The end of the 2nd Amendment?

Townhall.com ^ | August 17, 2006 | Cam Edwards

[California Patriot]

Thanks for bringing up this Manufacturers' Protection Act up. It's an important bill and a good example of a substantial NRA victory. And it's progress, not just stopping something bad. Bush certainly deserves credit for this one. I'd also be very surprised if the claim that "King George" "promised to sign any gun control" is anywhere close to being true. I also don't trust the judgment of anyone who refers to Bush as King George. What childish crap.

[from occupied ga]

Your defeatist attitude ... without your help

And I can do without your a$$hole comments. You and your "the NRA can do no wrong" and "anyone who isn't in the NRA is nothing" attitude can take a flying leap. One doesn't have to belong to the biggest gun compromising organization to do good work,

[from occupied ga]

I'm not aware that the Brady Law gives bureaucrats a blank check to deny weapon ownership "at any time

You misunderstood me. I was referring to the precedent set by converting a right into a privilege.

[Dick Bachert]

CAMP GUNFREE!

A common sense and historically proven way to keep those dangerous and destructive GUNS out of YOUR life. MEMBERSHIPS AVAILABLE NOW!

Details below.

Concerned about the easy availability of guns in our society?

Are you as alarmed as the United Nations and some within our own government about the "gun nuts" and other freedom wackos allowed to run loose?

Wish the government would just repeal the Second Amendment and confiscate all the guns because you believe sensible people shouldn't suffer because of some idiotic notion about some antiquated “right?”

While we can't take the guns away from the people, we CAN take the people (or at least SOME of them) away from their guns.

At CAMP GUNFREE, we have created an atmosphere of near-total tranquility where you and your family will experience the benefits of a GUN FREE environment.

The unique main gate at Camp GunFree.

The sign over the beautiful wrought iron gate declares: “NO FIREARMS ALLOWED!” Most arriving camp guests never see this view from their comfortable rail cars.

Each of our camps is a gated community designed to keep guns away from camp guests. Firmly enforced security measures ensure that these dangerous and destructive devices are kept outside. Each camp boasts 24 hour, 7 day a week sentries and state-of-the-art enclosure systems, guard dogs, trenches and surveillance equipment to absolutely GUARANTEE that no firearms enter the facility. Rigidly controlled access ensures that no guns will ever be smuggled in.

No cost has been spared to ensure that Camp GunFree remains gun free.

All camp members are given distinctive uniforms to distinguish them from any gun-toting barbarians who might attempt to evade our security measures. Each camp member is also assigned a distinctive ID number to ensure that only the right people are allowed within the camp.

Camp Director, Oberstfurher Koch, and his crack staff are here to see to your COMPLETE safety from dangerous firearms.

Spacious and comfortable sleeping accommodations are a hallmark of Camp GunFree. Room and board are provided to each member in exchange for rewarding tasks designed to provide a sense of accomplishment and to demonstrate that large numbers of people CAN exist – even if for a short time -- in a gun violence free community.

Camp members engaged in one of our many fun-filled organized play activities.

Current headlines prompt us to remind you that there has NEVER been a shooting by a student in any of the camp schools and we can GUARANTEE that there never will be!!

For more information, call 1-800-GUNFREE OR visit our new website at http://www.privategunsareabadthingandwe'llseethatyouare”safe”.batf.gov

(This idea from a pamphlet originally created by The Minnesota Center for Individual Liberty, PO Box 32170, Minneapolis, MN 55432-0170)

[Dick Bachert]

This is just a fabulous article. Please forward it to everyone you can. May Diane Feinstein, Rosy O'Donnell, Hillary Clinton and all other politico-celebrity types who work so sanctimoniously to disarm the average American, while they themselves maintain their armed guards, one day find themselves permanently ensconced in that special place in hell reserved for the hypocritical, self-serving elitists who denigrate personal
self-defense while they hire others to do their wet work for them.

---

http://www.guntruths.com/Houck/just_another_day_with_gun_contro.htm

Just another day with Gun Control, January 16, 2000
by Jim Houck
The movie I went to see today, at the request of my film managers, was Hurricane starring Denzel Washington. I write feature films. I write TV ads for the largest advertising agencies on earth for clients like Toyota, Ford, Sony and Coke. I am the "Hollywood crowd" that the liberal press lies about so often.

I arrived early at the Torrance, California AMC 20 Theaters, so I bought my ticket and sat on a bench just outside the front lobby under a palm tree for about half an hour, enjoying the many different faces, the playing kids, the adults.

A flood of Californians streamed out suddenly. A young girl had been attacked by a criminal who had just shot her.

"Is the shooter stopped?" I asked, reaching for my Heckler & Koch USP .45, running for the lobby with the intent to kill the criminal before he could injure or kill more of We the People.

"No, nobody can do anything! He's just walking around like he owns the place!" a California woman cried, trembling like a mouse before the lion. And indeed, the criminal did.

