What the is wrong with these people:
By the narrowest of margins, the Senate’s liberal bloc of Democrats defeated an amendment that would have allowed gun owners to carry their weapons across state lines without regard for stricter laws in many jurisdictions, giving preference to states with looser standards.
In a 58-39 vote, supporters of the looser gun law — including all but two Republicans and 20 moderate Democrats — fell two votes short of the 60 they needed under Senate rules to approve the measure. The amendment, sponsored by Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.), showed the bitter divisions among a Democratic caucus that now holds 60 seats, many of whom got to the Senate by winning in conservative states as they proudly supported gun rights. It also divided the party’s leadership, as Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.), campaigning for re-election in 2010, sided with gun rights supporters. His top lieutenants, Sens. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.) and Charles Schumer (D-N.Y.), led the push against the measure.
I’m not a gun banner or gun grabber, but I do have to wonder what is wrong with some people that they absolutely have to be packing 24 hours of the day and that during these difficult times, the number one concern is whether or not you can take your concealed carry weapon over the South Dakota border. I don’t understand these people at all, and I live around thousands of people who own guns.
calipygian
What pisses me off the most about this is that there are places like DC where the community standards are relatively sane, but the loose gun laws in VA would make a mockery of those laws.
I’ve seen people open carrying in Old Town Alexandria on a Sunday afternoon where the biggest threat to safety is a kid dropping an icecream cone on your deck shoes.
It’s absolutely insane.
One day I’m going to ask one of those crazies why they need to open carry on an open street full of families just strolling around and I’m not going to be nice about it. Then I’m going to ask them what they are going to do about it, just to make a point about how open carrying a Glock is pretty pointless and can only lead to trouble.
bvac
It’s so they can shoot cops when Obama threatens to take their guns away, a 24/7 threat. Duh.
JGabriel
Here in NYC, I’m pretty sure people are breathing a sigh of relief knowing that we’re not going to be flooded with a bunch of winger & gangster assholes walking around with concealed carry permits they picked up in VA, SC, or TX.
.
xyzzy
Point taken, John, and I don’t get it either. As I understand it, though, this was more of a States’ rights issue rather than a gun issue per se.
kid bitzer
it’s just rallying the base, john. it’s an issue that they know will play well with the limbaugh crowd, and feed a lot of the current insanity.
you watch–this will start a huge blow-up of gun paranoia on talk radio.
(like you, i am perfectly fine with people owning guns, and have owned handguns myself in the past. i’m also fine with various degrees of local regulation on guns. but the nra has stoked their crazies way beyond sensible policy-land)
El Cid
Hey, is this another one of those times where the NRA throws around its deceitful propaganda phrase about how we don’t need no damn more gun laws ’cause the existing laws are good enough and not enforced, and then they turn around and do everything they possibly can to make sure that existing gun laws are not enforced?
‘Cause, they must not think existing gun laws are enough and just needing to be enforced if they’re trying to effectively eliminate a lot of ’em. Just sayin’.
bud
Perhaps they’ll support recognizing gay marriage across states.
Gus
It’s not a policy thing at all. It’s all about theater. They’re reminding gun-lovers that Democrats are a bunch of pansy gun haters. Aren’t Republicans supposed to be about local control?
A Mom Anon
They’re scared. Of Everything. Those RNC lists they send out to give the numbers to call in with talking points to the talk shows have a button that says”Share Your Fears”. They’re playing into the OMG the Black Guy is coming for your guns thing. Plus,I really think they believe at some point they’ll have to be a hero and stop some serial killer or bamk robber or gang member.
cfaller96
Allow me to put my tinfoil hat on and throw this little fact at you: the NRA and the KKK were founded in the same year, right after (and arguably in response to) the end of the Civil War.
Think about that for a second. After the slaves were freed, a whole bunch of people got together and decided they needed to arm themselves. That is the psychology behind the membership of the NRA. Those who desperately need their guns to protect themselves against “criminals” aren’t actually referring to criminals per se- they’re simply expressing their deepseated fear and insecurity of teh darkies.
There, I said it. I have zero evidence to support this theory, so flame away.
Anoniminous
No matter where you go – on vacation or even merely out for a drive in the countryside – you always need to be able to fight off PinkoIslamoSovietCommie paratroopers with your 155mm Gruber/Marley Harley-Honker®.
WOLVERINES !!!
The Grand Panjandrum
@El Cid: I think Thune was doing the NRA’a bidding to get Dem’s on the record for the next election cycle. Rest assured the ads are being made as I type.
kth
It’s naive to focus on the narrow margin, except insofar as it tells us what a crazy place we live in, but we already knew that. Some of those moderate Dems might have come around if their votes had been needed. Most likely Schumer and Durbin worked it out so that the ones who really needed to vote to keep this measure alive, could. The important thing is that it is gone.
LongHairedWeirdo
Gun folks are actually pretty cagey here. They like to push the idea that removing guns from a lawful carrier is removing their right to self defense. I strongly disagree with this tactic[1], but admire their fortitude and ability to do what they want.
If pro-choice folks could get the same kind of energy over abortion restrictions… alas, they won’t.
[1] I disagree with the tactic for pragmatic reasons. To push this hard for the need for self defense helps push an idea that the world is a very dangerous place, and it’s simply not *that* dangerous (even though it’s hardly safe).
jenniebee
I’m not a banner or grabber either, and my husband is a collector with a concealed carry permit. There’s no logic to it, except the logic that there is a political and financial advantage to be gained from constant fomenting of the base.
