Timeline for Have gun rights ever increased without a revolution?
Current License: CC BY-SA 4.0
27 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| May 11, 2020 at 3:06 | review | Close votes | |||
| May 11, 2020 at 7:52 | |||||
| May 6, 2020 at 15:29 | history | edited | Spencer |
Removed inapplicable tag
|
|
| May 6, 2020 at 15:27 | comment | added | Spencer | At any rate, the example of Switzerland, for which there is a pretty definitive Wikipedia article, makes this question too basic. | |
| May 6, 2020 at 15:24 | comment | added | Spencer | @mart The tag was edited in later by someone else, and I don't think that restriction was intended by OP. | |
| May 6, 2020 at 15:22 | comment | added | Spencer | @NathanCooper Your suspicion is well-founded; since the Declaration of Independence does not mention any restriction on arms as one of the many grievances against the Crown, and the Virginia Declaration of Rights, upon which the Bill of Rights is based, does not have language about arms that can be construed in such an absolutist way (it mentions "a well-regulated militia, trained to arms"). | |
| May 6, 2020 at 14:22 | comment | added | mart | The question is tagged united states but asks for any examples. I assume the tag is in error, correct? | |
| May 6, 2020 at 14:21 | answer | added | mart | timeline score: 3 | |
| May 6, 2020 at 12:45 | comment | added | Nathan | I'm sort of interested in a related assumption that's embedded in this question. That the American revolution was victory for gun rights against the pro-gun control redcoats. Is that a thing people actually believe? Is it important to the argument here? Would you like to see an answer to that question? | |
| May 6, 2020 at 4:53 | answer | added | Rodrigo de Azevedo | timeline score: -1 | |
| May 6, 2020 at 4:11 | history | edited | Rodrigo de Azevedo | CC BY-SA 4.0 |
added 4 characters in body
|
| May 6, 2020 at 1:18 | review | Close votes | |||
| May 6, 2020 at 6:34 | |||||
| May 6, 2020 at 0:08 | answer | added | Jurp | timeline score: 1 | |
| May 5, 2020 at 22:31 | answer | added | user18968 | timeline score: 2 | |
| May 4, 2020 at 1:13 | comment | added | Luiz | Brazil is trying, we even had a referendum where the people did not allow a comprehensive arms ban, and which was ignored for years 'cause it did not went the way the socialists wanted. Now Bolsonaro increased our rights somewhat, in little details like the amount of allowed ammo and decreased paperwork, but he could not pass more fundamental legislation yet. On the other hand you can argue that electing Bolsonaro after decades of socialists and communists was a kind of popular revolution against the system, so I am not sure if it should count. | |
| May 4, 2020 at 0:50 | comment | added | Cort Ammon | I'm striving to avoid what I call the "fallacy fallacy," which is when, given that an argument fits a fallacious pattern (such as the slippery slope fallacy), then the argument is wrong. just because there's a fallacy called "the slippery slope fallacy" does not mean slippery slopes do not exist and that they cannot be used as a rational justification. It merely indicates that I need to tread more carefully. | |
| May 4, 2020 at 0:48 | comment | added | Cort Ammon | @SJuan76 Yes, you can think of that as a slippery slope. And many who depended on slavery thought of it as a negative slippery slope as well, even though we think of it as positive nowdays. I ask examples of it going the other way because that would demonstrate that the slope is not a one way thing, but a balance, which would counter their argument. However, if there's a lack of evidence that it can go both ways, it's hard to use that as a response to their position. | |
| May 3, 2020 at 19:28 | comment | added | SJuan76 | The concept of slippery slope is slippery at best. You could as well say that the last 150 years of history have been a slippery slope towards human rights (first they banned slavery, then they allowed poor men to vote, then women and then even non-white people!) But that would not mean that emancipation caused or facilitated femenine suffrage anymore that taking those both movements as examples of a common general trend towards individual freedom, or even completely unrelated events. | |
| May 3, 2020 at 18:35 | comment | added | Cort Ammon | @Lucian That question is intentionally out of scope. The question is seeking to explore the existence of a slippery slope, not its moral character. | |
| May 3, 2020 at 18:33 | comment | added | Cort Ammon | @a_donda and in reference to your comment, that would qualify other "civilized countries" as not providing evidence that gun rights can increase without revolution. While I intentionally included those nations in my question, your comment sugests that they don't play a part. | |
| May 3, 2020 at 18:31 | comment | added | Cort Ammon | @a_donda While my commentary providing context is focused on the US, I explicitly included all nations or states. I excluded revolutions because they are a fundamentally different beast all together, and as you point, the concept of deriving rights from them is complicated. | |
| May 3, 2020 at 14:40 | comment | added | user43870 | I downvoted because the question is applicable to a single country only. Many countries had their revolutions, none derives such a right from that. | |
| May 3, 2020 at 13:59 | comment | added | user42241 | I downvoted because the question reads like an invitation to discussion. Maybe it could be edited to focus only on the question being asked. | |
| May 3, 2020 at 12:15 | history | edited | John Dallman |
Add united-states tag, because this is an America-specific question.
|
|
| May 3, 2020 at 10:09 | comment | added | user43870 | Mostly without revolution, just economic interest and construed arguments and lobby work. And this is a national 'Murrican question. Most civilized countries make sure that people don't just run around with guns and that is rarely questioned at all. When there's no hill, there's no slope, very simplistic spoken. | |
| May 3, 2020 at 10:09 | comment | added | Lucian | it will never stop until they are all taken away - And ? That's bad because... ? | |
| May 3, 2020 at 5:30 | answer | added | user18968 | timeline score: 5 | |
| May 3, 2020 at 5:08 | history | asked | Cort Ammon | CC BY-SA 4.0 |