Anti-gun lunacy continues

We ought to be used to the stories by now — “Student suspended for toy gun”; “Boy Scout tool nets student suspension”; “Tweety Bird key chain cause for expulsion.”  Still, when we read of a fourth grade student being hauled into a school prinicipal’s office because his LEGO policeman figure is carrying a two-inch long plastic rifle, it is hard to resist the urge to pull at one’s hair in reaction to the sheer idiocacy of the adults who do such things.  This latest example of a grown-up appearing to be a simpleton in front of a child, took place at Public School 52 in Staten Island, NY. 

According to a spokesman for the school system, Principal Evelyn Matroianni was simply following the Staten Island school system’s “no tolerance” policy that prohibits all “weapons” at the school, when she hauled the 9-year old into her office and called his parents. 

Merriam-Webster’s Dictionary defines a “weapon” to be “something (as a club, knife, or gun) used to injure, defeat, or destroy.”  Now, I know we have become in many respects a people afraid of our own shadows, but if Ms. Matroianni considers that a two-inch long plastic rifle held by a three-inch tall LEGO police figure will “injure, defeat, or destroy” someone or something, then this is definitely not the sort of adult I would want teaching my children or grandchildren anything.  This is a person so afraid of the world around her that she probably leaves her bedroom light on at night to help scare away the boogey man hiding under her bed.  Perhaps she holds down a second job at TSA.

240 comments Add your comment

Logic

February 12th, 2010
6:38 am

Too bad school administrators can seem to use a little logic!

Karl Marx

February 12th, 2010
6:40 am

Public education = child abuse.

Privatize education and this problem goes away.

C. Tucker

February 12th, 2010
6:41 am

Oh the humanity….of course the student should be taken out of the school.
The single mother’s home should be searched.
We must stop America’s fascination with firearms.
I know Obama will solve all of our problems.
We must elect more Democrats!

Too many Guns

February 12th, 2010
6:53 am

There are too many guns in the hands of idiots I think we all understand that. But this is a fringe issue that lets someone think they have a higher cause. What about the kid who brings his baseball bat he got for X-Mas, this is a much more serious weapon, how about steel tip cleats, I could hospitalize you with a pair of those. An over sized comb would be a prized weapon in prison, better put those on the list too. Finally, my fists can induce more bodily harm that anyone would want to imagine. Does that mean I should leave those at home as well?

Fred Tokars

February 12th, 2010
6:55 am

Nice Ascot Mr. Barr! Society has rules and we must follow those rules, you can’t bake a cake without breaking a few eggs.

Bubba

February 12th, 2010
7:11 am

Ascot? I think that’s called a shirt.

Baker

February 12th, 2010
7:40 am

“you can’t bake a cake without breaking a few eggs.” Huh? Hauling a 9-year-old kid out of class, embarrasssing, and bothering his parents over a Lego is breaking a few eggs? No sir, that is an assault on freedom. That is also one of many examples of the problems in our public school systems throughout the country. Not only can this idiot principal do this and cause problems for this poor kid, there will certainly be no recourse for the adult, not in NY where the unions have such a stranglehold on the teaching profession that teachers and administrators can’t be fired for even the worst displays of incompetence.

Skip

February 12th, 2010
7:46 am

Slow news day Bob? Got nothing so you chum the water?

V for Vendetta

February 12th, 2010
7:59 am

We’ve debated this a few times on Get Schooled. As a teacher, this makes me want to puke. I think such lapses of commons sense should be grounds for termination–or is that too strong a word for people who fear plastic toys?

Road Scholar

February 12th, 2010
8:07 am

Does that mean pencils and pens are weapons? Common sense? Doesn’t appear to exist any more.

Just enforce the present laws on the books. with some common sense!

Dave

February 12th, 2010
8:08 am

Karl Marx wants to privatize our schools – how ironic.

unclefast

February 12th, 2010
8:14 am

If I were in the principal’s position, I might, just might, follow the letter of the policy simply to draw attention to its asininity. Might make me look like an idiot, but it’s something I would try.

Sandra

February 12th, 2010
8:16 am

Common sense doesn’t exist on both sides of the issue. On one hand you have the people who overreact to toys. On the other hand, you have the people who believe there should be no laws around guys. Both sides need some medicine and mental treatment! I grew up in a hunting household, but still find it just plain stupid as to why we think everyone needs the rights to have any gun they choose and carry it anywhere they want to. An AK47 was never used in my house nor did my parents think they had a right to own one.

Sandra

February 12th, 2010
8:17 am

Sorry meant to say no laws around guns!

Remember Sarah

February 12th, 2010
8:17 am

Any person who would use “Fred Tokars” as their name is a real dick. All other bloggers would love to meet you, cake boy.

Van Jones

February 12th, 2010
8:18 am

You know your principal is an idiot when they say “I’m just following the school system’s policy…” instead of actually using their brain.

John Adams

February 12th, 2010
8:22 am

It’s simple Sandra. It is a right actually written in our constitution (unlike many other “rights” people think they have); the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. Your parents did indeed have the right to own an AK47 but chose not to. What others do legally is really none of your business.

RGB

February 12th, 2010
8:23 am

Principal Evelyn should be required to demonstrate how the “rifle” on the LEGO policeman can be used as a weapon against someone–it’s show & tell time.