Not our base. When we have issues that never seem to go anywhere, like torture, we tend to get pissed off at our own, not at the other guy.
Michael
They might run across some scary negroes or hispanics somewhere who might look at them funny, and they want to be able to show some heat to make it stop.
jamfan
I love how 58-39 is “the slimmest of margins” now. It’s the Republicans’ bizarro world; we just live in it.
The Moar You Know
@xyzzy: One and the same issues to 47% of this benighted country.
I own guns and have been shooting since I was eight, but goddamit I don’t understand what the big deal is. I want stricter gun laws, much stricter, license, registration, and insurance at a minimum. I say that to one of the NRA dipshits and their reaction makes me fear for my life; I said I wanted gun regulation, not to chop your dick off, you fucking inbred retard.
Sorry, just had to vent. Most gun owners make me look like an asshole by association and I resent the hell out of it.
media browski
I’m emotional about guns. I’m emotional because I grew up in Indiana where I met 16-year-olds in the mall who greeted each with “You packing?” “I’m packing” and both showed each other their guns. I’m emotional because a kid who was expelled from my Jr. year came back and hunted the principal in the halls with a shotgun while we all hid in locked classrooms. I’m emotional because I’ve spent th past 20 years in Wash, DC and have experienced all manner of gun violence.
When I think of the GOP’s position on guns, and their position on education, their positions on all things involving race, and their positions on everything involving the poor I believe that they *want* a race war in the streets.
Michael
By the way – in my years of law practice, I’ve been asked on several occasions to get rid of criminal convictions which serve as an impediment for some goobers to carry concealed. I can say beyond all shadow of any doubt that the people who whimpered about this the most and were strident were the ones you’d least want to see carry concealed.
freelancer
@COLE:
It’s about Freedom. It’s about Liberty. It’s about suppressing Tyranny. It’s about bucking Fascism. DUH.
That is all.
General Winfield Stuck
Pure politics and the power of the NRA. Wingnut Thune is just trying to light a fire under the faithful and make red state dems take a painful vote breaking from the dem party as a whole.
Plus a different kind of gun culture in the mid-west and west. Where there are great expanses of nothing but dirt and praire dogs. Here in NM they passed a reasonable concealed carry law calling for some evidence you know how to handle a firearm. But anybody can carry a six shooter on their belt in view. And more than a few do.
demkat620
Um, this guy
http://pajamasmedia.com/blog/six-months-under-the-gun-a-weapon-carrying-experiment/
I don’t get these people either. I don’t want your guns. I don’t care but we don’t need a bunch of itchy trigger fingers running around Philly.
We have enough of that shit already.
Trollhattan
In a similar vein, allowing folks to pack heat in National Parks will accomplish…what? Freedom from marmot tyranny?
In a discussion about that fine piece of legislation I pointed out I’d love to see a list of folks who presently refuse to enter a National Park without a loaded weapon (unloaded has always been legal). I want those folks to let me know when they’re going, so I can stay home.
smiley
Wayne LaPierre of the NRA was on MSNBC today claiming that this was a victory for gun rights. Presumably because it failed by only 2 votes – they’re getting closer! It’s always been amazing to me that the gun manufacturers have been able to create such a powerful lobby based on such an ambiguous constitutional amendment as the 2nd. It’s also amazing to me that some people, many living in safe, rural/suburban areas, who don’t feel safe unless they’re packing. It reminds me of a map published in the local paper showing that the majority of conceal-carry permits were issued in white, suburban areas. You know, the most dangerous parts of town.
Josh Huaco
It’s about believing that even though you’ve been emasculated by changing demographics and secularization and a black guy being elected president, GOD DAMN IT I CAN STILL BANG (grips and massages steely surrogate penis).
Maybe. That’s my best guess anyway.
PS – There’s a gun shop here in Waco that has a radio advertisement, encouraging people to come to their establishment and purchase guns and ammo…”While you still can.”
jl
I can see the argument that some people who have legitimate reason to carry a concealed weapon in one state, may have (or think they have) a legit reason to carry when they travel to another state.
So, I would support, say, a program that makes it easy for states to coordinate their policies.
But I do not see a reason for just destroying the ability of any state to control who carries concealed weapons within their borders, which is what this would do.
The argument I have heard from wingnuts in support of it, including at least one jackass national news anchor, is that all these people where checked out in their home state, so what’s your problem? But it would not take long for a couple of states to set up shop as the Delaware of concealed weapons permits, and then who knows who would have them. And the states who would do this would do it for money (and how many states would like that kind of easy money now?)
I think this is an example of our government turning into an arm of the lobbying industry. These kinds of goofy efforts are just power plays and marketing gimmicks.
If the NRA won this, it would be another demo of its power, but it lost so it can be used as a reason to drum up bucks from the gulls and marks who think this is some totalitarian blow against the second amendment.
There was a sensible way to deal with the problem of people in danger who lost their concealed weapon at the state border, which I explained above. To try to pass this rubbish, its just a powerful lobby using the government for self-promotion.
The Other Steve
Some states already have reciprocity agreements in place with regards to CCW.
And that system seems fine to me. I don’t understand this at all.
