View Single Post
Old 12-10-2011, 08:26   #60
Lifetime Membership
NRA Life Member
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: GA
Posts: 1,507
Blog Entries: 3
Originally Posted by WarCry View Post
So, for those saying you want "Constitutional Carry" in the absolute purest sense, you have no problem with a 2-times convicted serial rapist carrying a gun, right?
Yes that is correct. However, I reject your question because it is based on a false premise. A twice convicted serial rapist being free to begin with is the core but a separate issue.

1. If he is too dangerous to own a firearm then he shouldn't be out of prison.
2. Whether he has LEGAL access to a firearm has practically nothing to do with wether or not he rapes again. The two have absolutely no connection.
3. SEE #1

Don't lie to yourself by thinking somebody who wants to rape/harm and is not incarcerated, can not get access to a means to do it. Believing that is fantasy. And trying to eliminate anything form people that "might be used as a weapon" is fantasy, ineffective and leads to bans on things like limes.
It is not practical think you can prevent free resolute people from having a means by which to harm others. In trying the only thing you can do by law, is make law abiding people sitting ducks.

Originally Posted by WarCry View Post
The federal government doesn't determine May Issue/Shall Issue/No Issue, either. For all of you screaming about the exact wording of the 2nd Amendment, you realize that - as it stands right now - this has NO BEARING on most gun control laws, yes? Most restrictions on things like permits, magazine capacity, open/concealed carry, these are all state-level or lower laws. The 2nd Amendment applies to the FEDERAL government.

So, which are you? Are you a 100% supporter of the 2nd Amendment? Or do you believe in states' rights? Because the two CAN BE mutually exclusive.
Not exactly. I believe the SCOTUS Heller decision reaffirmed the individual rights of the 2A and McDonald "incorporated" them to the states. They said that the right of self defense and to have firearms is a "fundamental right", just like the 1A. And just like the 1A, it applies to the states. Every state ratified the constitution. So the states rights argument on 2a is somewhat fallacious. The SCOTUS did say there is room for some restrictions (just like the 1A) but the bar for restrictions on a fundamental right is exceedingly high (just like the 1A).

It is true that many of the most onerous of the thousands of state/local laws, won't disappear overnight though. Strategic civil rights litigation like that which is being undertaken by the Second Amendment Foundation takes time and must be done methodically to be the most effective. But if done correctly, with time, we will be emancipated from the enslavement of onerous firearms restrictions eventually.

The test of a first rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function. -F. Scott Fitzgerald
TheJ is offline   Reply With Quote