William

February 12th, 2010
8:24 am

Progressive liberals at work in our public schools! The progressive educators! Why would I want to send my kid to school and college with this kind of environment. You know the kind that indoctinates our kids as written in the book Animal Farm. Wake up democrats and take back your party. You do not have to accept those wacko’s ideals or values. You did have some goodones before they came onto the scene. At one time you were a Rugged American.

gaboomer

February 12th, 2010
8:37 am

Just remember” Those who can- Can, those who can’t- Teach, those who can’t even teach- Administrate!!
Another mindless, administrator afraid to make a “correct decision”

I't a Ruger, thank you

February 12th, 2010
8:38 am

When going through through the metal detectors in the Gwinnett CO courthouse I passed my keys through in a basket. The sherriff’s deputy picked them up with a pen and said what’s this, refering to a 1″ penknife on my keychain. I was told to remove it from the area or they could throw it away. After returning it to my car and re-entering I questioned the deputy (politely) as to which would be more deadly, that 1″ penknife or my 3″ ignition key shoved into the throat of someone? I was told to shut up, move on or be removed forcefully.

Where is Thomas Payne and his “Common Sence”.

steve

February 12th, 2010
8:40 am

He missed the one where an Arizona boy was suspended for drawing a sketch of a gun, and a 2nd grader in New Jersey for drawing a picture of a stick figure firing a gun.

Too many Guns

February 12th, 2010
8:44 am

If your going to invoke the second amendment you need to quote it in its entirety, ..”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.” So what’s the name of your militia? Just because your mother wears camouflage as a fashion statement doesn’t count. And to all you NRA fools out there who think everyone being armed will make a safer America I’ve but two words for you, friendly fire. I would bet my last dollar the same fool who supports citizens getting in gun fights with criminals would be first in line at the court house to sue the city state and anyone else when their innocent bystander loved one gets killed by friendly fire.

sam

February 12th, 2010
9:01 am

it does look like an ascot…hilarious! does he have a pipe on his lap?

mike

February 12th, 2010
9:13 am

Too Many Guns is a wussy

sam

February 12th, 2010
9:15 am

well said mike..let me guess, you’re nra and you vote?

Road Scholar

February 12th, 2010
9:21 am

Solution: Parents shoul be mandated (no laws) to get involved in their children’s lives and ensure they are taught both in school and at home. No more ” I didn’t know Johnny was doing that!”

jconservative

February 12th, 2010
9:35 am

If I may drag the US Supreme Court into the discussion, here is a sentence from Justice Scalia’s majority decision in last years Heller decision:

“Like most rights, the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose:…”

For those of you who want some control on weapons, possession is not an absolute right. For those of you who believe in no control over possession of a weapon, the Heller decision said Federal Government keep your hands off, with a few exceptions. The details will be worked out in subsequent decisions.

The Court now has a case from Illinois, McDonald v Chicago, that challenges control of possession by states & local governments. We should get the decision no later than May and you can expect a similar result. No absolute right, some limited control by states, but a fundamental Constitutional right affirmed.

This is the great thing about our Constitution, you can see it working right before your eyes in the light of day.

Sam ( The Cool 1 )

February 12th, 2010
9:37 am

I remember I brought my Roy Rogers cap pistols to school to show what I got for Christmas. It was a Holiday show and tell. Teachers had no problem with my cap pistols. That was in the 1950s’(I know I’m old) My how times have change.

Big D

February 12th, 2010
9:41 am

TMG, need to read the dialog for the 2nd amendment before commenting on it. It’s a tough read, but start with the Federalist Papers. Follow up with the independent essays of Madison, Jay and Hamilton. The “militia” as described is a lot like it is in Israel, where as the population at anytime is the “militia”. There will be no getting rid of guns…the genie is out of the bottle and just like people killed in car accidents we do our best to idiot proof them, but God will always provide a better idiot.We cannot follow in Hitlers foot steps with the 1938 firearms act that very effectively, through gun registration disarmed the Jews. The 2nd amendment for your information was not to protect us from invading powers…it was to protect us from our OWN Government. I believe we need it now more than ever.

ugaaccountant

February 12th, 2010
9:41 am

Please tell me that no school system has a rule against a toy gun. It’s one thing to write a policy against weapons, as nobody wants kids bringing weapons to a school anymore than they have to (fists, pencils, scissors, baseball bats, etc.) But there is no justification for banning any particular toy that cannot harm someone unless you simply ban all toys, which again is overstepping the bounds of common sense. The policy, as usual, is simply wrong.

JOD

February 12th, 2010
9:42 am

Why oh why can’t we have some Bob Barrs in power? Common sense appears to be on the endangered list.

Lastly – Hear, hear, Remember Sarah. Anyone who poses as Fred Tokars has serious problems.

ugaaccountant

February 12th, 2010
9:43 am

Road Scholar –
First, you know your name is misspelled don’t you?
Second, If I were the parents of this child I’d defend him by all available means. It is insanity to teach a child that a lego is a weapon. If you teach him that he’ll grow up to be a useless pansy.

Fix-It

February 12th, 2010
9:50 am

I will never understand the liberals, they claim that we should listen to all people and views, but if they disagree with liberal ideology then they are racist, stupid or a Bush supporter. I have an idea, if you don’t like guns, don’t buy one, and don’t stop me from getting one, problem solved….

Miles Standish

February 12th, 2010
9:55 am

interesting. thing is; when my child’s school paid its annual lip service to native Americans (Thanksgiving) it was OK for kids to manufacture weapons (bow and arrow, spear, tomahawk). as far as Lego rifles go, in the hands of “the state” (police, military, and private contractors – is there a Lego Blackwater kit?), it should be OK. it’s important for American kids to understand the nanny state logic which affords certain Constitutional rights to certain segments of society, but requires that others be carefully monitored. The teacher should be fired for incompetence.

Swede Atlanta

February 12th, 2010
9:57 am

Bob, I agree that in the administration of the policy common sense should prevail.

On the other hand I think it is fully appropriate to educate children at an early age that weapons of any kind are not appropriate nor permitted in the school environment. I didn’t have to deal with knives, guns, etc. at school when I was growing up even though I lived in the rural west. Kids had guns and knives, etc. but they knew if they dared to bring them on school grounds they would be seized and they would never see them again.

