Wednesday, April 22, 2009
Posted by:
John & Cisco
at
9:00 AM
John and Cisco talked to Alan Gura, the lead attorney who defeated the DC gun ban and is now working on the same kind of case in Chicago (listen to the interview at John and Cisco's podcast page).
Get more information about bringing the Second Amendment to Chicago at Chicagoguncase.com.
I called and spoke to John and Cisco about Guns today. My comment was that you can find an accident with a gun in america everyday. Those statitstics are debatable but if you follow the news closely you certainly will read about these tragedies frequently enough that we NEED to do something about it. If my kid were to get shot with an illiegal gun purchased at a gun show (where it has been shown you can buy a gun just as easily as if you were buying a pack of gum) I would feel that the people who are advocating for these laws would also be responsible.
I feel you are a moron if you have kids in your house and also own guns. As a parent of three kids i can tell you that you cant hide ANYTHING FROM YOUR KIDS. You are fooling yourself if you think that they don't know where or how to get at your guns.
Cisco, my challenge to you is this: I will send you a news story every time I find one about a kid being killed/hurt by an accidental gun shooting and you send me a story about how someone protected their family from a criminal who was threatening them. Do you want to take up the challenge? |
|
Michael, do You stores knives in Your house? Do You use natural gas in Your house? Razor blades? Cleaning chemicals? Gasoline in the garage? Do You transport Your children in an automobile?
Yes, guns should be secured and stored safely, but whether You like it or not, gun ownership is a right guaranteed by the Constitution. Some town and cities ignore that fact, or dispute it, but the Constitution really should be taken seriously.
Why don't You send John and Cisco newspaper clippings every time someone is hurt in a car accident? If You wish to ignore the Constitution and oppose gun ownership because people sometimes are accidentally hurt by them, certainly You must oppose car ownership for the same reason.
Do You want to give up Your constitutional rights? That's up to You. The rest of us want our government to stop infringing on our constitutional rights. |
|
"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."
-U.S. Constitution, Second Amendment.
"WASHINGTON — A federal appeals court on Friday overturned the District of Columbia's longstanding handgun ban, issuing a decision that will allow the city's citizens to have working firearms in their homes.
In the ruling, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia rejected city officials' arguments that the Second Amendment right to bear arms only applied to state militias."
-FoxNews, 9 March 2007 (http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,258067,00.html) |
|
John,
Guns are made to kill, cars are not this is a simplistic comparison.
Should we still have slavery today because it was written into the constitution?
Should we still ban women from voting because it was written into the constitution?
I'm not advocating for getting rid of all guns but we MUST have some common sense laws to control this unbelievable explosion in gun violence.
How would you like to go into a bar where everyone had a gun on their hip like some people advocate? Do you think their might be a few shoot-outs every month?
Come on John your drinking way too much of this NRA Koolaid if you dont think we should have major restrictions on guns.
Do you believe that anyone should be able to go to a gun show and buy a gun no questions asked - no backround checks done? These are things that are happening in this country today.
Did you hear the story where daddy tought his 9 year old how to shoot his 22 rifle and one day the nine year old decided to kill daddy and daddy's friend. Brilliant wouldn't you say? I know you think im making this story up but go ahead and google it, it really did happen.
Best Wishes
mike wallace |
|
Mike, yes, You're right that cars are not intended to kill. But in fact they do kill people, and this happens every day as the result of unfortunate accidents and reckless behavior. Yet the law accommodates responsible ownership and use of automobiles.
I do not agree that all guns are intended to kill. A large percentage of guns never kill or injure anyone. Individuals buy guns for various reasons, one of the most common being legitimate self-defense, from deterring aggressors up to and including the use of potentially deadly force. This sort of gun ownership protects individuals, families, and civil society. The fact that guns are sometimes used carelessly or recklessly does not in itself justify overturning or rewriting the Constitution, any more than drivers who drag race on public streets justify banning all automobiles.
