote, he can then report this to the proper authorities and the person's voting rights are suspended until such a time that mental competency can be proven.
Another regulation to be enacted is that anyone that works for a lobbying organization would not be allowed to vote. These people have a vested interest in you voting toward their goals and thus have a vested interest in lying to you for their own purposes. Removing the right to vote from them would guarantee that their influence would be tempered.
The final regulation would be to ban political commercials of any type. These are not designed to inform, they are designed to influence, thus they by there very nature are intended to deceive.
Back to Reality
While this article is tongue in cheek, it serves to illustrate the point that so many of these arguments against our second amendment RIGHTS can be equally applied to voting and thus the true nature of the proposals are shown in the light of day. They have nothing to do with solving the problems related to people who use guns illegally and everything to do with infringing upon the fundamental rights of the people to protect life, home, and family.