Re: Dem member of Congress killed



"RichL" wrote in message news:isSdnQT2H_W21bfQnZ2dnUVZ_h6dnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

And despite the temporary sturm-und-drang in the wake of the VA Tech episode, in actuality nothing was done. Nothing.

http://www.absoluteastronomy.com/topics/Virginia_Tech_massacre

"The massacre prompted the state of Virginia to close legal loopholes that had previously allowed Cho, an individual adjudicated as mentally unsound, to purchase handguns without detection by the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS). It also led to passage of the first major federal gun control measure in the United States in more than 13 years. The law strengthening the NICS was signed by President George W. Bush on January 5, 2008."

This does not appear to be a case where the perpetrator was driven by an extreme albeit coherent political philosophy. That's why I was initially skeptical about your original contention that the shooting was somehow the result of "the politics of extremism, where the other side is demonized and accused of plotting to destroy the nation". In the main, it's another nutbag on the loose with a gun.

A nutbag who ranted online about the current govt. being untrustworthy and "treasonous" (sound familiar?), who apparently stalked his target for some time (he'd been to at least one such previous event). Nuts, yes, but maybe he had some help coming to the conclusion that the current govt. is betraying America.

And yeah, if people were able or willing to take steps to reduce the likelihood of occurrence of episodes like this following VA Tech, I wouldn't even be mentioning the Amendment in the first place. So I'll ask you this: how do you convince the NRA die-hards that raising the bar on gun ownership to keep guns out of the hands of madmen is in the public interest?

The NRA came out in favor of those found to be dangerously unstable by a court being barred from purchasing firearms. What more did you want from them in that context?

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/06/09/AR2007060901080.html

"Senior Democrats have reached agreement with the National Rifle Association on what could be the first federal gun-control legislation since 1994, a measure to significantly strengthen the national system that checks the backgrounds of gun buyers."

So it is hard to imagine that the
founders ignored the reality of the early United States and wrote a
Constitutional Amendment that looked ahead to some distant day when the
state would have well-stocked arsenals to arm citizens in an emergency, it
seems more likely they expected citizens to show up already armed because at
the state level they even put that into writing.

Yes, agreed. All this and more is spelled out in the link on the 2nd A that I posted a link to. The issue is, how does that situation, which no longer exists, extrapolate to today's world?

It doesn't have to, unless the Constitution is amended or the SCOTUS rules that the 2nd does not protect an individual right then the amendment stands as written. The Bush administration figured the War On Terror meant they could ignore constitutional liberties, I assume we don't agree with them on that. Well, the same rule applies down the line--the 2nd doesn't get put in a "no longer applies" category because few of us belong to the National Guard. If circumstances change then you need to change the law, but it's the Constitution, you can't just ignore it.

So here's where the trouble begins. The part involving "exercise of that right as being valuable to society in a collective context" is largely forgotten, and to the extent it's retained, it's used by nutters like Sharron Angle (not to mention our own beloved nutbags) to promulgate a philosophy that insists that if you don't like what the Prez or Congress is doing, and you don't get your way at the ballot box, you're entitled to grab your piece and take care of business.

The ACLU stands up for neo-nazis and other vermin on the issue of freedom of speech not because the ACLU agrees with the vermin, but because they believe that freedom of speech either applies to everyone or it is safe for no one. IMO the 2nd falls into the same category, just because lunatics and criminals abuse firearms does not mean we get to suspend the rights of the sane, sober, law-abiding overwhelming majority who don't misuse their firearms.

Again, I have no problem with rational changes to the law that will actually reduce the criminal use of firearms without infringing on the rights of law-abiding citizens. I'm in favor of safe storage laws for example, in which any firearm not in use has to be secured in a steel lockup where kids and less skilled burglars can't get to it. I'd also require schools that expel students for violent or threatening behavior to report that to the authorities so that person can be flagged on a firearm purchase background check although that should go past a judge and be subject to challenge. There are things that can be done, should be done, but as the law stands today sweeping bans aren't going to survive court challenges.

.

Relevant Pages

  • Dave Kopels Second Amendment Newsletter December 16, 2008
    ... Dave Kopel's Second Amendment Project is based at the Independence ... Law Review Articles on Articles on Judge Wilkinson's Criticism of Heller, and Pacifism; Newspaper and Magazine treatments of the Media and Violence, Plaxico Burress, de-facto gun bans, the election, and 'Beware the Rahm!'; Blogs on Eric Holder and the Election; Video and Audio on the surge in firearms sales, the Constitution, and local politics, and... ... Egyptian Gun Law; Mumbai; Irish Semi-Auto Handgun ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Washington drops hammer on state gun plan
    ... Federal gun regulators have written to gun dealers around Tennessee, dropping the hammer on a new state law that exempts weapons made, sold and used inside the state from interstate regulations. ... The letter, dated just days ago, was distributed to holders of Federal Firearms Licenses. ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: Washington drops hammer on state gun plan
    ... Federal gun regulators have written to gun dealers around Tennessee, ... dropping the hammer on a new state law that exempts weapons made, ... Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, told dealers the Tennessee ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: Dudu Sez- ATF Needs to Hire Sarah Brady and NY Mayor
    ... illegal gun sales at gun shows, and they have the studies to prove it. ... In 1976, the Washington, D.C. City Council passed a law generally ... or dealing in firearms" without a federal license to do ... retail store, 39.2% through an illegal/street source, and 39.6% ...
    (talk.politics.guns)
  • Re: Which Beatle should have lived longest?
    ... including those illegally using firearms. ... the old canard that 'if it weren't a gun it would be something ... Quick and easy if you choose to break the law and puchase a gun ... If he couldn't have access to all those weapons would he have done it? ...
    (rec.music.beatles)