1. Attention: We have put together a thread with tips and a tutorial video to help with using the new software. Please take a moment to check out the thread here: Trapshooters.com Tutorial & Help Video.
    Dismiss Notice

Gun Control

Discussion in 'Politics, Elections & Legislation' started by eagles11, Jan 11, 2010.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. eagles11

    eagles11 TS Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    144
    "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."


    I have been considering the fact that in 2010 we the people of the United States will engage in a national debate of epic proportions on the issue of the Second Amendment. At issue are several questions that need to be answered once and for all.

    In 2008 the United States Supreme Court (SCOTUS) heard the Heller case and affirmed that the Second Amendment did in fact address the individual right of we the people to keep and bear arms. In McDonald vs The City of Chicago the court will decide if the Second Amendment applies to the states and the municipalities as well. Many states have preemption laws that prevent cities from making laws more restrictive than the state laws. In this case it appears that Illinois does not. Odds are that SCOTUS will rule in favor of the 14th Amendment and incorporate the Second under the 14th. However in the Heller case SCOTUS said that the Second Amendment is not a free reign. They used the example of felons and mentally unstable persons and said that prohibitions against them keeping and bearing arms was constitutional.

    So all this leads to several questions and I would like to hear your views about them.

    1. Where do we the people draw the line on excersizing the right? 2. When and where does our government have the authority to dictate to us that right? 3. What do we the people want to do, if anything, about allowing John Q Public buying, keeping and carrying firearms.

    Question One: The real question is what does the 2nd mean to a modern American? Does it mean exactly what the framers wrote? If we interpret it that way felons would be allowed to keep and bear. I don't think any of us would like that to happen. But is that where we draw the line, felons and mentally unstable persons? The terrorist who shot up Ft. Hood would not have fallen in that group. Should loose their right because of a misdemeanor crime? Right now in the United States it is in the case of domestic violence. Is that OK? Should an honest citizen be allowed to keep and bear without being harassed by law enforcement? The problem for law enforcement is they are required to make super human decisions at a moments notice and are expected to get it right 100% of the time. Where do we draw the line? How did they do it in the "Wild West"? By the way some scholars write that it is much wilder now than then. What about when we can use force or deadly force to protect ourselves and loved ones? There is a great difference between the laws in each state. For instance in Texas in some cases I can use deadly force to prevent someone from stealing my stuff. Should I be able to shoot someone for stealing my lawn mower at night as I can in Texas? Should I be able to shoot someone for breaking into my house? Where is the line? There is no question that crime is down in the US to a record low. Is this because of we the people arming ourselves?

    Question Two: Does our government, federal, state and local, have the authority to put controls on we the people for the purchase of and the carrying of firearms? Many states have concealed handgun licenses. Should we the people have to submit to asking for a permission slip to exercise an enumerated right? What about how and where we carry? Certainly we should not carry in a jail or prison but what about other places like a mall or church? What about on an airplane or bus? What about open carry? In Texas we have concealed carry but not open carry of handguns. Long guns and shotguns are ok to open carry though with restrictions on certain places. SCOTUS, in the Heller decision, seemed to say that the government does have the authority to limit the places we the people can carry. What should we accept?

    Question Three: I watch John Q Public handle firearms on a daily basis and I have to tell you that some are just down right scary. They do not know what safety is nor how to achieve it. Do we require a basic firearms safety course like the NRA has before a person could purchase guns or ammo? Some states do but doesn't that fly in the face of the amendment? We do this for hunters in most states why not all firearms? Do we maybe start teaching this in schools like we do other social issues like sex education? After all it is just about safety with firearms. If this is the way to go how do we standardize it for all states so you could buy ammo say in another state that you are hunting in?

    I feel that it is time to hash this one out and put it to bed but we need to realize what the total debate is about and finish it so we the people can protect ourselves from all comers from without or within.

    In answering please try to give non inflammatory answers as I am asking legit questions. I love this country for all that it is. All the freedoms we have. And all the opportunities before us. Most of those come from our ability to tell our government to stop and having the ability to make it stick. No other society has that "RIGHT" but the citizens of the United States.

    Thanks in advance.

    Jack Burch
     
  2. spitter

    spitter Well-Known Member TS Supporters

    Joined:
    Jan 29, 1998
    Messages:
    4,364
    Location:
    Prairie State
    Felons lose the right to vote. "Modern America" was does that actually mean?!

    In the movie American President - Douglas (democrat) makes some poignant remarks - America is advanced citizenship... Freedom means listening to someone who may hold a polarized perspective on an issue dear to one of us, the symbol of our Nation's freedom is more than the Flag, the right to burn the Flag is also a symbol of our freedom... although a Republican and whatever distaste I might have for that action - I agree.

    Democrats (socialists, not the original Democrats - today's Republicans) believe in a maternalistic all emcompassing form of oversight - recipe for loss of freedom - we do have to be vocal and fight for our rights, and fight for minimal government and be responsible for our own success and failure.

    Any legal firearm allowed within the country, should be allowed to be sold to any law-abiding citizen in this country with right to carry... however that said, I can see limitations being implemented to limit firearms in schools, within other's private property (retailers, employers, etc...) (distinguished from being placed in locked automobile/truck parked on private property) and in certain public buildings - courthouses, police departments etc... SCOTUS appears to have no qualms about implementing incidental registration and/or allowing certification.

    Regarding limitations for use on/within your own property, firearm ownership also carries responsibilities... there's no free lunch. Anyone (within the boundaries above) should be able to buy, but ownership doesn't guarantee unrestricted access to a facility to use... so a range or hunting facility should be able to require proof of ability before use of a 3rd party's facilities.

    In "The Shootist" John Wayne gives a brief speech by how he lived (wish I could remember it), but it basically was the "golden rule"... I won't be wronged, and won't do it to others... I don't know that the "wild west" was truly the "wild west", but considering 48 other states have some type of carry legislation, and no OK Corrals have popped up in recent memory...

    That's about all I have to say...

    regards all,

    Jay Spitz
     
  3. eagles11

    eagles11 TS Member

    Joined:
    May 26, 2007
    Messages:
    144
    Thanks Jay,

    Modern America really means that we have some differences of doing business than what our founding fathers did. They were pretty much a let me do it for myself society and now many want others to do it all for them. So probably back then if someone tried to break into your house it was understood that they would collect the interest on that action on the spot. Now some expect you to wait for the police to arrive to take care of the problem.

    You are correct on the OK Corral. But if the truth be known there was not rampant shootouts in the old west, however there were some. Not much has changed as we still have shootouts today, only more of them because of the number of people in the U.S.

    Jack
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.