We have seen how a mentality that guns and weapons are “kewl” pervades our society. It is one of the reasons we have the highest rate of death by shooting in the world. We have athletes thinking it is “kewl” to bring their guns into the lockerroom. The list goes on and on.

So while I agree schools should administer their “no tolerance” policy with some common sense, the idea that we should educate children schools are not an appropriate place for weapons is dead on right.

As for public versus private schools. I went to a public school as did all of my siblings. We got a great education. All of us attended public universities and got great educations and are doing quite well competing with people who had private educations their entire lives. So don’t denigrate the concept of public education. It can work where the parents and community want it to work.

Big D

February 12th, 2010
10:04 am

This is to help Liberals out with their misinterpretation of the Constitution. Very simply it is a recipe…lets say it’s a cake. The cook along with others put together years of trial and error and finally have a cake that is really good and everybody wants it. Now, a few years later an up and coming “chef” decides that for what ever reason that it does not need four eggs and uses two..then two cups of sugar are two much..he used one….you get the point. It will still be a cake, but it will not be as tasty. I have often heard that the Constitution is out dated…it’s 234 years old…that’s young compared to the Bible and the Quran, should we write new ones to replace the out dated ones…just a logical thought.

zeke

February 12th, 2010
10:05 am

THE SECOND AMENDMENT IS LAW! ALL THE IDIOTS IN THE GENERAL PUBLIC, CONGRESS, THE COURTS, THE NEWS LEMMINGS AND THE WHITE HOUSE WHO WANT TO VIOLATE IT AT EVERY TURN, MUST BE FORCED TO TAKE A 1 YEAR COURSE ON THE SECOND AMENDMENT, IT’S ORIGIN, AND, THE REASONS IT CANNOT BE VILOATED, REQUIRING A 90+ SCORE FOR PASSAGE IN ORDER FOR THEM TO HOLD OFFICE! THEN THE 9TH, 10TH AND SO ON! THE SENATE ELECTION MUST REVERSED TO THE ORIGINAL INTENT OF THE STATE LEGISLATURES APPOINTING THEM! THIS WAS A MEASURE INSTITUTED TO INSURE THE STATES HAVE NO VOICE IN THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT AND MUST BE OVERTURNED!

dreadnot

February 12th, 2010
10:09 am

“too many guns” you should read the papers written at the time the constitution was written. Then it is possible that you would understan the meaning of the 2nd, you probley should look up the defication of militia as used in the 1700.

Big D

February 12th, 2010
10:09 am

ZEKE…A BIG AMEN….

Swede Atlanta

February 12th, 2010
10:10 am

Zeke, the fact your post is in all capital letters is a good reason to ignore you.

Before you can run you need to learn to walk. In the English language you begin sentences and proper nouns with capital letters. The other letters in the words are in lower case. Where necessary you may use italics, capital letters, etc. to draw attention to a particular word or section of your sentence. But using all capital letters indicates to the reader that you haven’t mastered the basics of the English language.

Big D

February 12th, 2010
10:12 am

Swede, as usual off topic and full of yourself.

Matt C

February 12th, 2010
10:13 am

Couldn’t agree more, Bob. My favorite: “Perhaps she holds down a second job at TSA.”

Real Athens

February 12th, 2010
10:18 am

William:

“Progressive liberals in charge of our schools”?

Miles: “Nanny state logic?”

Get real. Where have you been? The the freedom hating, “zero tolerance” with “mandatory minimums” laws many find so oppressive in this state were passed by “conservative” Republicans and who have been in charge for quite sometime. There are no bigger nannies in Georgia than Ralph Reed’s Faith and Freedom Coalition and Sadie Fields of the Georgia Christian Alliance. The “nanny state” has a big, fat “R” next to its name here in Georgia.

Your rant holds no water and contains no fact.

You guys have got to start weighing facts and quit mindlessly, regurgitating Boortz. He’s an entertainer.

I also believe, in his days as a federal prosecutor, Mr. Barr also favored mandatory minimums that set sentencing guide lines, and in essence tied the hands of elected officials (judges) for weighing extenuating circumstance and, uh, judging cases on individual merit .

You get the government you deserve.

twinkletoes

February 12th, 2010
10:24 am

The second amendment says: 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. Now. That means to me that the right to bear arms is connected to a regulated Militia. We have that in the form of the National Guard. However, it does NOT state that you can or must have an AK-47. It also doesn’t say that you have to have an arsenal in your home. Our love affair with guns has proven to be quite deadly, no pun intended. The schools have gone crazy w/their no tolerance attitude. A child, w/a 2″ toy is NOT a threat to anyone other than his attention span. The schools just need to get over it.

Jess

February 12th, 2010
10:25 am

What a sad, sad, over regulated, progressive place our country has become.

Jess

February 12th, 2010
10:30 am

Twinkletoes,

“The people” means everyone, not just the militia.

ugaaccountant

February 12th, 2010
10:32 am

real athens – sort of on point, but you do realize this blog doesn’t exactly represent the republican party. Check out Bob Barr’s most recent political experience and you’ll find you’re ranting against the wrong people.

ugaaccountant

February 12th, 2010
10:35 am

twinkletoes – regardless of your thoughts on militias or even the second ammendment, all citizens have a basic human liberty to arm and defend themselves from criminals. We all know the government doesn’t do a good job of protecting us, so perhaps we should stop relying on an all powerful government and work towards restoring individual liberties and reduce the role of the government to a more effective and appropriate level.

Kristopher

February 12th, 2010
10:37 am

“The second amendment says: 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. Now. That means to me that the right to bear arms is connected to a regulated Militia. We have that in the form of the National Guard.”

The Second Amendment existed before the National Guard did.

Also, you might want to consider reading the Heller case.

