It is time for Gun Control

Posted in the Charleston Forum

Comments

Showing posts 1 - 20 of109
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:

Since: Feb 11

Logan, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#3
Jan 24, 2013
 

Judged:

2

2

2

By Cass R. Sunstein, Bloomberg News

The rise of the Second Amendment as a serious obstacle to gun control legislation is astonishingly recent.

Here's a quick way to see how rapidly things have changed. Warren Burger was a conservative Republican, appointed chief justice by President Richard Nixon in 1969. In a speech in 1992, six years after his retirement from the court, Burger declared that "the Second Amendment doesn't guarantee the right to have firearms at all." In his view, the purpose of the Second Amendment was only "to ensure that the 'state armies''the militia' would be maintained for the defense of the state."

A year before, Burger went even further. On MacNeil/Lehrer NewsHour, Burger said the Second Amendment "has been the subject of one of the greatest pieces of fraud I repeat the word 'fraud' on the American public by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime." Burger wasn't in the habit of taking stands on controversial constitutional questions on national television. In using the word "fraud," Burger meant to describe what he saw as a clear consensus about the meaning of the Constitution.
Second Amendment: "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." Fair-minded readers have to acknowledge that the text is ambiguous. Sure, it could fairly be read to support an individual right to have guns. But in light of the preamble, with its reference to a well-regulated militia, it could also be read not to confer an individual right, but to protect federalism, by ensuring that the new national government wouldn't interfere with citizen militias at the state level. Until remarkably recently, almost all federal judges have agreed. It is striking that before its 2008 decision in District of Columbia vs. Heller, the Supreme Court had never held that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to have guns.
U.S. vs. Miller. The 1939 case involved a ban on the possession of a sawed-off shotgun. Sounding like Burger, the court unanimously said that the Second Amendment's "obvious purpose" was "to assure the continuation and render possible the effectiveness of" the militia. Without evidence that the possession of a sawed-off shotgun was related to preservation of a well-regulated militia, the court refused to say that the Second Amendment protected the right to have such a weapon.

For decades, federal courts overwhelmingly rejected the conclusion that the Second Amendment protects an individual right. It wasn't until the 21st century that lower federal courts, filled with appointees of Presidents Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush, started to adopt the individual rights position. And, of course, the Supreme Court itself adopted that view in 2008, by a 5-4 vote.

More important still, the Supreme Court has proceeded cautiously, and it has pointedly refused to shut the door to all gun regulation. On the contrary, the court said, "Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms."

To this the court added that the sorts of weapons it was protecting were those "in common use at the time" that the Second Amendment was ratified. We should respect the fact that the individual right to have guns has been established, but a lot of gun-control legislation, imaginable or proposed, would be perfectly consistent with the court's rulings.

Reasonable people can debate about what policies would actually work. That is a debate worth having. It is past time to stop using the Second Amendment itself as a loaded weapon, threatening elected representatives who ought to be doing their jobs.
Chet 1245

Charlottesville, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#4
Jan 24, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

2

The recent shootings happened because of the modern Leftist Culture that has been busy removing all sembalance of personal responsibility and respect from our lives. Your President even said this is not a christian nation. It started at the top. If children are not punished at home or school by law what can you expect?? We have done this to ourselves.
Jay

Charleston, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#5
Jan 24, 2013
 

Judged:

3

3

1

Their are already gun laws in place to suggest that it's time for gun control is to ignore the fact that it already exists and that despite these laws shootings continue to happen.

I personally believe toning down our violent mass media culture and not making the shooters more famous then the victims as well as reestablishing traditional American moral values at home and at school will go further in reducing gun crime then limiting the size of magazines but that's just me.

In the end law abiding citizens will pay the price by losing more rights while shootings will continue mostly in our democrat controlled inner cities go figure.
Ali

Charleston, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#6
Jan 24, 2013
 

Judged:

5

4

3

Amerikans should be forced to give up their guns. You don't need guns. Sharia law allows only the faithful to have such power and no Amerikan is fit. So many guns in the hands of Americans is threat to religious freedom under Sharia law. Guns should be banned for all but Allah's sons.
todd

Charleston, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#7
Jan 24, 2013
 

Judged:

3

1

1

The constitution is out dated. Written by a bunch of bigots over 225 years ago. It needs to be repealed and totally revamped.
burner

Charleston, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#8
Jan 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Ali wrote:
Amerikans should be forced to give up their guns. You don't need guns. Sharia law allows only the faithful to have such power and no Amerikan is fit. So many guns in the hands of Americans is threat to religious freedom under Sharia law. Guns should be banned for all but Allah's sons.
You and your Shria Law are absurd. You are also one of the reasons that I burn every copy of the Qur'an that I can find since it is trash it should be burned like all trash should.
burner