I ripped up my leather jacket and found my holster missing. I didn't have my .45 with me today. I'd opted not to take it just this one time at the advice of the local Californians, avoid the hassle of the California cops if they discover it, I thought, save the massive court costs of exercising my right. "Don't get caught, the street officers will hook you and book you and let the judges sort it out," a friend and local California police officer had told me repeatedly. Besides, it was three in the afternoon next door to Palos Verdes Estates, one of the most affluent and lowest crime areas in the United States.

My decision to leave my self defense at home very likely cost the young man who would be shot next his life. I have extensive, combat firearms training. I've been in three gun battles with criminals in New Orleans and Miami in the defense of myself twice and a Miami police officer once, and I've never missed nor have I lost. The criminals did.

Of course the criminal didn't know these things. He didn't know he was in a "low crime" area and he didn't seem to care that it was three in the afternoon on a Sunday. All he knew was that he was operating in Senator Diane Feinstein¹s wet dream, a theater of perfect Gun Control. Not one citizen in the large crowd of moms, dads, young men or young women had a firearm with which to defend themselves. So they ran. But the funny thing is, they didn't run very fast and the certainly didn't run very far, in fact, many basically hurried and stood around and complained about not being able to finish their show. You see, criminals being in full control is nothing new in California. It's not news. It didn't excite these folks.

I stopped outside the lobby doors. No gun. No way to fight this criminal, I thought.

The shooter fired again, dropping a young man next. Well, the California people voted this idiocy through, they repeatedly elect servants like Diane Feinstein and Barbara Boxer as state senators, people who take away their rights to self defense and the defense of their families, I thought, let them deal with the consequences of their decisions. Of course the criminal walked out the back of the AMC 20 Theaters and vanished long before the local police could wade through the Sunday traffic and do the paperwork. At least they were nice enough to come. They didn't have to. They responded as a "courtesy" according to the Supreme Court. They have no legal duty to protect the individual from criminal assault or murder. Something surprisingly few people know, especially in California.

I looked at the downed young man. He would die, judging from my own personal
experiences as a shooter of over 20 years and where the criminal had injured him. The girl, barring very unusual circumstances, she would live, judging from where the criminal had injured her and her loss of blood.

The police put pressure on the injuries to try and reduce the bleeding from the criminal attack. Another courtesy service.

I sat back down on the bench and watched the Californians as they angrily demanded their ticket money be refunded, the victims of the criminal lying ten yards from them, moaning, dying.

A man with his wife in the line of angry movie patrons turned to me and growled, "I'm surprised Feinstein isn't here already. And the liberal mainstream press. You know, we carry our guns anyway and we didn't bring them today because it's such a hassle to have to hide them all the time from the local cops. What a bunch of shit. Just look at that guy. He's probably going to die."

Thanks, Senator Feinstein. As a resident of Florida, in Los Angeles working on feature film scripts with my L.A. based managers, it's interesting to see how your Prohibition on self defense, "Gun Control" works. Of course, had you been there to see The Hurricane, your armed bodyguards would have used their semi-automatic, high capacity "assault weapons" to stop the criminal dead in his tracks, which is what the bastard richly deserved. Funny, Diane, with all your SB 23s and SB 15s and Prohibition on self defense, the criminal still badly hurt and perhaps killed two young kids who just went to see a movie on a quiet Sunday afternoon. Why call it "gun control?" Why not rename it "defenseless sheep" or the "citizen massacre laws?" Or maybe just simple "bullshit."

Wish you could have been there Diane to see how your idiotic laws work in real life. It was memorable.

Jim Houck is the Creative Director of Citizens of America

[California Patriot]

I do have to plead a certain amount of ignorance here. I thought the Brady Law was simply a waiting period for all buyers, plus a denial of the automatic right to own a gun to certain felons. Neither, in my opinion, would violate the Second Amendment. (The language of the Second Amendment says "of the people," which suggests a certain concept of the good citizen. That some small class of dangerous people can be kept from owning weapons. There is no such terminology ("of the people") in, say, the First Amendment. A law forbidding an ex-felon to speak freely on public issues would be blatantly unconstitutional.)

If the Brady Law goes beyond what I've described, then I'd agree that it does, or might, violate the Second Amendment.
But I would still point out that it was enacted a decade ago by a Democratic Congress. I know it was renewed, but that's different. To me, if you want to show that we aren't making progress on gun rights, let alone show that we're losing on gun rights, you'd have to show that new laws or regulations that are now occurring, or about to occur, serious enough to outweigh the progress we've clearly been making, currently and much more recently than Brady, on concealed-carry.

[ApplegateRanch]

What YOU don't seem to understand is that having those damned laws that need rolling back in the first place, is a total abrogation of 2A. It is not "idealist" to insist that a RIGHT be recognized as such.

You CAN'T have "a little bit" of a "right" any more than you can be "a little bit" pregnant.

How about making you take a state mandated test, and get a piece of paper to let you join a church?

Or to post?