EchoesNoBunnynoMan a variation
I get a little amused whenever a right wing blogger has their picture taken holding their cherished piece. The elegant poses they try to assume reminds me that they are trying to recreate old Chuck Heston NRA ads.
Here’s me holding a hand cannon that will obliterate a bear, with my gentle, church going smile and warm, fireside background.
I can imagine they will scream tyranny over the Senate vote today.
Now I have no problems with guns, as I own a few. But these people creep me out too. I don’t carry with me, ever. I don’t feel the need and I am not that paranoid, even though I am not exactly what you could call physically imposing.
lotus
“the slimmest of margins”
Not a teevy-watcher, but a friend of mine who is says MSNBC explained that this “margin” is misleading: apparently once Reid knew it was definitely going down, he released the remaining Blue Dawgs to vote as they wished.
Paul L.
Looks like John agrees with Peter Singer that a 22 year old has a greater right to life than a 72 year old.
General Winfield Stuck
@lotus:
I suspect this is true.
freelancer
The most punchable douche in the universe throws in on this issue:
http://thinkprogress.org/2009/07/22/beck-gun-movies/
Last night he brought up the fairness doctrine as an example of how Obama’s dictatorial nature stifles dissent.
Anyone, and I mean ANYONE who tunes into his show on a nightly basis, obsesses about guns, and/or “WANTS THEIR COUNTRY BACK!” needs an ice cream cone, a hug from their dad, a bedtime story, and to have their Fucking head examined!
gwangung
They LISTEN to Reid????
The Other Steve
John Yoo got punked…
http://www.wired.com/threatlevel/2009/07/yooprank/
Halteclere
It isn’t the hunters that are up in arms (pun intended) about gun laws. For the longest time I didn’t under stand this – as someone who grew up hunting I have never had a desire to own a handgun. Why, when a rifle or shotgun was all I needed?
But the gun crazies are those who see a gun as a tool to shoot someone else. Yea, self defense is a great word, but how often is someone’s life really in danger where there is no path to flee? And when is someone’s life really in danger yet they have time to pull out their concealed gun in the first place?
No, gun crazies are paranoid people who think the world is a dangerous place that is out to get them personally, and they need a gun because they lost their security blankey when they were four.
The only gun crazy I respect are the ones that were also up in arms about the Bush Administration. Everyone else is just a pus*y trying not to show that they are on the edge of peeing their pants.
kid bitzer
tho i will say one thing:
i never set foot here in john cole’s blog without being armed.
i mean, to the *teeth*. i gotta nine on my side and a little derringer here next to my mouse-pad. i make travis bickle look like a peacenik.
otherwise, it’s just too goddamn dangerous on these interwebs–you got your trolls, you got your spoofers, you got your straw men, you got your internet traditions.
and people taking potshots at you with every comment! holy crud, you take your life in your hands just logging on!
so, i mean, you people can do what you want, but you won’t see me at balloon-juice unarmed.
and did i mention that under my swivel-chair i have a pump-action 12-gauge? every now and then the give-and-take gets so ferocious, i fear for my cheetos.
come and get me, bloggers!
Josh Huaco
@Paul L.:
Non sequitur troll does not follow.
@freelancer:
Does Glen Beck have a conceal carry permit? I thought they didn’t provide them to mental cases.
Riggsveda
I come from a family of hunters, including my husband (SW PA originally) and we can’t believe the incredible stupidity of the thinking behind this amendment. And while I’m on the subject, no one needs an assault rifle to go hunting. I used to know someone whose dad was a big-time safari hunter, and he had the most powerful rifles I’d ever seen, things that could take down a Dodge Monaco at 50 yards. Cabela’s sells a 90-round magazine for its assault rifle. Seriously. If you can’t hit the target in the first few shots, you need to stay the fuck home.
The whole purpose of the NRA, when not strong-arming legislators of questionable rationality, is to whip up hysteria to support the arms industry and maintain the worldwide flow of cheap killing machinery to anyone who can pony up the cash. These numbskulls who sport its bumper stickers and parrot its poorly reasoned arguments for freefire zones are only puppets. They really believe that if the shit comes down, they can hold off a military they’ve been overfeeding for 65 years with a few ak-47s and some attitude.
smiley
@kid bitzer:
Pow! Your turn.
Just Some Fuckhead
I got a friend (ex-friend, really) who has a concealed weapon permit and spends a lot of time on his blog championing conceal/carry. He’s a big fucking pussy who’s scared to death someone is gonna kick his ass. He thinks carrying a gun makes him a tough guy.
The Moar You Know
@freelancer: It’s about dropping a moose in my driveway. In San Diego.
Hey, it could happen. Do you want another dead moose victim laid at the feet of the Democrat Party?
DO YOU?
I want to be prepared with my .50 Desert Eagle that I always tote around jammed into my waistband, it’s my constitutional right cause Glenn Beck said so.
Ed Drone
When he tells them it’s OK to do what they want…
Ed
devopsych
Is there a correlation between countries that have rational health care policy and rational gun control policy?
kid bitzer
@38
blam! blam!
damn smiley varmint! ooo, i *hate* rabbits!
WereBear
This always struck me as strange, since The Olde West got kinda shirty about leaving your guns at the entrance to town.
Because they preferred to not have free fire zones while you were picking up the flour and beans, ya know?