I do agree that common sense needs to prevail in the laws regulating gun ownership. The Second Amendment does not guarantee an absolute right of gun possession to everyone. Should convicted felons be permitted guns? No. Should seven year-olds own pistols? No. Should I be permitted to have a functioning cannon or anti-aircraft gun in my back yard, or a grenade launcher? I don't think so.
But preventing law abiding citizens from owning handguns, rifles, shotguns, and ammunition to protect themselves and their families violates the Constitution, emboldens criminals, and victimizes the public. Gun ownership should be regulated, not banned.
Any reasonable person who is aware of the terrible level of violent crime in Chicago or Washington D.C. can see that disarming the public isn't the answer.
Cheers,
John Robin (http://straightdope.blogspot.com) |
|
If your going to continue to compare cars, carving knives and such to guns it is not worth my time to talk with you.
You do agree to some level of gun control - many of your fellow gun owners and the NRA would never agree to ANY laws involving guns.
I ask you again, should anyone ever be allowed to go to a gun show and buy a gun without a backround check or even an id? Please answer this question because this IS LEGAL TODAY IN MANY PARTS OF OUR COUNTRY.
Also, do you think it should be legal for any of us who have guns to carry that gun with us in public everyday places in a gun holster?
I also ask you to answer the question of whether our not these guns purchase for "protection" more often end up in accidents or crimes rather then actual protection.
How is it that you need to lock up your guns because your son is now old enough to snoop? Arn't you jepordizing your precious "protection"? |
|
"Should anyone ever be allowed to go to a gun show and buy a gun without a backround check or even an id?" No. The "gunshow loophole" is a lie; every gun show I have ever been to has a requirement that ID be shown and a background check be performed to complete a sale. Sales between *private citizens* is a different matter.
Also, do you think it should be legal for any of us who have guns to carry that gun with us in public everyday places in a gun holster? YES, except for when entering schools, airports, post offices or other gov't buildings. No concealed carry when drinking (ANY amount). Only specially licensed personel to carry in these locations.
I also ask you to answer the question of whether our not these guns purchase for "protection" more often end up in accidents or crimes rather then actual protection. THEY DO NOT. ANOTHER LIE TOLD TO YOU BY THE LEFT.
How is it that you need to lock up your guns because your son is now old enough to snoop? Arn't you jepordizing your precious "protection"? YOU'RE RETARDED. THAT'S WHY YOU'RE A LIBERAL. |
|
I'm actually an indendent voter and I votED... for the winner.
You're retarded?...Good solid argument.
Why could you bring a gun into a restaraunt or bar but not into a government building - what would be the difference? Why not let all the students in college arm themselves if they choose. Wouldn't the schools be safer?
You call the truth a lie. These are indisputable facts. There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.
I, like many americans today, would not vote for the hypocrtical positions of the RNC as they stand today however I expect them to change these positions as they will not be able to win national elections without changing.
|
|
"legal for any of us who have guns to carry that gun with us in public everyday places in a gun holster? YES"
Wingnuts just wanna grow up to be cowboys. |
|
I'm actually an indendent voter and I votED... for the winner.
-He's the President, but he's no winner.
You're retarded?...Good solid argument.
-I can't help it if you're mentally deficient.
Why could you bring a gun into a restaraunt or bar but not into a government building - what would be the difference?
-One CAN'T bring a gun into ANY establishment serving liquor, restaurant OR bar(FL CCP law). Impaired people + guns = trouble. And I'm sure if you rub your widdle bwain cells together you can think of a reason why a non- security/LEO bringing a gun into a gov't building might be a bad idea.
Why not let all the students in college arm themselves if they choose.
-I agree, IF they pass the background check, the exams and are fingerprinted and are licensed.
Wouldn't the schools be safer?
-POSSIBLY. Then again, some people can pass exams and get a license but are still not gun-safe. There's also a lot of drinking and drug use assoc. with college students.