Charleston, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#9
Jan 25, 2013
 
todd wrote:
The constitution is out dated. Written by a bunch of bigots over 225 years ago. It needs to be repealed and totally revamped.
Sounds like you are the bigot
GUN NUT

Charleston, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#10
Jan 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Gun control is using both hands
way to the right

Charleston, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#11
Jan 25, 2013
 

Judged:

1

Ali wrote:
Amerikans should be forced to give up their guns. You don't need guns. Sharia law allows only the faithful to have such power and no Amerikan is fit. So many guns in the hands of Americans is threat to religious freedom under Sharia law. Guns should be banned for all but Allah's sons.
I think that muslims should just be removed from the earth in general. That will clear up a solid 70% of world violence.
Ali

Saylorsburg, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#12
Jan 25, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

Hussein and the Calipornia Jew woman see the true way of peace for the infidels. Too much power in the hands of the unworthy corrupts them. Your children graze unstructured on the chafe of the Internet and you wonder where they come to kill themselves. You poison them by neglect and no structured education on the way of Allah. You cannot handle the power you grant yourself and need to ruled properly.
todd

Saylorsburg, PA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#13
Jan 25, 2013
 
burner wrote:
<quoted text>Sounds like you are the bigot
Huh? How do you figure?
da na na da na na

Charleston, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#14
Jan 25, 2013
 
the founding fathers were a bunch of atheist,elites who committed adultery with their slaves.
burner

Charleston, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#15
Jan 25, 2013
 
da na na da na na wrote:
the founding fathers were a bunch of atheist,elites who committed adultery with their slaves.
Which slaves the whit or black?
burner

Charleston, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#16
Jan 25, 2013
 
should have been white or black
2 posts removed
Kief Sweat

Mooresville, NC

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#19
Jan 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

todd wrote:
The constitution is out dated. Written by a bunch of bigots over 225 years ago. It needs to be repealed and totally revamped.
If you don't like it get the fuck out. No one is forcing you to stay here if you don't like the laws. One of the principals that this country was founded upon was the freedom to defend yourself from tyranny. Why are you so eager to give up your rights? What makes you think they will stop with just the second amendment once that safeguard is gone? Don't you realize that the leading cause of death during the 20th century was out of control governments which disarmed and then murdered their citizens by a huge margin? Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler, Chairman Mao, Fidel Castro, Ho Chi Minh, Hugo Chavez they all disarmed their citizens and most of them killed literally millions. Mao killed the largest number of people during the history of the world. Pol Pot killed about 31% of Cambodia. You appear to share the same views as most of these men on gun control. I don't imagine that you are going to come and take them yourself, your kind are effeminate pussies and you would never do that. So whats your plan big guy? Send guys with guns to take them? Then what is going to be our safeguard against those aforementioned guys with guns when they decide to get out of control? Don't say it couldn't happen, it has happened countless times all throughout history. Tyranny is just as much of a threat as it was over 200 years ago, perhaps moreso now judging by some of the legislation that has been shoved through over the past 15 years. Our Federal government can now legally kill US citizens abroad, and they have. They can spy on your phone calls without a warrant, read your emails, follow your internet history. If deemed a terrorist you can be incarcerated indefinitely without charges or a trial. The DHS has put in an order for over 1.4 billion rounds of ammunition, and then they start trying to go for the gun grab, and you think we don't need the second amendment?
NJ71

Charleston, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#20
Jan 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

1

Kief Sweat wrote:
<quoted text>If you don't like it get the fuck out. No one is forcing you to stay here if you don't like the laws. One of the principals that this country was founded upon was the freedom to defend yourself from tyranny. Why are you so eager to give up your rights? What makes you think they will stop with just the second amendment once that safeguard is gone? Don't you realize that the leading cause of death during the 20th century was out of control governments which disarmed and then murdered their citizens by a huge margin? Pol Pot, Stalin, Hitler, Chairman Mao, Fidel Castro, Ho Chi Minh, Hugo Chavez they all disarmed their citizens and most of them killed literally millions. Mao killed the largest number of people during the history of the world. Pol Pot killed about 31% of Cambodia. You appear to share the same views as most of these men on gun control. I don't imagine that you are going to come and take them yourself, your kind are effeminate pussies and you would never do that. So whats your plan big guy? Send guys with guns to take them? Then what is going to be our safeguard against those aforementioned guys with guns when they decide to get out of control? Don't say it couldn't happen, it has happened countless times all throughout history. Tyranny is just as much of a threat as it was over 200 years ago, perhaps moreso now judging by some of the legislation that has been shoved through over the past 15 years. Our Federal government can now legally kill US citizens abroad, and they have. They can spy on your phone calls without a warrant, read your emails, follow your internet history. If deemed a terrorist you can be incarcerated indefinitely without charges or a trial. The DHS has put in an order for over 1.4 billion rounds of ammunition, and then they start trying to go for the gun grab, and you think we don't need the second amendment?
The constitution is outdated and needs amended. The 2nd amendment was written while everyone carried muskets lol, don't get me wrong I think the American people should be allowed to own as many guns as they wish, but there is no reason anyone she be able to own assault riffles. I'm a gun owner, a member of the NRA and own 7 different guns one of those being an AR-15, but I would give it up in a heart. Not sure if you have actually fired an AR -15, but no way should any civilian be able to own one, hell I could have ended the civil war my self with one of those. I honestly think the 2nd amendment needs amended and that part of the constitution is outdated, anyone without being political biased should see that. For the record I'm a 5th generation Republican.