Or not. It’s of no concern to me if you choose to be ignorant.

neo-Carlinist

February 12th, 2010
10:40 am

isn’t it strange how a Friday AM fluff piece, which isn’t really about the 2nd amendment or guns, becomes a liberal v conservative spitting contest? to the conservative gun folks (I’m with you – hunter, shooter, but not NRA member) – the second amendment ain’t going anywhere. that said, it has no teeth, because should big brother feel the need, he will come take your guns on a case-by-case basis. to the sarah brady crowd; spare me the “well-regulated militia” tripe. legally purchased, responsibily handled firearms are not a threat to anyone. if people steal guns or use guns to commit crimes, throw the book at them (or better yet, shoot them). the second amendment exists as much to convince Americans they have the right to protect themselves against the government. as my first point illustrates, this really isn’t the case, but we can all dream, can’t we? the bottom line is, the second amendment is safe because it guarantees nothing, so people with guns can continue to hunt, shoot, and protect themselves as they see fit, and those who do not can rely in Kroger and APD (who, like the Lego police DO have guns) to meet their needs (food, security).

Hard Right Hook

February 12th, 2010
10:42 am

“However, it does NOT state that you can or must have an AK-47. It also doesn’t say that you have to have an arsenal in your home. ”

Yes I can have an AK-47, so long as the fully auto funtion is disabled.

Yes I can have an aresenal in my house, and I do.

And limp-wristed liberals can just shove it. The right to keep an bear arms shall NOT BE INFRINGED.

Big D

February 12th, 2010
10:48 am

” Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserves neither liberty nor safety” Ben Franklin. ” There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be trust no man with power to endanger the public liberty” John Adams…1772. These men knew what was a stake and their signature was their death warrant…ask yourself if what you believe is worth dieing for.

Real Athens

February 12th, 2010
10:53 am

UGA Accountant;

I know who Bob Barr “is” and who he “was”. I respect many of stances regarding constitutional law. I abhor his hypocrisy (in political and private life) and timing after marching lock-step with the RINO’s in charge of the country when he was a representative.

He has a lot of crow to eat.

He hasn’t proved his new found “libertarianism” is anything but a way to punch the clock and pick up a check

Big D

February 12th, 2010
10:54 am

HRH, you can by Federal law legally own a fully automatic weapon( class-3) if…you have a $200.00 federal tax stamp issued by the Department of the Treasury or you are a licensed Class-3 firearms dealer.

mike

February 12th, 2010
10:55 am

Not NRA Sammy, but I do vote. I also taught my children gun safety and how and when to use one. They both live in that hellhole called Atlanta and they are both armed and licencsed to carry.

Rational Person

February 12th, 2010
10:56 am

I notice that Bobbo is still citing the story about the Cub Scout who took his utensil to school and got into trouble.

That utensil included a sure-enough knife blade just like the one on my pocket knife, perfectly adequately for injuring or killing somebody. You can see it 36 seconds into a video at http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=5381392n&tag=mncol;lst;3

And thank goodness we still have sensible people like Sandra in this world.

Hard Right Hook

February 12th, 2010
10:58 am

Thanks for that, Big D. At this writing, I really don’t have a need for any fully auto weapons, but who knows what the future will bring?

Anarchy in the streets? Hope not.

Jimbo

February 12th, 2010
11:01 am

@ C. Tucker , Fred Tokars and the rest of the KOOL-AIDE drinkers:

Know guns, know peace, know safety.
No guns, no peace, no safety

ugaaccountant

February 12th, 2010
11:02 am

real athens – regardless of your views on Barr as a person, this column and the ideas he puts out are limited government, personal responsibility ideas. Neither Republicans nor Democrats can lay claim to these ideas, so for the most part the readers here are not happy card carrying members of either party. He’s working one column at a time to improve the level of discourse in this country so that one day the voters might actually vote in a way that serves the people.

ugaaccountant

February 12th, 2010
11:03 am

rational person – There’s no reason a person shouldn’t be able to carry a knife or a gun anywhere they dang well please. If weapons are outlawed, only outlaws will have weapons.

Richard

February 12th, 2010
11:09 am

Bob, thanks fo breathing some common sense into this story. This is not about politcs, republicans or demorats (or public vs. private schools). This is about a student being smarter than his idiot teacher. This is not even about the 2nd amendment.

For those of you trying to make this a political topic, you clearly don’t grasp reality. A quote from Lewis Black: “If a squirrel gets run over by a car, you can’t say the squirrel was trying to kill himself.”

drmoses

February 12th, 2010
11:16 am

“A well regulated(trained and functional)Militia(all citizens capable)being necessary to the security of a free state,(A state of freedom not the State)the right of the people(everybody)to keep and bear(own and carry)shall not be infringed.”

If you folks would bother to read more history, instead of drinking beer and watching over paid morons carry a ball, you might understand the history of YOUR own country. Read a book? What a novel concept.

ali66

February 12th, 2010
11:17 am

Here is another classic example of the failures of the public school system. Give everybody their tax money back and people send their kids to whatever school they choose. What about “the right to bear arms shall not be infringed” doesn’t everybody understand. Ah Freedom!

Scout

February 12th, 2010
11:19 am

Mr. Barr:

And remember, we have already raised a couple of generations under these inane “zero tolerance” policies. These are the kids who grow up to be policemen, judges, politicians, etc. and that does not bode well for our future ……… they have been brainwashed not to use common sense.

By the way, when I was in school every boy had a pocket knife so we could whittle and play mumblypeg at recess. As long as we didn’t have them out in class (like chewing gum) we were o.k. If we did the teacher took it and put it in her big lower desk drawer and there it stayed until the last day of school at the end of spring. Even when she left the room we dared not mess with that drawer.