You call the truth a lie. These are indisputable facts.
-If they were indisputable, I wouldn't call them "lies"; they'd be facts. I know the difference, but you don't.
There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.
-And none who bend reality to fit their worldview like liberals!
I, like many americans today, would not vote for the hypocrtical positions of the RNC
*(the DNC has less or NO hypocritical positions?*)
as they stand today however I expect them to change these positions as they will not be able to win national elections without changing.
-Then they'd no longer be the GOP. THey'd be the DNC.
|
|
|
I can only imagine how you'd carry YOUR firearm. |
|
|
Well as good as the person holding it. I carry a pistol and have used my pistol in self defense 3 times .i have yet to fire it in a selfdefense situation and pray fervently that it never comes to that .Had i not had my pistol in those aforementioned situations i could have easily been killed . Better to have one than not |
|
Hi, Mike, thanks for Your reply. I'm not an NRA member, and I'm not a spokesman for gun owners, but I'm happy to answer Your questions:
- No, I don't think that individuals should be able to buy a gun at gun shows or elsewhere without ID or background check. I've already stated that in my opinion gun purchases should be regulated (but not banned).
-Yes, I think that citizens should be able not only to possess guns but to carry them in a holster, and use them in self-defense. Gun usage should be regulated at the state, not federal, level. The federal government should intervene when necessary ONLY TO PREVENT state and local governments from attempting to deprive citizens of their constitutional gun rights. But I'm all for reasonable restrictions. Training should be required before a state gun-carry permit can be obtained, just as states impose regulations for training and licensing vehicle drivers. I don't want 15 year-olds or convicted felons "packing heat". There probably are some locations where private citizens should not be permitted to carry guns, such as courtrooms.
-No, I don't think that guns purchased for personal protection "more often end up in accidents or crimes". I suspect only a small percentage of such guns encounter this fate. If You think otherwise, the burden is on You to provide the evidence to support Your suggestion.
-Your question about locking up guns to protect my children... Come on, is that a serious question? Guns hazards are not the only things that children need to be protected against. Parents need to exercise due caution in securing their homes, guns, and other possessions so that they provide a safe environment for their families. Responsible adults lock up their car and their home. They keep dangerous household items out of the reach of children, but also train their children how to live in the real world. This does not infringe upon our rights, but is a proper exercise of those rights. |
|
Hi, Mike, thanks for Your reply. I'm not an NRA member, and I'm not a spokesman for gun owners, but I'm happy to answer Your questions:
- No, I don't think that individuals should be able to buy a gun at gun shows or elsewhere without ID or background check. I've already stated that in my opinion gun purchases should be regulated (but not banned).
-Yes, I think that citizens should be able not only to possess guns but to carry them in a holster, and use them in self-defense. Gun usage should be regulated at the state, not federal, level. The federal government should intervene when necessary ONLY TO PREVENT state and local governments from attempting to deprive citizens of their constitutional gun rights. But I'm all for reasonable restrictions. Training should be required before a state gun-carry permit can be obtained, just as states impose regulations for training and licensing vehicle drivers. I don't want 15 year-olds or convicted felons "packing heat". There probably are some locations where private citizens should not be permitted to carry guns, such as courtrooms.
-No, I don't think that guns purchased for personal protection "more often end up in accidents or crimes". I suspect only a small percentage of such guns encounter this fate. If You think otherwise, the burden is on You to provide the evidence to support Your suggestion.
-Your question about locking up guns to protect my children... Come on, is that a serious question? Guns hazards are not the only things that children need to be protected against. Parents need to exercise due caution in securing their homes, guns, and other possessions so that they provide a safe environment for their families. Responsible adults lock up their car and their home. They keep dangerous household items out of the reach of children, but also train their children how to live in the real world. This does not infringe upon our rights, but is a proper exercise of those rights. |
|
|