Like that whacky bill to allow people to carry loaded firearms into bars.
That will go well. /snark
The next-to-last samurai
So when is principal season, anyway? Do they taste like chicken? Does anyone have any good principal recipes?
freelancer
Works in NYC, lives in Connecticutt. Not sure about concealed permit laws there, I get the feeling he’s pulling a Palin with that statement.
devopsych
Unless you are a subsistence hunter or a soldier a gun is just a dick for the dickless.
b-psycho
While I agree that some people seem to act as if everywhere they go is obviously dangerous — there’s a difference between being prepared and being paranoid — I had the following thought:
This deals with concealed carry. People being able to have a gun in public without being distinguishable as such, to put it plainly. So, doesn’t that suggest that if someone knows somebody with a concealed carry permit has a gun that it’s because either A) a cop asked them if they had it or B) they unconcealed it for some reason?
Am I missing something here?
dlw
A buddy of mine who is sort of into guns knows a guy that always carries, to the point where when he goes swimming at the lake, he has a little derringer wrapped in a sandwich baggy jammed into his swimming trunks.
kid bitzer
@49
see now, in all seriousness, i think this leaves out something important:
regular old target practice can be a hell of a lot of fun. just plinking at tin cans.
for that matter, hunting can be a very nice activity, even if you are not dependent on the meat.
i mean, i will grant you that many gun-nuts are manifesting a severe penile paranoia, and that is a lot of what prevents rational policy.
but i also think that sensible policy is not promoted by stereotyping all gun-owners this way.
i and many of my relatives have owned guns and enjoyed target-shooting and hunting, without buying into any of the nra bullshit or the glenn beck psychosis.
don’t write off the sane gun owners in your rush to condemn the sickos.
ironranger
@dlw:
I’m laughing so hard, I’m crying.
oth, this guy has some serious issues of some sort.
freelancer
@devopsyche
SATSQ
YES, Fewer deaths.
*****
@The Moar You Know
NEWB, everyone knows it’s nickname is “DEAGLE”, and even more so, it should be placed very carefully in the elastic band of your underwear with the muzzle resting comfortably over your femoral artery.
SBW
Exactly how many people per year are gunned down by concealed carry permit holders?
I live in a ‘Shall Issue’ state — Nevada — and have yet to have a problem. What exactly is the threat from concealed carry?
Is there any factual basis, or just asinine opinion?
smiley
@freelancer: Works in NYC, lives in Connecticut. Not sure about concealed permit laws there.
I don’t know the laws there either but it’s a big gun manufacturing state. I remember the first time I was flashed a legally concealed gun. It was at a urinal at a bar in Connecticut. Short guy, like me.
cj
What is going on with the Democratic party?
I am wondering if all these new Democrats are really Republicans and Democrat in name only.
jl
@kid bitzer: I grew up on farms and shot me many a varmint (jack rabbits, mostly). There was a gun closet, chock full o’ guns. In Alaska, I lived in places where you had to take a noise maker with you as you walked the north forty, and often a shot gun was the best thing. Especially with those fun noise maker shells.
I love skeet and trap shooting (which is a fancy version of plinking cans, I guess).
I hate hunting. Get up in the middle of the night, crawling around in the brush at dawn. Freeze and then bake your ass off. Have to worry about other hunters, a substantial minority of whom have a relaxed attitude about gun safety and shooting at poorly identified targets. Forget about that hunting nonsense. I went out a few times with the Rocky Mountain branch of the family and then swore off.
So, there are others here who don’t have a problem with guns at all, but have a big big problem with the NRA and second amendment nutcases.
demimondian
@devopsych: No, like the others said, plinking a tin can or real target practice is a boatload of fun. I’ve never carried for self-protection. Of course, that’s because when I used to walk through the bad parts of Boston, I always thought that a gun would be more likely to be used *on* me than *by* me, and I was never sure that I would actually be able to pull the trigger if I had to.
Maybe I’m just a bad American.
Tsulagi
@dlw: That’s funny.
I bet that guy is extra bright carrying a derringer without a trigger guard. Lard ass gets out of the water forgetting he’s carrying then sits down, he could have more than one asshole.
demimondian
@kid bitzer: Shee-it. You got nothin’, son.
I got my snark right here. You feelin’ lucky today? Huh? You feeling lucky?
Nellcote
This is an intentional plan by the NRA to get their wish list passed. This is the second or third “must pass” bill they’ve tried to attach an NRA approved amendment to. Expect to see more.
jl
@dlw:
A dude who shoves a derringer into his shorts while swimming is “sort of into guns”?
smiley
@SBW: Exactly how many people per year are gunned down by concealed carry permit holders?
Probably none, or very few. But that’s not the point. The point is about who is allowed to carry and whose laws apply. Different states differ on that. Federalism and all…
EchoesNoBunnynoMan a variation
I wonder which movie Gleen Beak felt it necessary to bring a rod to. Harry Potter? Public Enemies?
Fern
@Tsulagi:
Or really need that surrogate for a dick.
kay
@SBW:
“Exactly how many people per year are gunned down by concealed carry permit holders?
I live in a ‘Shall Issue’ state—Nevada—and have yet to have a problem. What exactly is the threat from concealed carry?
Is there any factual basis, or just asinine opinion?”
Well, I think John Cole’s point here is that conservative lawmakers, lawyers and judges base a good part of their stated ideology on a absolute reverence for state’s rights regarding crafting and enforcing state law.
What this amendment would do is allow the most far-right state law to trump a more restrictive law, like, for example, New York’s. You’re federalizing. That’s okay, but you simply have to stop lying about it.
At some point you have to explain the massive, jarring constant hypocrisy. You can’t just keep spouting this stuff as dogma and then never, ever abide by it.
kid bitzer
61–
that snark? you call that snark? hell, i’ve heard worse snark from a sunday school teacher.
now you just wait there while i get out my tu quoques, buddy boy. these things illegal in 50 states–got ’em off a guy in mexicali.
jl
@kay: There is principle here: ake-ray inna the oney-ma.
(it is a very high arcane secret principle known only to high people entrusted with great power, that should not be revealed to just anyone who may not be able to handle the knowledge, so I put in pig-Latin, which I suppose is appropriate)
kay
@jl:
They do this a lot. Immediately prior to the 2006 elections, when GOP House members knew they were going to get beat, they tried to sneak a law in that would trump all 50 states on tort reform. They were going to impose a federal law and it applied to state judgments. I was flabbergasted at the breadth of the over-reach. “How could this BEEEE?!!” I said. I’m smarter now.
Like so much else in the dogma, the state’s rights blathering is meaningless, as applied. Put it over there with “family values” in the bullshit section.
SBW
kay,
I’m not a Republican, so you can drop that bullshit — nor of course, did you attempt to bring any facts into the debate.
I am, however, big on civil liberties — which is easy for a “gun nut” in Nevada, since our state ACLU chapter thankfully and strongly backs the 2nd amendment.
I was unaware federalism trumped constitutional rights. Owning a firearm is not like a driver’s license, or marriage, or anything else where standards vary from state to state. It is a constitutional right.
Perhaps you are for the 1st amendment varying widely by state, or the 4th amendment varying widely by state, or 7th etc. I am not. If a person owns a firearm legally in this country, they should be able to transport and carry it in all states with minimal hassle.
kay
@jl:
Thank you for the explanation. I was going to pretend I knew what it meant. Now I don’t have to!
Silver Owl
If the gun nuts, not to be confused with responsible gun owners, are that terrified to go out in public without being armed they should just stay home.
Mike P
@calipygian:
I deleted the picture, but last time I was in NoVa, I went to lunch w/my mom and aunt, both of whom live near Old Town. As we walked into a restaurant near the waterfront, I noticed a sign by the door that said something along the lines of “Pardner, please leave your guns outside”.
I had to use my iPhone to document the sheer madness of it all.
Really? You have be told NOT to bring your gun inside a restaurant? W.T.F.?!?
We are truly effed in the a.
kay
@SBW:
I know the legal argument, and I knew this tactic was next up, after the decision that the right was personal, per Justice Roberts.
I think you can and should expect push-back, because it’s a big country, and places like DC and New York have legitimate concerns regarding the safety of their citizens and law enforcement.
My state has concealed carry. They wrote an out into the law and nearly every private business took it and posted it, and every state agency took it and posted it.
As far as I’m concerned, concealed carry has done wonders for the sign industry. You can carry in your car, but you can’t walk into nearly any place of business or any government agency. I’m not sure what the point was. There must be a lot of guns sitting in cars. Big win.
jl
@SBW:
First, there is a difference between the two amendments:
One:
Congress shall make *NO LAW* respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.
Two:
*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.
The first is much more absolute than the second, and for good reason, otherwise people would be demanding the right have their own nukes and bunker-busters. Which is what you would need today to make any difference if a civil insurrection faced US military willing to put one down.
Second, the Bill of Rights originally applied the federal government, not the states. Some think, myself included, that the fourteenth amendment extended all of them to the state governments as well, but I think that it is crazy to say that such an extension should not be tailored for some states to individual circumstances -and this is where the founders prudence in using different wording for the different amendments comes in handy.
And, PS, even the first amendment has the ‘shouting fire in a crowded theatre’ exception, which any sensible person should agree with.
Paulie Chestnuts
You know, I know plenty of gun owners who don’t support the right of foreigners to, say, possess nuclear weapons to protect themselves from a nuclear attack by the U.S.
It would seem, then, that the inalienable right to self-defense only goes so far.
Mike P
@xyzzy:
@freelancer:
I mean, is Beck really going to use it, anyway? He reminds me of this exchange:
Sue: Just because I had the balls to stand up to those guys…
Trent: Like fuckin’ House of Pain was gonna do anything?
Sue: What? Come guys I couldn’t back down, that guy called me a bitch we kept our “rep” bro.
Charles: Man, fuck “rep” I got a call back tomorrow!
b-psycho
@EchoesNoBunnynoMan a variation: Dunno…do they still have porno theaters in NYC?
GregB
These bedwetters are upset that they won’t be able to hide their guns in their diapers.
-G
Paul L.
@Josh Huaco:
How do you explain Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Diane Feinstein (D-CA) having one?
kay
@Paulie Chestnuts:
I don’t have any problem with gun owners, and I figured this was coming.
The NRA in my state got concealed carry, but they didn’t get it in public parks. Then they got it in public parks. I was looking forward to it, because that applies to my municipal swimming pool, and I would enjoy that: the bathing suit and the ankle holster typa thing. I wanted to see that nuttiness.