Marcos

February 12th, 2010
11:20 am

Thanks to conservatives of the Reagan error, we have “zero tolerance” in our schools which means administrators don’t have to use the brains God gave them to figure out how to deal with kids.

leeh1

February 12th, 2010
11:21 am

This merely teaches the lesson: “Don’t trust teachers!” If you have friend who is suicidal, for Heaven’s sake, don’t confide in a teacher! They will go ballistic, act irrationally, and punish everyone! The teachers are not your friends.

If you have questions, ask a public library reference librarian. They are on your side. If you have a problem, go to a minister or a rabbi or someone like that. They are on your side.

Teachers are not. They will turn you in. They will do you over. They will first protect their job, then make sure you are punished, even for doing right.

Teachers will apply simplisitc solutions to complex problems. Teachers are stupid, and must obey silly rules designed not to solve problems, but to satisfy idiots. Learn what you can from them in academics, but don’t confide in them, and keep your secrets to yourself, kid!

This is the lesson the teachers want you to learn!

Scout

February 12th, 2010
11:22 am

P.S.

I’m betting (someone check this out) that most if not all modern history books used in school have no photos of any weapons used in WWII, Korea, Vietnam, etc. No soldiers charging up Omaha Beach with their M-1’s. Oh no ………. can’t have a picture of a gun in school.

What idiots.

Miles Standish

February 12th, 2010
11:22 am

Real Athens, the “nanny state logic” dictates that ONLY the police/military can protect citizens – which is why THEY can have certain guns (”assault rifles” etc.), but we cannot. of course, this logic is based on the belief that all policemen are good and the state itself NEVER acts in its own interests, at the expense of the interests (rights) of the citizens. but I digress. my point was, maybe schools should use this specific Lego tool (policeman) to “teach” our children that we don’t need a second amendment because the nanny state (police/military) have our best interests in mind when they enforce the law.

Scout

February 12th, 2010
11:23 am

To ugaaccountant :

I carry a gun because a policeman is too heavy.

Big D

February 12th, 2010
11:27 am

This may not be a “100%” 2nd amendment issue..it is a 1st cousin. If you leave the common sense of this issue to those who call “toys” guns you are therefore emboldening those of the same ilk who would use the same false logic to outlaw the legal possession of a firearm. I for one don’t believe that “every person should have the right to have and carry a weapon”. We are smart enough to make sure that we ( sometimes not very well) make sure a person has been trained enough to get a drivers license to get a car on the road with the rest of us. I believe we can do the same with a training program for the “person” to have the ability to have and carry. If this was implemented it could be as simple as a state run training course if you have not had military experience. It would be a great way to derive revenue also. It would allow the state to put this on a drivers license and would be necessary to purchase weapons as well as ammunition. If you don’t think this is a good idea, just go to a firing range and so how many holes are shot in places they should not be.

William

February 12th, 2010
11:32 am

twinkletoes

February 12th, 2010
10:24 am
“it does NOT state that you can or must have an AK-47. ”

Have you seen a regulated militia in contempory times? Do you think they use muskets? Or springfield rifles? For a well regulated militia, the minuteman must carry and possess the firearm at all times. Since you seem to know very little about war fare and the dire need to protect the freedom rendered to us by God, it takes all types of weapons for personal and national security. If bad people use the weapons for illegal purposes, it is not the gun but the individual who should be controlled. However, progressive liberals do not want an armed citizenry. Progressives can shout and call it debate and win at times but they cannot win in an armed conflict. They know this and so do I.

William

February 12th, 2010
11:39 am

Is it the gender factor that we are having this problem? ….just asking.

Big D

February 12th, 2010
11:42 am

For those of you that have not had to exist in a country that has lost it’s civility ( I have) you will quickly learn a harsh reality ” if you can’t shoot it or eat it …it’s worthless”. Hitler, Stalin and Mao were less than 60 years ago and killed over 200 million in their consummation of power…do you really think we have become more civil in that short amount of time. I betting on NOT…I will stay armed and watching.

Real Athens

February 12th, 2010
11:42 am

This column is not a second amendment issue — but hey that’s what people want to write about. No one is coming to get your guns, but keep contributing to the NRA and electing folks who represent a fraction of what you believe in.

This column is about over-reaching, draconian, bill-of-rights defying, inane legislation; usually passed post-haste without much thought (legal or common sense) so politicians can be seen as”tough on (insert subject here) and have a 30 second sound bite for the next election cycle. Legislation that treats EVERY “convicted criminal” EXACTLY the same; regardless of circumstance or what a judge or impartial jury thinks is fair or just.

Cynical but so true.

JoseyWales

February 12th, 2010
11:54 am

“You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.” -Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander In Chief Imperial Japanese Navy WWII.

Too Many Guns- The name of my militia is…. The United States. And Friendly Fire?? Most gun accidents occur with people who don’t know how to use their gun. Not “friendly fire.” If there was a good chance the people some ignant criminal was planning on robbing had a gun, I bet you he would think twice about robbing them. Do some actual research on well armed societies and violent crime rates. Check out Switzerland for starters where every household is required to have a gun in it.

Oh yeah, my “camouflage wearing mother” is going to be perfectly capable of safely and effectively defending herself in the event that she needs to. What is going to happen to your mother??

Fred Smith

February 12th, 2010
11:58 am

Hm. Privatize education and the problem goes away. So, according to our founding fathers, will the society – no big deal, I guess, according to (wow) karl marx. Unregulated private schools, that can hire high school dropout pedophiles for teachers with complete immunity. You bet. No problems there. Do we have idiots making policy? You bet. Do we have idiots running some of the schools? You bet. Do we need to fix it? YOU BET. How is it you think unleashing predator private schools on your kids will solve the problem? The same idiots will end up running your private schools.

Scout

February 12th, 2010
12:00 pm

“If the 2nd Amendment meant only flintlocks (i.e., no M-16’s) then the 1st Amendment meant only quill pens and ink (i.e., no computers).

Hummmmmm …………………………….

