Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Gun Rights for the Gun Shy
SFGATE.com (The SF Chronicle) ^ | May 14th, 2003 | Adam Sparks

Posted on 05/10/2003 7:32:31 AM PDT by sfwarrior

"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. No free man shall be debarred the use of arms." -- Thomas Jefferson

I grew up in New York City's rough-and-tumble Spanish Harlem in the 1960s. My highschool English teacher, who was then a gray-haired grandma, doubled as our coach -- the rifle team's coach. The range was in the school's basement, where we practiced twice a week.

Our school was in a gritty neighborhood, replete with five-story walk-up tenements -- it could have been a set for "West Side Story." When the teen gangs weren't breaking into cars, they were snapping their fingers and harmonizing their "doo-wa-diddie"s on the street corners under the moonlight. It was there that our high school supported a rifle team.

My experience was not all that unique. It was just like that in cities across the country: Even San Francisco had high schools, from Lowell to Lincoln, that had basement firing ranges. That was in the decades before the politically correct gun-a-phobic peaceniks took control over our schools. That was before the self-esteem, whole-language, peace-and-love crowd commandeered our youth and turned their brains into mush.

Ironically, during those days, the nation never had a single school shooting and certainly no such thing as killing your teacher for notoriety or a better grade. Guns were readily available back then; it was a time that even teens could buy them in stores -- and with no waiting period. Fast-forward to the gun-a-phobic 21st century: Now -- even though there are some 2,000 restrictive state and federal gun laws and our kids all know guns are bad -- our nation's violence, both with and without guns, has skyrocketed, with record numbers of shootings at schools.

Nowadays, schools in most cities, particularly liberal cities, have "violence-free zones" (that's kind of like nuclear-free zones), and many, sadly, have metal detectors. School violence, and the nature of the violence, are now so horrific that single school shootings are so commonplace, they're barely newsworthy.

Children are now taught to fear guns as the enemy, rather to respect them. Educators would rather have elementary school boys play with Barbie dolls than enact a pretend shootout at the OK Corral. Showing any signs of testosterone is now punishable as a hate crime. In San Francisco, the school board even went so far as to propose a ban that would have prevented cops -- yes, cops -- from coming into the schools with guns even when called in to make an arrest.

That would have been San Francisco school policy today if the police hadn't actually threatened not to show up at all. Not many police are foolish enough to come into a violence-prone school without arms, but the local gun-a-phobic politicians are. This must have been a policy driven by a leftover residue of their drug-induced halcyon days, when flowers were still the roughest things of all. Drugs, body piercings, ripped pants hanging lower than your butt and condoms are OK in our schools, but the Pledge of Allegiance, God and rifle ranges? Not OK. Verboten. Connect the dots.

I can understand the knee-jerk reaction of many on the Left to guns. After all, it was on April 20, 1999, that Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold opened fire on fellow students at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colo. They left 12 classmates and a teacher dead, and 23 more seriously wounded. Harris and Klebold then committed suicide. The Left's predictable reaction: "Guns did it -- get rid of 'em."

Politicians are compelled to react and pass even more gun laws. They have to look busy.

However, these new laws may actually be exacerbating the problem. According to University of Chicago researchers John Lott and William Landes, deaths and injuries from mass public shootings fall dramatically after laws upholding the right to carry concealed handguns are enacted. States from Alaska to Florida give concealed-gun permits liberally, and some states, such as Vermont, don't require a permit at all. The researchers' analysis of data from an 18-year period, from 1977 to 1995, shows that the average death rate from mass shootings plummeted by up to 91 percent after such laws went into effect, and injuries dropped by more than 80 percent! Ironically, Colorado was in the midst of considering just such a law at the time of the massacre at Littleton.

"People who engage in mass public shootings are deterred by the possibility that law-abiding citizens may be carrying guns," Lott concluded. "Such people may be deranged, but they still appear to care whether they will themselves be shot as they attempt to kill others."

Think about it. There are far fewer children today who have legal access to, or familiarity with, guns, and yet the violence is out of control. Maybe that conundrum offers a solution. A July 1993 U.S. Department of Justice study, which received scant publicity at the time it was released, found that "boys who own legal firearms ... have much lower rates of delinquency and drug use [than those who obtained them illegally] and are even slightly less delinquent than nonowners of guns." It concluded, "For legal gun owners, socialization appears to take place in the family; for illegal gun owners, it appears to take place 'on the street.'"

The debate over the real meaning of the Second Amendment to the Constitution is a relatively new one. The amendment reads as follows: "A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." The argument over its interpretation is largely held in the minds of liberals, and the pursuit of this conflict has been an outlet for their angst-ridden gestalt.