Sadly, I was there today and they took the exception (because who the hell needs a gun at a pool, right?) and posted the same sign sign I see everywhere: “Not here”.
So I’m not going to see swimmers with firearms.
CCW4ME2
To better understand the Second Amendment to the United States Constitution it is helpful to consider how almost every reasonable person would interpret this amendment if it did not involve something which is considered controversial or politically incorrect by some and idolized by others. Arms in the possession of ordinary citizens meet both criteria. Let’s, for the sake of argument, suppose that the Second Amendment dealt with books, not arms or weapons, and read like this: “A well educated electorate, being necessary to the maintenance of a free State, the right of the people to own and read books, shall not be infringed.” Does anyone really believe that liberals would claim that only people who were eligible to vote should be allowed to buy and read books? Or that a person should have to have voted in the last election before the government would permit him or her to buy a book? Would the importation of books be banned if they did not meet an “educational purpose” test? Would some States limit citizens to buying “one book a month”? Would inflammatory “assault books” be banned in California?
The meaning of the Second Amendment becomes quite clear if one removes the emotional “gun” issue. Let’s re-state the 2nd in another context:
A well educated electorate, being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and read books, shall not be infringed.
If this were the law, would only educated people have the right to keep books? Or, would only the voting electorate be allowed to read? Of course not. All the people would have the right to keep and read books, and the state would benefit by having a more educated electorate.
There is NO requirement to be a member of a Militia to have the RIGHT to keep and bear arms. However, the more people who DO, the better the security of the state.
The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.’ The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right. [Nunn vs. State, 1 Ga. (1 Kel.) 243, at 251 (1846)]
Josh Huaco
@Paul L.:
Syllogism: Ur doing it wrong.
Trollhattan
“How do you explain Chuck Schumer (D-NY) and Diane Feinstein (D-CA) having one?”
Does the name Dan White strike a familar chord, maroon?
SBW
Paulie Chestnuts,
Weapon type has nothing to do with making concealed carry standards transferable and/or uniform across the country.
I am not a permit holder –if I ever need to use a weapon I won’t be hiding it — but allowing me to legally carry a concealed pistol from Reno, NV to Truckee, CA is not comparable to my supposed desire for suitcase nuclear weapons for self-defense purposes. Types of weapons allowed, and state interference in use, transport, and carry, are two different arguments. I do know Nevada permit owners and most do not have end-of-the-world personal armories. Nor am I alarmed to hike, run, eat, shop, and work, surrounded by concealed carries — and Nevada has issued thousands of permits. I have yet to see any murders in Reno attributed to them. Shooting deaths — yes. By gangs and involving stolen weapons.
jl,
Heller (and thankfully again) re-affirmed the individual, not collective, nature of the Second Amendment.
Chuck Butcher
My lefty friends make exactly as stupid and contradictory arguements against the Second as my rightist foes do regarding the rest of the BOR and Habeas. I will remind you that the arguement re: Ricco, and BushCo all referred to safety from “The Other.” Fuck you, is simple enough.
Start from the damn beginning, the people doing criminal shooting for the most part have no legal right to even possess a firearm of any sort and are committing an illegal act with them. Federal firearms laws are almost never prosecuted when accompanied by a State felony, dropped to keep the Fed prosecutor’s calendar clear for big cases.
If you don’t like guns, don’t own one. If you own one you have an ethical responsibility to be proficient with it and shooting once in a blue moon won’t cut it. If you have one and a kid you have a responsibility to make sure they are well educated concerning it and a water filled capped milk jug is a fairly effective illustration when struck by a bullet and equated to the human body.
Regarding my dick and my guns, well I’d guess your overheated rhetoric is related to inadequacey issues on your part rather than mine. I cannot remember ever equating a gun with sex, or even thinking of the two in close proximity in time.
I have quite a few firearms, each has its purpose. Your ignorance regarding purpose is not my concern short of you trying to pass laws out of ignorance. Those guns range from hand guns to one that can kill anything that walks on land. Not one has ever been pointed at a human at this point. There are times I should carry concealed for real reasons and I am qualified other than the actual application which I just never bothered with. The facts of today regarding concealed carry and criminal acts connected with it don’t back the paranoia evidenced here. You are in fact in more danger from your unarmed fellows than those with concealed carry. It may seem counter-intuitive, but it is the case.
The NYC & DC firearm regulations have not been shown to be effective. Blaming other states for your (NYC & DC) environment is stupid – these are YOUR criminals. Why is that? Here in Baker City we are, per capita, armed to the freaking teeth and we don’t slaughter each other or even point guns at each other.
jl
@SBW: Heller and individual right to bear arms (which I also believe in) has nothing to with my point.
It is the difference between the phrase ‘no law’ in the first, and the extended qualifier in the second, in terms of interpreting the relative strength of the protection, and what the context should be for imposing restrictions such as the ‘shouting fire in a crowded theatre’ restriction on the first amendment.
And please note that the Supremes explicitly said so in their recent decision -that local circumstances and considerations have significant weight when evaluating second amendment claims. That is is separate issue from whether the right is collective or not.
I do not believe you are thinking clearly on gun rights.
kid bitzer
oh well. this thread’s pretty much useless from here on out.
