Posted by: Jim | June 26, 2008

Liberal Schmiberal

 

 I’m siding with the right on this one, although maybe not for the same reasons. Today the Supreme Court upheld the individual right to bear arms. Since most of you think of me as a “liberal” this may come as a surprise, but here are my reasons:

 

  1. I don’t like the idea of the Supreme Court removing liberties (of any kind) that had previously been assumed to apply to all. If  they had sided with the District of Columbia on this one, it would have been another nail in Liberty’s coffin. What next? Freedom of Speech doesn’t apply to everyone? It was intended as a “collective” right?
  2. Most anti-gun advocates cite crime statistics as their reason to ban guns (as did DC.) But the presense of guns in our environment is not the reason people are committing crime. The vast majority of crimes are committed because
    1. A lot of things are illegal that shouldn’t be (i.e. drugs), and
    2. Because economic oppression of the lower class promotes gang and criminal activity.

These problems will not go away by banning guns. In fact, it will allow the government to continue to run roughshod over committers of consensual crimes and the lower class without fear of harsh reactions. Which leads me to

  1. If guns are outlawed, only the law will have guns.
Advertisements

Responses

  1. I see it as a little bit of the Court making up laws out of thin air. The Constitution clearly links gun ownership to a militia; this ruling severs that link.

    I fully expect the Right to speak out against this, since they hate it so when judges “legislate from the bench.”

  2. Changing laws on gun ownership only effects those owning guns legally, ie: the law-abiding.

    It provides no sanction whatsoever for those who are illegally in possession of guns, ie: criminals.

    I can only see the court’s involvement as being the result of pressure from those wanting to create a “safer” society. This is fine, misguided people, be they ordinary citizens or those holding public office, have every right to use the tools made available in a republic to forward their agenda by legal means.

    The end of the article states that, without removing the right to own a gun, there is plenty of scope for legislating who can own them, and how they must be stored. It does seem a little strange though, that somebody intending to use a firearm for self-defense is obliged to keep it unloaded and disassembled or with a trigger lock on it.

    Citizen to intruder, “Now, you just take a seat while I assemble my rifle and root out some ammo… and I’ll be right with you.”

  3. i agree that the basic right to bear arms should be protected. but there should also be laws with real accountability to protect the average joe schmo victim.

    people with guns, kill people.

    its just too darn easy to get a gun here in CA.
    google gun shows in CA, and you’ll see what i mean.
    and not everyone can handle the responsibility of gun ownership. and that fact has been proven over and over, and over again. sadly.

    and there’s different ways to activate some reasonable guidelines-rural vs. city rules would be one. the whole argument that someone can justify having an AK-47 for “personal protection” is ridiculous.

  4. King, the court struck down the requirement of trigger-locks and keeping weapons disassembled or unloaded:

    “Therefore, the District of Columbia’s handgun ban, which “amounts to a prohibition on an entire class of ‘arms’ that Americans overwhelmingly choose for the lawful purpose of self-defense”, and the requirement that any firearm in the home be disassembled or bound by a trigger lock, which “makes it impossible for citizens to use arms for the core lawful purpose of self-defense”, are ruled unconstitutional.”

    I have a CCP, but I don’t carry all the time. I keep my piece in the center consul of my car, and I don’t take it outside with me unless I am going to be out of my car in an area with high crime. I also leave it in the car when I am going to places where there is a “no gun zone” like Virgina Tech.

    You may have converted to Progressivism Jim, but your Libertarian roots still show 😉

  5. Ash from the fires raging aove the city drifted though the hot summer air like light grey snow. Only two more blocks to the beach. Jian’s pearl handled Colt .25 automatic fit snugly in the handlebar bag of her bicycle, tucked between a bottle of Coppertone and a well worn copy of The Kite Runner.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

Categories

%d bloggers like this: