More liberals and guns
My fellow liberals, arguing for gun control, say that the amendment only relates to citizens in an organized militia. The wording is unclear, but I can’t get past this: the bill of rights generally is about the rights that belong to individual citizens. I don’t know exactly what the founders where thinking, but it seems odd to think that they meant this particular amendment to only apply to organized groups. So I have to conclude, even if it challenges some of my poltical opinions, that it means that yes, American citizens have a constitution right to their guns.
But on the other side, I see anti-gun-control folks insisting that this means that any law that controls the ownership of guns is unconstitutional, and I think that’s patently ridiculous. The right to free speech is probably the most fundamental of all of our Constitutional rights, but that doesn’t mean speech can never be controlled in some ways. Your freedom of speech doesn’t include freedom to incite violence or panic with falsehoods, or freedom to libel someone. Your right of assembly doesn’t mean that the city can’t require a permit for some public gatherings. (It does mean that the way such permits are given out had better be fair, though.)
Given that, I don’t buy the argument that regulation of gun sales or registration of weapons is unconstitutional.
There’s more. Read it all.
Seems a lot of liberal types are abandoning the gun control bandwagon. Good.
June 19th, 2006 at 12:33 am
I’m not going to accept registration though. They can take that shit off the table now.
June 19th, 2006 at 2:02 am
Well his opinion isnt actually in any danger of becoming policy, so I dont feel too threatened by his registration bit. The big win is that ultra-liberals are falling in line with what was in the 80s and 90s considered the viewpoints of right wing anti-government extremists.
Getting them to admit it is a fundamental right is the big win that paves the way for all the other victories we are after. At first they will only say it and not beleive it. Eventually they will beleive it.
June 19th, 2006 at 2:09 am
Oh and he is getting hammered politely in the comments section. Awesome.
June 19th, 2006 at 8:26 pm
OK, I am sick of this absolute crap spewing from the mouths of the socialists;
“Your freedom of speech doesn’t include freedom to incite violence or panic with falsehoods, or freedom to libel someone. Your right of assembly doesn’t mean that the city can’t require a permit for some public gatherings.”
Duh! Really! Who has been claiming otherwise?
So very true, and so very clever is anyone pointing out such an unknown yet important truth ; the First Amendment does not protect fraud or liable. Wow.
AND the Second Amendment does not protect armed assault or murder. And no one has EVER claimed that it does, so stop arguing against a position that has never existed! Get a life, libs.
The First Amendment DOES protect your right to assemble anywhere you damned well please, as long as it is your property or someone else’s property on which you have permission to assemble (notice the Left’s almost total denial of the concept of private property). The First Amendment also means you can have any amount of printers or any type of printer of any capacity, and that you do not need to register your printer or your fax machine, and that you do not need a special license to sell printers or fax machines, or to have your own web site. Are you getting it yet, Lefties? I doubt it.
If I hear the “Duh, yeah, but you can’t yell “fire” in a crowded theatre” argument one more time, I’m going to puke right there on the spot, so don’t say it in my presence unless you’re wearing a wet suit.