Church Lady
About three weeks ago, a traveling jewelry salesman from Alabama was in Memphis, calling on jewelry stores. He stopped at a store in East Memphis and was accosted by four robbers. He has a concealed carry permit in Alabama and was armed at the time. He shot two of the robbers (not fatal) and the other two ran. The two he shot are now in jail, awaiting trial. I’m not sure whether or not they ever caught the other two.
Tennessee law allows permit holders from other states to carry in this state, so he was in no trouble with the law for carrying and the shootings were ruled as justified. Had he not been armed, he would have been robbed and two criminals would still most likely be on the streets, looking for someone else to rob.
terry chay
@jamfan: Actually it was the slimmest margins as the majority voted FOR the gun law. Because it was an addendum to a must-pass bill, it required a 2/3 majority and they were just shy of that.
A Cat
The state line makes accidental felons of people who carry because they are required to make the nightly till drop at the bank.
Admittedly, the law wasn’t about these people and it is their own responsibility to not have their gun in their cars when they cross that invisible line. It would be nice if the Government made less felons for minor infractions and not more.
aimai
One of the religious nut blogs I read described the horrifying fact that her husband, who concealed carries all the time because of his unspecified work, drove accidentally through the part of michigan that canada intrudes into. It was all the fault of the GPS! He was arrested by the canadian authorities and they *took his gun away* and explained to him that under canadian law sneaking the gun in, as he did, even accidentally could result in seven years in jail. She was so torn between her usual slavish respect for authority and her determinaton to support her husband’s gun love no matter what. Finally after admitting that they graciously let him go with a warning (though they kept the gun) she finished up by saying, incomprehensibly “welcome to SOC-thing-ism” (well, she didn’t have to break it up that way.
aimai
Irony Abounds
America has always had one part of its psyche that is part sociopath. Adoption of slavery in a country established on the basis that all men are created equal. Pride in a nation governed by the rule of law that routinely abrogated treaties with native americans, forcing them off of their lands and into quasi concentration camps (aka reservations). The desperate need to show how macho we are by displaying guns. It really is a mental illness.
terry chay
@Church Lady: It cuts both ways. Memphis can have their guns, what we are talking about is whether New York City has to eat Memphis’s paranoid delusional sociopaths and gangsters with VA CCW permits. Until crime reaches Bernie Goetz territory, you are basically advocating an infringement on states rights here.
Chup
Sorry, gun nuts. I’ve lived in Texas for damn near 50 years, many of them in the neighborhood near the Astrodome during the late 1980s (lots o’ crime at the time) and never ONCE have I felt it necessary to pack an extry dick.
You folks ain’t nothing but scared children who haven’t grown up. Stand up straight, walk confidently, and most important, grow a freakin’ pair!
Pansies.
Mike Stollenwerk
learn more and join the open carry movement at Opencarry.org
Dave_Violence
“Exactly how many people per year are gunned down by concealed carry permit holders?”
Oh, lots. More than are killed daily by people carrying assault weapons. In fact, people who actually go to the trouble of applying for and acquiring such permits are responsible for lots and lots of gun crimes. Guns in the hands of taxpayers are also the reason why criminals don’t get locked up.
That’s why laws have to be changed such that no-law-abiding citizen can carry a firearm, other than a policeman. Or, perhaps, Sean Penn (http://www.thesmokinggun.com/archive/pennpermit1.html).
demimondian
@kid bitzer: Tu quoques? What kind of weak-spined jellyfish would bring *tu quoques* to a snark fight?
What are you, anyway? A Democrat?
Chuck Butcher
@Chup: Pansies.
You just type that rough or do you talk that tough to people’s faces? Funny how much your trash talk reminds me of the 101st Keyboard Commandos.
You seem to have left an “M” out of your handle…
Wile E. Quixote
@devopsych
Man, I love dumb liberals like you. Really I do, I love you all so much that I think you should be put in a glass cage right along with the American anencephalic wingnutasauraus erectus to keep you from being exterminated but also so we can keep you from breeding too much. One of the things I really love about dumb liberals like you is your attitude that only soldiers should have guns. Ever been in the military? I have, and you know what, those guys are really, really, really, really conservative and they really, really, really, really hate dumb liberals. Cops are the same way. So I love it when some dumb liberal says things like this because I wonder how they’d react if they’d ever spent time around cops and soldiers (I have) and had heard the kinds of things that I’ve heard cops and soldiers say about liberals. I think if they had they might reconsider the idea that armed force should be a monopoly granted to two groups that by their nature attract authoritarian conservatives to their ranks. Of course then again they might not, because after all, they’re dumb liberals.
disappointedGOPer
Guns are Serious Business, lol.
angulimala
Bullshit!
All they have to do is leave it, unloaded and trigger-locked, in their car when they leave their car. It is not a crime to transport a gun without a permit. They can leave it in the glove compartment with the ammo under the seat. As long as the gun and ammo are seperate and the gun is trigger-locked you are fine.
Cat
@angulimala: Obviously they didn’t have the gun stored properly for transport over state lines or they wouldn’t have had much of an issue with law enforcement would they?
Seriously.
Das Internetkommissariat
@Riggsveda:
Yeah, they are going to fight against this here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N7ELhy4_0hM
Or that here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IsaRHf7zHQI
oh really
Just one more example of the Democrats’ 60 vote super-majority steamrolling its way to victory. It’s a joy watching Harry Reid wield his iron fist and crush the opposition.
