Keyes: Constitution protects machine gun ownership [describes Israel as an example]

Chicago Sun-Times ^ | August 25, 2004 | SCOTT FORNEK

[yonif]

Declaring "the front line of the war against terror once again involves the citizens," Republican Alan Keyes said Tuesday he believes the U.S. Constitution grants properly trained private individuals the right to own and carry machine guns.

"You're not talking about giving citizens access to atom bombs and other things," the former presidential candidate said. "That's ridiculous."

But the GOP nominee for U.S. Senate argued the founding fathers intended the Second Amendment to allow people to carry the types of weapons "customarily carried in those days by ordinary infantry soldiers."

"And, yes, does that mean that in this day and age people would have the right to have access to the kind of the weapons our ordinary infantry people have access to? With proper training and so forth to make sure that they could handle them successfully, that's exactly what was meant."

Keyes made the remarks at a news conference he called to attack the "ideological extremism" of his Democratic opponent, state Sen. Barack Obama.

The Republican lit into Obama for voting against a bill in Springfield earlier this year that would have allowed people who use handguns to fend off home invaders or attackers to argue self-defense as a possible legal defense against prosecution for violating any local anti-firearm possession ordinances.

The measure passed the Legislature with bi-partisan support, but Gov. Blagojevich vetoed it last week.

Keyes called Obama's vote against the measure an "appalling . . . lack of common sense."

"This seems to be a man who is absolutely determined to make the world safe for criminals, while making sure that law-abiding citizens have no opportunity to defend themselves against the criminals," Keyes said.

Keyes said he supports a system in which guns would be treated similarly to automobiles, with people being required to undergo different levels of training before they would be allowed to own and carry various sorts of weapons.

"I always remind -- even people who support the Second Amendment -- that it has two parts: the right to keep and bear" arms, Keyes said. " 'Bear' means to carry, to carry around. . . . I think it has been proven empirically that . . . allowing law-abiding citizens this access to conceal-carry actually reduces crime."

Keyes said he owns two firearms himself: a 9mm Glock semi-automatic pistol and a .38-caliber "six-shooter." But he said he does not keep them at his new home in Calumet City.

Keyes only indirectly answered a reporter's question about whether he would "be comfortable if the entire society was walking around with Uzis, as long as they were properly trained."

"Have you ever been to Israel?" Keyes asked the reporter. "Because if you've ever been to Israel, you wouldn't ask that question. And in the midst of terrifying dangers, you walk around the streets of Israel and you see every other person carrying arms and Uzis and so forth and so on, and believe me, you do not feel less safe on that account."

Machine guns, or fully automatic weapons, are firearms that fire multiple shots with a single pull of the trigger.

Thomas Ahern, a spokesman for the Chicago division of the U.S. Bureau of Alcohol Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, said private individuals can only own such weapons if they apply with the bureau and clear a series of hurdles, including a background check, fingerprinting and the OK of local law enforcement officials. Additional paperwork is required any time the weapon is to be transported.

"It is heavily regulated," Ahern said.

A spokesman for Obama defended the Democrat's record on guns.

"Certainly he believes in the Second Amendment, but he also believes in common-sense gun safety laws, such as the federal ban on military-style assault weapons." said spokesman Robert Gibbs. "If Alan Keyes truly was concerned about public safety, that would be his position, as well."

[Luis Gonzalez]

I just read the post you "BTTT"ed and noticed this:

(Alan Keyes) On U.S. interventionism in the world:

I would want to renounce the idea that we have the right to interfere, in an aggressive way, with the affairs of other [nations]. I think we can play a constructive role in trying to bring about diplomatic solutions in different parts of the world, but I do not believe that when our ideas are rejected, we should resort to war in order to force people to accept a deal that's dictated on our terms.

Does this mean that Keyes is against the war in Iraq?

[nopardons]

Shhhhhhhhhhh...I only BTTTed that to have a record of where Keyes stands.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Sorry...

Just sit still and don't bump it for a little bit, at least until it drops out of "Latest Posts".

:0(

[WillRain]

I think that the man speaks in such complexities that it's often easy to see in his words what one hopes (or fears) to see.

That is one aspect in which I agree with thouse who say he's less than an ideal candidate. The straightforwardness is refreashing and desperatly needed...the tendency to say in 60 words what he could say in 16 can sometimes be a handicap.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"...the tendency to say in 60 words what he could say in 16 can sometimes be a handicap."

LOL!!

You mean sort of what happened to me when Jim read my response to your asking me to provide you with my interpretation of "well regulated"?

[WillRain]

Keyes has said he supports the war as a valid front in the war on terrorism but that he opposes the retroactive rhetoric used by many Republicans to redefine it as a mission of "liberation" and a defacto exercises in nation building.

In other words, the war was a good thing - for OUR purposes - NOT for IRAQ'S purposes. which is what the "nation building" fallacy implies...that we are going about meddling in folks affairs "for there own good."

[Luis Gonzalez]

The liberation of Iraq, and the subsequent "nation building" came about as a consequence of taking action "for our own good".

What is wrong with pointing out the positive consequences of selfish actions (for our own good). And while we are at it, I am willing top make a gentleman's wager that we will "nation build" in Iraq for one tenth as long as we remained in Germany.

Iraq is a base, a beach head, and a target.

[WillRain]

That's always been my take. It had the salient combination of being both the most strategic target and the one most readily offering us justification for going in.

I don't think anyone is saying that it's wrong to say "oh by the way, look at the folks we liberated" or even to allow that to be assumed as our mission if it's the only way we can politically sell a necessary mission. What I was saying about Keyes is that he doesn't actually believe that it was an exercises in that sort of meddling, thus he supports it - and when confronted with the seeming contradiction in the nation building rhetoric and his previous statements, he's forced to point out that the nation-building rhetoric is confusing the issue of why we went.

[Robert_Paulson2]

I am technically a 'neocon' so I support intervention in the middle east... big time. If words mean things... it sounds like he thinks we should have other priorities.

[WoofDog123]

"Iraq is a base, a beach head, and a target."

I have been told and read that a major issue now is force projection (air power), and having land facilities to do so, since carriers are quickly becoming vulnerable to conventional anti-ship weapons(I cannot recall the sun-what missile that goes at mach 4 or whatever)....CMIIAW, but I don't think we ever actually put carriers in the persian gulf during the iraq invasion for this reason.

[k2blader]

Very kind of you, but I prefer something a little more upbeat. :-)

[Caoilfhionn]

Jim, Alan Keyes is on my prayer list and I am actively writing letters to the editor on behalf of his campaign. I am a Christian woman, a constitutionalist--and write my representatives constantly on the oath they took to uphold the constitution.

We should expect no less from our elected representatives but for some reason they have strayed from the original values and concepts. I guess we turned a blind eye and look what happened! Now we have to literally beat them back into their constitutional cages and start electing guys like Keyes. IMHO, his time has come, God Bless that man. He has a tremendous fight ahead.

Does anyone know about him when he was Ambassador Keyes to the UN under Reagan? I'd be interested in any stories on that.

[BillyBoy]

>> I would not stand still if the Dems brought in someone from out-of-State to run against any Pubbie here, so I can't in good conscience give my consent if the GOP did the same. <<

John Ellis "Jeb" Bush is the 43rd and current Governor of Florida. He was elected in November 1998 and re-elected in November 2002, becoming the first Republican in the state's history to be re-elected as Governor. He is the younger brother of President George W. Bush, older brother of Neil Bush, and second son of former President George H. W. Bush.

Bush was born February 11, 1953, in Midland, Texas. He graduated Phi Beta Kappa with a bachelor's degree in Latin American Affairs from the University of Texas at Austin in 1973.

He has been married to Columba Garnica Gallo since 1974 and has three children, George P., Noelle and Jeb Jr. Jeb Bush speaks Spanish and English.

His first position in public service was as Florida's secretary of Commerce between 1987 and 1988 under Florida governor Bob Martinez...

Luis, can you believe the Florida GOP lowered themselves to running a carpetbagging TEXAN for Governor of FLORIDA? His WHOLE family is in Texas, was it was Jeb failed to get elected to ANY office in his home state? Was the Flordia GOP so DESPERATE that they couldn't find ANYONE from Florida to run in 1994? Millions of native Flordians are NONE of them were qualified? I mean Florida is the 4th largest state, just beating out in Illinois. I guess the Florida GOP is even more pathetic than the ILGOP.

Well Luis, it's bad the rest of the state didn't follow your lead and vote for Buddy McKay, a LIFELONG Floridian. At least you're consistant in your hatred of carpetbaggers that you were willing to support Democrat McKay, right? It's such an embarrassment that the current Governor probably can't even find Miami-Dade on a map, eh Luis? (oh and the fact he ran statewide in Florida numerous times before doesn't count -- certainly didn't count with the current GOP Senate nominee in Illinois)

Ah, don't worry, you can switch to the RAT party and help oust the Diaz-Balart . Did you know their whole family, including their grandfather, father, and uncle served in the CUBAN legislature before Castro took over? The nerve of these guys to CARPETBAG it to Florida and take a seat that RIGHTFULLY belonged to a native Florida resident! You CERTAINLY wouldn't tolerate a guy who's family held posts in Maryland running for an Illinois seat, so we all know you'll hold the Balart family to the same standard and DEMAND they head back to Cuban and run for the family's TRADITIONAL seat.

After all, you're not a hypocrite, right Luis?

[Luis Gonzalez]

Jeb Bush moved to Florida in 1981, entered State politics in 1987, and was elected to the office of Governor in 1998. He had lived in Florida seventeen years by then.

If you can't see the difference between the two, you're dumber than dirt.

[Luis Gonzalez]

Re: post #490.

Jim, do you think this type of graphic is appropriate for your site?

[tame]

Re: post #490. Jim, do you think this type of graphic is appropriate for your site?

Far more appropriate than the Keyes bashing.

[tame]

Don Joe wrote to a friend on the Keyes/machine gun thread: you haven't really won an argument until your posts start disappearing...you know you won, because they're all hitting the abuse button on your posts.

Regarding deleted posts 490 and 497, I guess the Keyes bashers are losing the argument. BTW, the graphic at post 490 has appeared on this forum several times and, until now, has not been deleted that I'm aware of.

I submit it was no more offensive than the Keyes bashing posts, and therefore should not have been deleted before all those posts are, IMHO.

you haven't really won an argument until your posts start disappearing...you know you won, because they're all hitting the abuse button on your posts.

You lose, Luis.

[Luis Gonzalez]