To liberals, "gun control" really means "gun confiscation." To a conservative, proper gun control means knowing how and when to gently squeeze the trigger while holding your breath. (That is not totally fair, of course, as many sincere liberals are gun owners, and many understand the true meaning of this amendment, though they are in the minority.)

How bad do most liberals hate guns and gun owners? You know it's serious when Mayor Willie Brown is reduced to saying, "I will accept money from anyone and any group ... except Gun Owners of California." It may come as a surprise to gun-grabbing politicians such as New York's Charles Schumer or California's Barbara Boxer, but 35 states now have concealed-weapons laws mandating that the state "shall issue" a concealed-firearms permit, unless it can show a compelling reason not to -- mental disorder, criminal conviction, and so on. And in all these states, "studies show crime has plummeted. After all, an armed society is a polite society. Israel mandates that each family be armed and, notwithstanding the terrorist violence, has a lower crime rate than any European nation except Switzerland -- which, not so coincidentally, also has a similar law mandating gun ownership.

To historians and constitutionalists, the meaning of the Second Amendment is as plain as the nose on your face. Even the courts, from our nation's founding until as recently as some 20 years ago, have been clear. They consistently interpreted the amendment as one that granted individual rights to citizens, much like the other nine amendments, which, with the one in question, have collectively come to be known as the Bill of Rights. And, fortunately, the courts have stated how "Militia," as used in the Second Amendment, should be interpreted.

More than 100 years after the passage of the Bill of Rights, the U.S. Supreme Court proclaimed its decision in Presser vs. Illinois (1886). Justice William B. Woods reaffirmed, "It is undoubtedly true that all citizens capable of bearing arms constitute the reserved military force or reserve militia of the United States, as well as that of the states; and in view of this prerogative of the general government as well as of its general powers, the states cannot, even laying the constitutional provisions in question out of view, prohibit the people from keeping and bearing arms, so as to deprive the United States of their rightful resource for maintaining the public security, and disable the people from performing their duty to the general government."

More recently, in the last century, the court's decisions continued with this interpretation in U.S. vs. Miller (1939). The majority opinion echoed the earlier conclusion, saying, "The signification attributed to the term Militia appears from the debates in the Convention, the history and legislation of Colonies and States, and the writings of approved commentators. These show plainly enough that the Militia comprised all males physically capable of acting in concert for the common defense."

The amendments that comprise the Bill of Rights granted rights to citizens, individual citizens, to protect them against a new, worrisome and meddling power, the federal government. No states had gun-control laws when the Constitution was passed. Gun-grabbing liberals and their revisionist allies in black robes who sit on many of the courts have now mangled the Second Amendment. They see the need for prohibitions of and restrictions to guns, when the Founding Fathers did not. Some courts today...

(Excerpt) Read more at sfgate.com ...


TOPICS: Activism/Chapters; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Government; News/Current Events; Politics/Elections
KEYWORDS: 2ndamendment; 9thcircuit; bang; banglist; calgov2002; constitution; courts; freedom; gunrights; guns
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-75 next last
This article explains the correllation between a weakening of the 2nd Amendment and the increase in violence. It's a keeper.
1 posted on 05/10/2003 7:32:31 AM PDT by sfwarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: I_Love_My_Husband; *calgov2002; snopercod; Grampa Dave; Carry_Okie; SierraWasp; Gophack; RonDog; ...
Ping
2 posted on 05/10/2003 7:33:34 AM PDT by sfwarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sfwarrior
The liberal gun owners I know and hear about just don't want anybody else to have guns, it's fine for them though.
3 posted on 05/10/2003 7:38:48 AM PDT by fml
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: sfwarrior
This is your best effort yet.

In a future piece, you might wanted to explore the celebrated "gun control" experience of both Britain and Australia. After banning gun ownership, not only did they both experience skyrocketing violent crime rates, but they both share a physical attribute that should have made gun control more effective than it ever could be here:

They are both islands. If the liberals can't control illegal guns there (or illegal immigration and drugs for that matter), they'll never do it successfully here.

When one then confronts what has happened to those who are attacked and defend themselves in those countries the travesty of justice betrays the intent of gun control to even the most hardened liberal. It proves that it is not only unachievalbe, its goal is truly tyranny.

This is a topic that stands up to repetition. If you hear complaints about it, you'll know it's been effective.
4 posted on 05/10/2003 8:01:48 AM PDT by Carry_Okie (California: Where government meets pornography every day!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sfwarrior
I will accept money from anyone and any group ... except Gun Owners of California.