With this kind of power is there anything the Democrats can’t accomplish?
HeartlandLiberal
This is a perfect example of the sheer, blind hypocrisy of the right. One of their age old mantras is the demand for “States Rights”. It has always been there as a chestnut to pull and and oppose the Federal government on any issue the far right and the conservatives do not support. It was golden during the Civil Rights era, because threatening to give equal protection under the law and ban Jim Crow laws and force Blacks and Whites to go to school together and even worse, let Blacks vote without passing stiff written tests not required of Whites was “infringing on states rights”. Hey, I lived through it in Alabama, got to see George Wallace up close and personal as he campaigned when I was a teenager, lived through the era of Bull Conner in Birmingham, fire hoses, dogs, and all.
So it is sheer, blinding hypocrisy on the part of the Republicans (and the Democrats who have gone along with it), that over the past 10-12 years or more, again and again Congress has interfered with states passing usually more progressive legislation, by passing a federal law that emasculates the state laws, and waters them down or overrides them.
In this case, they were perfectly willing to ignore every principle of states rights they had advocated in the past in order to pass a ridiculous piece of legislation, that was totally inappropriate, and something that should be left to the states to decide, especially in light of the broad differences among the states in terms of urban vs. rural and population density, a whole host of factors.
I live in Indiana, and frankly, Indiana has a perfectly sane and sensible law allowing any citizen who doesn’t have a felony conviction to carry a concealed firearm. Pretty basic stuff. And a law I frankly agree with, sorry, I am a raging liberal who owns two handguns, a classic Smith and Wesson four inch barrel police special, and a Charter Arms five round 38 special that is easy to conceal.
But if the NRA and the wingnuts could have their way, they would have us strapping on in public view. Right along with our cod pieces.
I am still in shock that my Republican Senator Lugar has voted right two times in a row on critical issues, first to dump the ridiculous F-22 waste of money years long boondoggle and pork program, and now he voted against this amendment. Sad to report, our idiot Democratic Sen. Evan Bayh voted for it. But then he has been an idiot and has been voting like a Republican ever since taking office in the Senate after serving as governer here in Indiana, and I have no respect left for him at all. I won’t even bother to go into his and his wife’s links to big pharma and the medical insurance for profit industry in this post, except to say “hack, spit”, after all, Evan Bayh ASSURES us his wifes multiple tentacles and positions in the industry are TOTALLY fire-walled, and have no influence on his votes what so ever.
AlanDownunder
… but I do have to wonder what is wrong with some people that they absolutely have to be packing 24 hours of the day
they’re shit scared of people who are wrong enough in the head that they absolutely have to be packing 24 hours of the day?
bob h
But what is the South Dakotan to do when he visits NYC and is the object of a dildo attack by queers there?
gonzone
Simple answers to simple questions:
Tiny Penises
ChrisS
Does anyone really believe that liberals would claim that only people who were eligible to vote should be allowed to buy and read books?
While books educate the electorate, guns don’t regulate the militia. Your analogy fails.
Signed,
A gun-owning, hunting liberal.
DaddyJ
@CCW4ME2: I’d say that’s a poor analogy. Your book ownership has no effect on me or my rights. Your gun ownership might. You are not going to be able to beat me to death with a book. (Well, maybe the boxed set of the Oxford English Dictionary.)
Let’s not delude ourselves that we can remove the “emotional” aspect from the discussion of gun rights. Second Amendment arguments are emotional because guns are tools that make it easy to deprive *other* citizens of *their* rights.
I think it is a good thing that ownership of such tools is constrained by politics and emotionalism. Think about what a nation of cautious, responsible car drivers we are, then think about gun ownership being as easy, thoughtless and widespread as car ownership.
I do respect gun advocates who practice responsible gun ownership; but when you present your personal responsibility as the reason why I should embrace removing all Second Amendment restrictions, I can only ask how do you *enforce* responsible gun ownership if it’s a right beyond regulation?
Alan
I see a lot of people vigorously arguing their positions, and in a way, I think everyone here is right.
I think people do have a right to self-defense which probably includes a right to gun ownership. I think the scope of that right is commensurate with the level of danger within one’s community such that each state should be able to establish its own gun control policy. I think it is dangerous for us as a society to take the position that only soldiers and police should have the right to legal gun possession. And I think that for every person who carries a concealed weapon out of a legitimate need for self-protection, there are probably two or three who do so because they fetishize gun violence, suffer paranoid irrational fears of becoming crime victims (usually fears with a racist subtext), or who harbor fantasies about overthrowing the liberal-commie-islamofascists who have taken over the country.
CalD
Relax. Things aren’t always what they seem. Outcomes of virtually all votes in the Senate are known in advance. A party’s leaders will often give members from areas where crazy shit like this is good for Brownie points the nod to vote Yea, when they know it hasn’t a prayer of passing. A buck says that’s what happened here.
Kinda nice of Republics to hand some of the people they’re going to be running hardest against next year the opportunity to build up some bragging rights with the NRA crowd. But if they insist on doing it, I can hardly blame the Dem’s for taking them up on the offer.
JR -- Bryan, TX
Sorry, Chucky-boy — you are a pansy.
Gotta have your penile replacement with you at all times.
I don’t put my name in because I live in a state where folks get fired for putting their opinions out there.
See it happen — ain’t gonna happen to me.