20 years from now when a firearm can sling 5000 rounds per per minute are civilians allowed to carry them?

Use common sense and think about it. Take politics out of the equation. Smh
Martin

Chesapeake, VA

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#21
Jan 27, 2013
 
Chet 1245 wrote:
the modern Leftist Culture that has been busy removing all sembalance of personal responsibility and respect from our lives. Your President even said this is not a christian nation. It started at the top. If children are not punished at home or school by law what can you expect?? We have done this to ourselves.
Not so! The recent shootings happened because of a young man with so much hatred in his mind that he decided to kill these young beautiful children, School teachers and his Mother for no other reason at all.
Jack_4ral

Logan, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#22
Jan 27, 2013
 

Judged:

2

1

1

The young Man had access to Simi-automatic weapons, ban all Simi-automatic weapons.
Redneckerson

Charleston, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#23
Jan 27, 2013
 

Judged:

1

1

NJ71 wrote:
<quoted text>
The constitution is outdated and needs amended. The 2nd amendment was written while everyone carried muskets lol, don't get me wrong I think the American people should be allowed to own as many guns as they wish, but there is no reason anyone she be able to own assault riffles. I'm a gun owner, a member of the NRA and own 7 different guns one of those being an AR-15, but I would give it up in a heart. Not sure if you have actually fired an AR -15, but no way should any civilian be able to own one, hell I could have ended the civil war my self with one of those. I honestly think the 2nd amendment needs amended and that part of the constitution is outdated, anyone without being political biased should see that. For the record I'm a 5th generation Republican.
20 years from now when a firearm can sling 5000 rounds per per minute are civilians allowed to carry them?
Use common sense and think about it. Take politics out of the equation. Smh
Yeah I fired several semi-auto AR15's and military auto M16's ,not impressed with either. But if you want rid of your AR ,sell it! The .223 round is not impressive , and you are wrong a AR 15 is not a assault rifle, to be a assault rifle it must be full-auto ,or 3 rd. burst rifle. A AR-15 is nothing more than a black scary looking semi-auto with a large clip. If you knew anything at all about weapons you would know this.
Redneckerson

Charleston, WV

|
Report Abuse
|
Judge it!
|
#24
Jan 27, 2013
 
NJ71 wrote:
<quoted text>
The constitution is outdated and needs amended. The 2nd amendment was written while everyone carried muskets lol, don't get me wrong I think the American people should be allowed to own as many guns as they wish, but there is no reason anyone she be able to own assault riffles. I'm a gun owner, a member of the NRA and own 7 different guns one of those being an AR-15, but I would give it up in a heart. Not sure if you have actually fired an AR -15, but no way should any civilian be able to own one, hell I could have ended the civil war my self with one of those. I honestly think the 2nd amendment needs amended and that part of the constitution is outdated, anyone without being political biased should see that. For the record I'm a 5th generation Republican.
20 years from now when a firearm can sling 5000 rounds per per minute are civilians allowed to carry them?
Use common sense and think about it. Take politics out of the equation. Smh
and by the way the cyclic rate of a AR15 in the hands of a experienced Marksman is about 625rds pm

Tell me when this thread is updated: (Registration is not required)

Add to my Tracker Send me an email

Showing posts 1 - 20 of109
< prev page
|
Go to last page| Jump to page:
Type in your comments below
Name
(appears on your post)
Comments
Characters left: 4000
Type the numbers you see in the image on the right:

Please note by clicking on "Post Comment" you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

41 Users are viewing the Charleston Forum right now

Search the Charleston Forum:
Topic Updated Last By Comments
It is time to Flush 6 min Bruce 13
WV Who do you support for U.S. Senate in West Virg... (Oct '10) 7 min Billy 51,985
Rockets fired at Isreal....all because of.... 9 min Bruce 31
Ed Robinson 12 min I heard that 3
1548 lee st is a house of thiefs 15 min Bunny 29
Davon from Belle 28 min Laurie 20
Found X Rated pictures of girlfriend and her ex 1 hr TPB 18
•••
•••
•••
•••

Charleston Jobs

•••
Enter and win $5000
•••
•••

Charleston People Search

Addresses and phone numbers for FREE

•••

Charleston News, Events & Info

Click for news, events and info in Charleston
•••

Personal Finance

Mortgages [ See current mortgage rates ]
•••