Or to assemble? Oops; that is also necessary, too, in many instances. Scratch 1A, too.

As to "progress, I was BORN in Californicate, and was able to openly wear a gun in public WHEN I WAS IN 7TH GRADE...and did. In high school, I almost ALWAYS had a gun in my car...LEGALLY. At 16, I was able to (and did) hunt legally ALONE. Now, I would not even be able to own a gun legally at that age, let alone be anywhere near a school with it.

Half or more of what I presently legally own here, would not be legal to even possess there, now; and you call it "progress" because a tiny fraction of the restrictions are selectively rolled back?

It is only progress when it is not necessary to keep fighting the same battles over & over to keep any gain made.

[steamroller]

"derby" is slang in Detroit for a lump of feces-apologies to other Derbys,but in this case the shoe fits

[California Patriot]

Again, I'm talking about what's happening right now -- what changes are being made right now -- not the total situation right now, and now what's happened since you were a kid.

I agree that the situation isn't ideal, although I disagree that it's terrible. I'm only saying, and insisting, that things are getting better, and have been for the last few years, thanks to the shall-issue laws many states have enacted. I would add also, the manufacturers' protection act that Bush signed.

[Shooter 2.5]

Alaska has an unrestricted CCW law and they wouldn't have had that much if they didn't have a shall issue to begin the process.

The NRA and any other gun group doesn't have a magic vote machine. And we're still doing more than any other gun group in the country with CCW laws, Castle Doctine, Sunset of the Assault Weapons Ban, NO lawsuits and the Firearms Manufacturers Protection Act.

[ApplegateRanch]

What I am pointing out is that it is UNCONSTITUTIONAL to HAVE "gun laws", so we will never agree.

[California Patriot]

On that point, no, we'll never agree.

I still fail to see how the situation, however bad you think it is, is getting worse RIGHT NOW or in the last few years. Are we, at this time, losing ground on gun rights? If so, how?

[murdoog]

We have more important rights to fight for than the right to bear arms.

This sentence struck me too, for a couple of different reasons.

First, it tacitly acknowledges that there indeed is a right to bear arms.

Second, it is a very peculiar argument. It suggests that if a right is not the most important right, it's not worth fighting for. By this logic, you could strip the bill of rights down to one amendment.

An English teacher should put more thought into his writing.

[Shooter 2.5]

I depends on where you live. I would imagine in California, things won't get better until you can get more real conservative Republicans in.
Places like Texas where the dems are almost a memory, we're doing ok.
We have to keep the dems out of power in November. It's useless to keep the dems out of Texas when they have the U.S. Congress or Senate.

The sideline quarterbacks will never be satisfied because they aren't contributing. They also will be all to willing to let the hilderbeast back in the White House so they can have a smug look on their faces since they aren't satisfied with the Republicans.

[California Patriot]

Good points, except that I think it's always good to defeat the Rats in an election, even if we are losing bigger elections, like for Congress.

Your point about third-party or stay-home psychology seems quite valid to me. A lot of it's about such a person making himself feel important, everything and everyone else be damned.

[steamroller]

i think it's okay to restrict firearms from the possession of persons convicted of violent felonies;persons committed to mental institutions involuntarily for severe mental disorders,and illegal aliens-otherwise there shouldn't be any gun laws.

[ApplegateRanch]

Neither, in my opinion, would violate the Second Amendment. (The language of the Second Amendment says "of the people," which suggests a certain concept of the good citizen. That some small class of dangerous people can be kept from owning weapons. There is no such terminology ("of the people") in, say, the First Amendment.

Wrong

First Amendment: ...or the right of the people peaceably to assemble..."

[ApplegateRanch]

I could ALMOST do with that, IF if it wasn't the government making the call.

Remember the Russian, Chinese, Vietnamese, etc. "insane asylums"?

[Blue Jays]

Hi ApplegateRanch-

The goblins were breaching the doorway hoping to steal what they expected to be valuable antiques inside. They got the wrong address and when the ax came through the door, my friends used the best weapons they had available to repel the criminals...in their case a golf club and thrown hardcover books from the shelf.

The lockbox they currently have is the same model I use. It can be opened in under two seconds. I do a pattern of four buttons and it pops right open. Their best tactic (in hindsight) would have been to dial 9-1-1 and drop the phone and start yelling...but sometimes one doesn't think of that when they see an ax blade splintering their door.

~ Blue Jays ~

p.s. What is your standpoint on private firearms ownership?

[Blue Jays]

Hi C.P.-

My friends were a little freaked-out in that condominium for a bit and then eventually sold it when he took a transfer. We were all pretty amazed at the time at how brazen these criminals could become. Their viewpoint is probably similar to many folks...they're just not "into" their firearm and they keep their one revolver around because it tips the scale into their favor when they're safely locked inside their own home. They've thankfully never been the victims of crime before or since that single frightening event.

You sound like a very decent and honorable person, good luck with whatever you chose.

~ Blue Jays ~