Bob

February 12th, 2010
12:01 pm

If your going to invoke the second amendment you need to quote it in its entirety, ..”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.”
Where does that state we need to name our militia ?

neo-Carlinist

February 12th, 2010
12:02 pm

a little off message, but I find it interesting how the AK-47 has become an icon of the “unecessary gun” crowd. I find this interesting because history suggests, the AK-47 is the de facto “weapon of choice” of most of the well-regulated (and perhaps unregulated” militias of the post-WWII world were the American war for independence fought in 1976, as opposed to 1776, no doubt the minutemen of the Continental Army would have been armed with M. Kalishnakov’s 1947 automatic rifle. Just a thought.

Road Scholar

February 12th, 2010
12:03 pm

uga accountant: No it’s not. I’m not a Rhode’s Scholar! Boy is that an openning for criticism!

neo-Carlinist

February 12th, 2010
12:03 pm

my typing is atrocious!

Name (required)

February 12th, 2010
12:05 pm

I wonder if that schools art department has scissors.

Fred Smith

February 12th, 2010
12:06 pm

As long as I’m distracted, the key indeed is “Most gun accidents occur with people who don’t know how to use their gun.” Aside from the fact that I had a rifle in my hands when it was longer than I was tall growing up on a farm, and that the small community spent hundreds of hours with all the 4-H kids making sure they knew how NOT to mistakenly kill themselves and others, I HAPPILY took the required sd courses in Virginia for my first carry permit after the coke addict invaded our house with us in it. Georgia? Nah – as long as they haven’t been busted, let ‘em kill themselves. But make sure the kids don’t carry toy soldiers to school – - -

Jefferson

February 12th, 2010
12:07 pm

If bullets were $3000 a round, what would that do ?

Bob

February 12th, 2010
12:10 pm

The national gaurd is run by gov, the second amendment is to protect us from gov, and robbing crews, this from today’s AJC.
The first electrician to arrive to the home was ambushed and shot in the leg, Fulton County police spokeswoman Cpl. Kay Lester said. He was tied up and placed in another room.

A second electrician came to the home, but fought back after he also was shot in the leg, Lester said.

“He was armed, and shot one of the perpetrators,” she said

I missed the part about all the innocents being hit by the electrician.

Sandra

February 12th, 2010
12:18 pm

John Adams,
It is my business when you affect me and my freedoms. Most anyone can take something that is written and interpret in the way they chose. The 2nd amendment is a classic example of that. I’m just sick of being told I as a person have no freedom of choice when it comes to guns.

Scout

February 12th, 2010
12:30 pm

To Jefferson re: your 12:07 ………

The short answer is most people would do their own reloading but it might also set off our next “Revolution”.

I suppose you know enough about U.S. history to know that our first “Revolution” started over guns (not taxes). The British went in the dead of night to Lexington and Concord in an “attempt” to seize the gunpoweder stores of the local militias. By the time the British got back to Boston, they had lost a lot of dead and wounded.

Now, most people will answer that there is no way citizens today could defeat our military. That may be somewhat true but just remember if things ever do get that bad ……….. a large part of our military will be siding with those who feel the Constitution must be upheld. Therein lies the problem.

Bottom line: The 2nd Amendment in the end is the one that protects all of the others.

Ego or Leggo?

February 12th, 2010
12:35 pm

Sorry, Bob Barr, but the principal is….. RIGHT! It’s a slippery slope from leggo rifles to class field-trips at a firing range, where the teachers won’t be able to resist clandestinely poking bullseye holes with a #2 pencil in the student’s paper targets on the bus ride back to make it seem like the student really can shoot.

Then where would we be? I’ll tell you where. We’d have fifth graders with their NRA Sharpshooter rankings and none of them actually being able to hit anything. Then, when the chinese come in hoards over the hills toward our positions we’ll be overrun and the only thing left of us will be moo gu.

Imagine Lady Ga Ga with two .38s and you can see the problem. She can’t shoot either.

Gawd this stinks. I’ve got the worst writers block in years, man. Time to stick my head in the toilet.

Big D

February 12th, 2010
12:47 pm

Scout, There is no way a standing Army fighting with conventional weapons could defeat the the Citizens of the USA …even the Japs knew that in WWII. The US will be defeated from within by the constant softening of the brain and spirit by the modern coliseum ( TV ) and the left wing lunny tunes thinking they have a clue to what is happening outside of their MAMA’s basement.

Rational Person

February 12th, 2010
12:47 pm

JoseyWales
February 12th, 2010
11:54 am

“You cannot invade the mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind every blade of grass.” -Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander In Chief Imperial Japanese Navy WWII.

—————————–

Of course, Yamamoto never said this. See http://www.factcheck.org/2009/05/gun-control-in-australia/

The formidable Japanese army was not frightened off by farmers with hunting rifles.

This imaginary quotation has been attributed to many Axis leaders; none of them said it or thought it. This is another example of how gun worshipers live in an imaginary world.

Normal

February 12th, 2010
12:48 pm

Mr. Barr,
I’m late on this post, but I will tell you this. I was taught by age six to shoot and I served during Viet Nam. I fully support the Second Amendment, but I would rather wallow in slop than have a weapon in my house. It’s just my way, I guess.

Rational Person

February 12th, 2010
12:50 pm

On the other hand, the Nazis encouraged all non-Jews to have guns. When the Russian army rolled into Germany and raped all the women in sight, the German civilians did not do squat with their guns.