As if the GOC would give money to the likes of Willy Brown. Good article. How about exploring the corruption in California's "MAY issue" CCW system? The kind of system where Sean Penn can get a permit, but your typical law-abiding citizen with a spotless record cannot. It might make for interesting reading for people who are unaware of the issue. But then again, it's just another set of facts for liberals to ignore.

5 posted on 05/10/2003 8:20:48 AM PDT by .38sw
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sfwarrior
When I was in jr high and high school late 60's early 70's we would bring guns to school. Most of the time on fridays on the bus to go to a buddys house for a weekend of hunting.

Most every one I knew had guns availible 24/7. No one even thought about useing them to shoot up the school. Respect for them was taught and required.

LESS GUNS MORE CRIME.

6 posted on 05/10/2003 8:29:13 AM PDT by riverrunner
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sfwarrior
Excellent article ping!
7 posted on 05/10/2003 8:31:47 AM PDT by Gritty
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: riverrunner
Incredible! Where and when did you go to school?
8 posted on 05/10/2003 8:32:00 AM PDT by sfwarrior
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: All
Eastman gun show, North Atlanta trade Center next weekend.
800 tables. One of the largest in the state.

Come on down!
9 posted on 05/10/2003 8:36:29 AM PDT by tet68 (Jeremiah 51:24 ..."..Before your eyes I will repay Babylon for all the wrong they have done in Zion")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: sfwarrior
This is your best effort yet.

I'm confused... Is "sfwarrior" the author of this article?

10 posted on 05/10/2003 8:36:38 AM PDT by wizzler
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sfwarrior
The leftitsts from the Democrat Party need to have their noses rubbed in this article.
11 posted on 05/10/2003 8:39:23 AM PDT by punster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: tet68; .45MAN; dansangel
Thanks for the heads-up. Ping.
12 posted on 05/10/2003 8:44:15 AM PDT by FreedomPoster
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: *bang_list; Joe Brower
A lone voice of reason about guns coming from the wilderness that is San Francisco.
13 posted on 05/10/2003 8:54:28 AM PDT by coloradan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sfwarrior
excellent article.
14 posted on 05/10/2003 9:09:36 AM PDT by demosthenes the elder (If *I* can afford $5/month to support FR: SO CAN YOU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower; *bang_list
PING
15 posted on 05/10/2003 9:10:28 AM PDT by demosthenes the elder (If *I* can afford $5/month to support FR: SO CAN YOU)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: sfwarrior
The amendments that comprise the Bill of Rights granted rights to citizens, individual citizens, to protect them against a new, worrisome and meddling power, the federal government.

WRONG!!!

God granted those rights. The Bill of Rights only affirmed that those rights pre-existed, and those 10 were important enough to be directly named.

16 posted on 05/10/2003 9:49:25 AM PDT by Petruchio (Single, Available, and easy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: *bang_list; AAABEST; wku man; SLB; Travis McGee; Squantos; harpseal; Shooter 2.5; ...

17 posted on 05/10/2003 10:46:14 AM PDT by Joe Brower (http://www.joebrower.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: sfwarrior; riverrunner
What riverrunner said is also true of my high school daze back in the late 70s, on the Gulf Coast of Florida. We could have staged a "Columbine" any time we wanted. We never did. It just wasn't in us. So what's changed?

This same high school now looks like a damned gulag -- chain link fences everywhere, with a cop roaming the hallways.

It never has been, and never will be, the guns.


18 posted on 05/10/2003 10:48:57 AM PDT by Joe Brower (http://www.joebrower.com/)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: sfwarrior
I graduated from high school in 1971. During that time I would carry a .22 around all over the place. I loved to go hunting and I also enjoyed shooting targets like cans and stuff I would set up. I lived in Indianapolis and was within the city limits. I was never stopped or questioned about carrying my rifle around the neighborhood.

We had wooded areas as we do now and that is where I did most of my shooting. I liked shooting in my back yard too. We owned a 3/4 acre lot which is large but not huge. It was not all that long ago.

As an aside I remember going downtown and would visit the army surplus shops. They used to set up huge tables on the sidewalk loaded with bayonets of all types that they had for sale. I still have one I bought there hanging in my garage. They had an amazing variety of them.

You could buy ammunition in any store and many gas stations carried ammo. The liberals have been very effective at brainwashing the masses and erasing memories of our heratige.
19 posted on 05/10/2003 11:09:00 AM PDT by Khepera (Do not remove by penalty of law!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Joe Brower
What's changed has been the triumph of nihilism.
20 posted on 05/10/2003 11:10:36 AM PDT by Travis McGee (----- www.EnemiesForeignAndDomestic.com -----)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-6061-75 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson