I should have gone back another 5 or 6 administrations. 
Posted on 01/11/2006 10:58:18 AM PST by Behind Liberal Lines
OVID NY— Two teenagers were charged Tuesday after allegedly having a rifle in the parking lot of South Seneca Central Junior/Senior High School at 7263 Main St.
District Superintendent Janie Nusser said a student came on campus with a rifle in her car to give it to the rifle’s owner who was another student. She said they made the transfer in the school parking lot in violation of board policy and state law.
“I think when students saw the rifle, they were concerned and reported it to adults and we immediately called law enforcement,” Nusser said.
“I think what heightened people’s concerns was the student that was the owner of the gun had been involved in an argument with another student just prior to the transfer. At this time in the investigation, we do not see a connection between the two incidents.”
Nusser said the incident happened at the end of the school day and reports of a lockdown are untrue.
“It’s an ongoing investigation, so for me to give you much information would be premature,” she said.
Nusser would not name the students, but Seneca County sheriff’s deputies charged Jeffrey R. Warne, 17, of 7904 Route 89, Interlaken, and Jessica L. Prindle-Ike, 16, of 8494 Mill St., Lodi, with fourth-degree criminal possession of a weapon.
Deputies said the .22-caliber rifle was not pointed at anyone during the incident.
The teens were ticketed and are to appear Jan. 30 in Ovid Town Court.
Either rid us of schools or arm all the kids. Gang bang problem solved either way!
So hospitals should allow parents to put pistols in the cribs of their newborns too I suppose.
The greatest enemies of the RTKABA are nutcases who allow their brains to go out the window at the mention of the word "gun". Reduced to arguing with reasonable people the Grabbers lose everytime.
But with fanatics the Grabbers gain ground around the majority almost every time.
The federal law was declared unconstitutional, but not on second amendment grounds, once. Congress just passed it again. (No respect for the Court I guess. :) ). State laws have rarely been challenged on second amendment grounds, and have not been appealed to the Federal Supreme Court on those grounds. The Supreme Court has been very loathe to take on any second amendment case. They can refuse to hear any case they wish. If they heard a case they'd have to argue that the second amendment means nothing at all in order to uphold some of these laws. That's a little blatant for most of them, so they just don't hear the cases.
Some moron might. The rest want this as part of their campaign to demonize guns.
Not in this case.
I clearly used a crappy example, so try replacing "mall" with "White House", or "Congress", or "post office", or the incredibly generic "any federal installation".
I take it you don't trust parents or wouldn't hold them responsible for their own?
Yes, in this case. The whole point is to demonize guns. The creeps that would shooot up the place don't care about the law and rational people realize that. That's why rational people never support such laws.
"The greatest enemies of the RTKABA are nutcases who allow their brains to go out the window at the mention of the word "gun". Reduced to arguing with reasonable people the Grabbers lose everytime.
"
Bingo!
Angry White Boy
by Marty Nemko
"What's the common thread among the school shootings at Columbine, Jonesboro, Paducah, Conyers, Oregon, Alberta, and the other copycats? The shooters were all alienated middle-class white males.
What's different about now versus previous decades? Why have all these school shootings emerged now? Until recently, alienated middle-class white male teens could take solace in their being accepted, indeed, extolled by mainstream society. Today, however, the white male teen who is rejected by peers is also de facto rejected by the mainstream society that he sees: every school and media celebration of Blacks, gays, women, etc., is by omission, a denigration of straight white males. Middle- and upper-class white males are often referred to in the curriculum as oppressors and in sitcoms as boors or evil. Hollywood, in part in fear of being called racist, is bending over backwards to, where possible, make the bad guy a white male.
Most teens are deeply concerned with being accepted. Today's middle-class white male teen, if rejected by peers, neglected by too-busy parents, and now, for the first time, denigrated by society, may consider violence; they feel unaccepted, unloved--an intolerable situation for many teens. While gun control and better parent-child communication are, of course, partial answers, I believe that an essential part of the solution is to ensure that the media and schools aren't celebratory of everyone but white males."
The rest of the article is here, Angry White Boy
Yes rational people, like you, should always twist a fanatics, like me, words around to say that pistols in the cribs of newborns is right and just.
Thank goodness rational people like you can stop my knee jerking...thank goodness indeed..... /sarc!
So, if Congress passed a law. "Mr and Mrs America, turn them all (your guns) in" you'd line up to do it?. I would not. Such a law is in contravention with the Constitution, and it's really no law at all, but merely has the form of law.
"All laws which are repugnant to the Constitution, are null and void." Chief Justice Marshall, Marbury v. Madison, 5, U.S. (Cranch) 137, 174,176
Why? They could easily return to the school and commit mayhem, or go into the stop and rob and kill a few students stopping their for a Coke.
It's very important that law abiding, decent, responsible people, to include students, do NOT have any means of self defense when wacko's or terrorists, etc enter schools, armed with guns & bombs, etc in order to mass murder staff and students.
The 14th amendment assures the RIGHT to equal protection under the law. If you're going to extend constitutional RIGHTS to kids, they get that one too.
No "if" about it. No state will deprive "-- any person of life, liberty or property, without due process of law; --"
However, 'due process' allows reasonable regulations be placed on kids.. Or on anyone. Empathsis on reasonable.
Once they have that, they can get all of the responsibilities and privileges by simply arguing discrimination. If they have the same rights as adults, there's very little legal ground on which their other actions can be regulated.
Reasonably regulated.. The law in question is not reasonable, imo.
Prohibitions on guns locked in an auto in a parking lot is an infringement of our personal RKBA's. These kids are, at worse, only guilty of breaking a petty rule on taking a gun out of their car at the 'wrong' place.
Legally, if the rights of the Constitution are extended to minors, the 14th Amendment requires that a 9 year old be treated the same as a 29 year old or a 90 year old. Yes, that would be an incredibly stupid idea, but that's why we DON'T extend the rights in the constitution to children (except for those specifically mentioned, like birthright citizenship).
Children have Constitutional rights.. But reasonably, their rights can be regulated a bit more than those of adults.
Wrong.. a 4 year old does not have a right to bear arms.
I should have gone back another 5 or 6 administrations.
Yes, he does.
He has every right to use them to defend his person/home/freedom as anyone else. The explicit purpose of Ammendment II.
Show me a law that says a 4 year old has to sit still and die quietly in any of those cases. Now wise parents know that a 4 year old is as likely to misuse the weapon so they don't let them. But in dire circumstances I know i can hand my 12 year old and my 7 year old weapons and they have the God given right to bear those to defend against danger. No different from anyone else.
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.