DirtyDawg

February 12th, 2010
12:54 pm

I hope you people realize what you’re saying and doing. I mean the more that my redneck ‘friends’ talk about their stockpiling AK-47’s and ammo ‘just in case’, the more this ‘Liberal’ is adamant about not giving up my Dad’s and Grand-Dad’s shotguns that they left me. If the ‘anarchy’ that some of you seem to believe will happen – most likely in the form of a ’self-fulling prophesy’ – comes (some think that’s where the ‘tea-baggers’ are heading) then be advised that we may be ‘out-gunned’ but we won’t be ‘unarmed’. Is that what you want? Is that what you’re really hoping for? Well if it is, it’s a pretty sorry thing to contemplate. Sad damn state of affairs if you ask me.

Was this a great country, or what?

Big D

February 12th, 2010
12:56 pm

Neo, you are right the AK has been lifted to the iconic, when in reality the M-16 is so much more formidable I have seen men shot with both and the difference between a .223 round going 3200 feet per second and a 7.62 going 1750 feet per second is staggering. The 55 grain bullet does not stabilize with the slow twist barrel it is fired through and follows the least path of resistance when it hits. Probably TMI …just the facts.

Bubba

February 12th, 2010
1:03 pm

“This imaginary quotation has been attributed to many Axis leaders; none of them said it or thought it.”

I have no idea whether he said it or not, but the factcheck.org site doesn’t refute it; it says nobody has verified it.

Big D

February 12th, 2010
1:03 pm

Dirty, I would say the “teabaggers” are more closely affiliated with the founding fathers than a left wing ideologue that preaches a new version of socialism.

Big D

February 12th, 2010
1:05 pm

RP, there were was nothing left ,but old men and children…bad example of ” rational”

Jack

February 12th, 2010
1:11 pm

May I temporarily move the discussion to another topic?

This must be made perfectly clear – anyone, including Sarah Palin, who goes to Arizona and campaigns in behalf of John McCain does so at the risk of the wrath of Tea Party voters.

John McCain, Lindsay Graham, Johnny Isakason, the two Maine senators and the Tennessee turncoat who voted to confirm the Hispanic racist are all who are republicans first and conservatives second, third or maybe not at all.

All must be purged. This is NOT a republican movement as republicans have had their chance in controlling Congress and the White House. Their betrayal is more so than the democrats who make no effort to present themselves as conservatives.

If you vote for republicans rather than conservatives, don’t whine about the results.

Big D

February 12th, 2010
1:20 pm

Jack, Good Point.

Davo

February 12th, 2010
1:29 pm

Good column, BB.

What the left, and to a lesser extent, the right fail to grasp is that no rights can be guaranteed without a degree of responsibility. If our school teachers fail to teach our children how to become and participate as citizens of our nation, then what we are left with is these statists drones that irrationally fear guns, and not the individual behind them.

Wouldn’t it be great if we could have a well-educated public, instead of the mish-mash of the barely literate and the over-educated, and gun control at the same time? Impossible?

Why Switzerland Has The Lowest Crime Rate In The World
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6nf1OgV449g&feature=aso

“Among the many misdeeds of the British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.” Mahatma Ghandi, 1927

“I’m all in favor of keeping dangerous weapons out of the hands of fools. Let’s start with typewriters.”
Frank Lloyd Wright, architect

“Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are
willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom.” John F. Kennedy

“The unarmed man is not just defenseless – he is also contemptible.” Machiavelli

JoseyWales

February 12th, 2010
1:36 pm

Rational person:

I really don’t care if he said it or not; that wasn’t the point. And if you take a little time to actually read some history, you will find that in almost every major discussion of invading the mainland United States this issue has come up. “Farmers with hunting rifles” is just an ignorant comment. And the “formidable Japanese army” absolutely worried about armed US citizens. Go “fact check” that one for yourself.

I don’t worship guns. I appreciate them. And I enjoy them. And if need be, I am going to protect myself with them. So when the proverbial dump hits the fan, don’t come to my house for protection; I’m not going to let you in. You can rely on the state. I’ll take care of my self.

OneFreeMan

February 12th, 2010
1:52 pm

I remember when you could bring a rifle to school and clean it shop class.

Lyle Lee

February 12th, 2010
1:56 pm

Federal defination of a deadly weapon: “Any object,animate or inanamite, that is used for or is readily capable of causing great bodily injury or death”. When will Speaker Pelosi be arrested for weilding that big wooden mallet, in our House of Representatives, where only law enforcement officerson duty may posses arms?

Scout

February 12th, 2010
2:05 pm

Big D and Normal:

A couple of points here:

1) The only idea I was trying to get across …………. is that if things ever got so bad in this country (and that is not an impossibility down the road) that citizens by the hundreds of thousands took up arms, then those same citizens have friends and relatives in the military who probably feel the same way they do. Therefore, it would never be just citizens against the military. It would be a little of both.

Note: Remember, those in the military and law enforcement give an oath to the Constitution (not the President, the Congress or even the Supreme Court).

2) Normal: Do you have a sign by your mailbox that says “There are no weapons in this house”.

3) This M-16, AK-47, automatic weapon thing is overblown.

First, you waste a lot of ammo on full auto. Two rounds bursts are much more effective and weapons can be modified to do just that with each pull of the trigger.

However, should I have to kill as many people as possible in a confined space (let’s say Islamic terrorists held up in a middle school cafeteria) I would choose a good 12 guage pump with #8 buck.

Just one man’s opinion …………… now have at it .

Scout

February 12th, 2010
2:08 pm

OneFreeMan :

Yes, and go rabbit or squirrel hunting after school ! So what has changed? The inanimate object (gun/knife) or the degeneration of our nation?

Chris G

February 12th, 2010
2:08 pm

Big D

The AK is iconic not because it can inflict greater damage per round than the M16 and its variants, but because its durability is legendary. However, the M’s durability has been improved over the course of time and is much better than it is used to be. A lot of AK’s built today are built from sub par materials, and as a result are not as durable as those manufactured years ago.

Scout

February 12th, 2010
2:12 pm

Chris G:

You are correct sir and you can carry twice the ammo for the same weight. Been there done that.

Scout

February 12th, 2010
2:14 pm

Mr. Barr:

Your thread has gone to page two already today. This is good.

Rational Person

February 12th, 2010
2:17 pm

Bubba
February 12th, 2010
1:03 pm

“This imaginary quotation has been attributed to many Axis leaders; none of them said it or thought it.”

I have no idea whether he said it or not, but the factcheck.org site doesn’t refute it; it says nobody has verified it.

——————

What Factcheck.org actually says:

The e-mail’s historical information is not much better. One of the more fanciful claims in the message is that during World War II “the Japanese decided not to invade America because they knew most Americans were ARMED!” In fact, according to the U.S. Army’s Center for Military History, Japan in World War II had set its sights mainly on Asia; its attacks on U.S. military targets were intended to clear the way for Asian conquests.
American Military History, p. 165: Japan entered World War II with limited aims and with every intention of fighting a limited war. Its principal objectives were to secure the resources of Southeast Asia and much of China and to establish a “Greater East Asia Co-Prosperity Sphere” under Japanese hegemony. Japan believed it necessary to destroy or neutralize American striking power in the Pacific (the U.S. Pacific Fleet at Pearl Harbor and the U.S. Far East Air Force in the Philippines) to secure its otherwise open strategic flank before moving southward and eastward to occupy Malaya, the Netherlands Indies, the Philippines, Wake Island, Guam, the Gilbert Islands, Thailand, and Burma.
Japan had no thought of invading the U.S. mainland, and the idea it was deterred from such an invasion by fear of homeowners with guns in their closets is historically absurd.
(Note: The author alludes to a belief, widely held by supporters of gun rights, that Japan’s WW II Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto advised his country’s leaders against invading the U.S., supposedly saying “You cannot invade mainland United States. There would be a rifle behind each blade of grass.” This alleged quote appears literally thousands of times in various Internet postings. So far we have seen none that cite any source, or even give a specific time, date or place where Yamamoto is supposed to have said or written this. We invite any of our readers who can validate this remark to send us a citation that we can check out. Until then we must classify this alleged quote as unverified and probably a fabrication.)
Update, May 11: We contacted Donald M. Goldstein, sometimes called “the dean of Pearl Harbor historians.” Among his many books are “The Pearl Harbor Papers: Inside the Japanese Plans (1993)” and the best-selling “At Dawn We Slept: The Untold Story of Pearl Harbor (1981).” He is a professor at the Graduate School of Public and International Affairs at the University of Pittsburgh. He told us the supposed Yamamoto quote is “bogus.”
In an exchange of e-mails he said:
Prof. Goldstein: I have never seen it in writing. It has been attributed to the Prange files [the files of the late Gordon W. Prange, chief historian on the staff of Gen. Douglas MacArthur] but no one had ever seen it or cited it from where they got it. Some people say that it came from our work but I never said it. … As of today it is bogus until someone can cite when and where.

Katie Barr the Door

February 12th, 2010
2:20 pm

After Columbine, it’s understandable that a zero tolerance policy would make some principles appear foolish.

Better to have a few red faces than a few red faces.

GGG

February 12th, 2010
2:26 pm

Way to Go Big D! You are absolutely right! The intent of Our founding fathers was for us to have far more freedom to keep and bear arms than we currently have! Someone needs to read up on their history! I am so thankful that we have the NRA, of which I am proud to be a member, fighting for our 2nd Amendment Right to keep and bear arms. It shouldn’t even have to be discussed! Like it or not, it is a constitutional right for every law abiding American. Criminals are excluded, just as they should be.

Van Jones

February 12th, 2010
2:26 pm

Sandra “I’m just sick of being told I as a person have no freedom of choice when it comes to guns.”

Is someone making you go out and buy a gun? I didn’t think so. Next!

Scout

February 12th, 2010
2:33 pm

Rational Person:

You have obviously never seen the movie “1942″ (with John Belushi as “Wild Bill Kelso”) or you would obviously know the truth of this matter …………………. :o

Duh

February 12th, 2010
2:38 pm

Rational Person, if it’s on the interwebs then it MUST be true. By the way, nobody has verified that I have never been to mars…

Big D

February 12th, 2010
2:45 pm

Chris, I won’t get into a pissing contest on lethality , because I’ve seen both and hands down the 16 is more. The AK is a short .308 or 7.62 about 155 grains and it stabilizes in flight making an in and out wound. The .223 or 5.56 is 55 grains ( it was originally designed for 75 grain, but was for more lethal in 55 ) and in the current configuration does not stabilize. If it hits you say in the shoulder it may just take off down or sideways, not in and out. If you couple that with 1450 feet a second better velocity the initial trauma is very evident. The only thing that was wrong with the original version was the head spacing was set to close, not allowing for any contamination of the chamber. If it does not go into complete battery the hammer will not fall and you cannot pull the upper receiver retaining pin to take it apart. This the reasoning for making the second run with a foreword assist. The AK is a very loosely made weapon even in it’s post WWII variant. Most of the NVA carried the SKS.

DAVID: AJC -Truth Detector

February 12th, 2010
2:46 pm

ONE WORD SAYs IT ALL……….LIBERALISM…..Liberals have taken over education….Public Schools & colleges……KOOK LIBERALs……

Northern Songs, LTD

February 12th, 2010
2:47 pm

jack @ 1:11 — The pharmacy called; your meds are ready.

Big D

February 12th, 2010
2:53 pm

Chris, if you do want to get a good AK buy the Polytek Chinese made. They are made with a milled receiver instead of being stamped and spot welded like the Norinco. The AR-180 ( AR-18 ) was the gun that Stoner preferred over the M-16. If you can find one made at Costa Mesa buy it, they are great.

DirtyDawg

February 12th, 2010
2:54 pm

Gotta say, you people are scary. You quote Machiavelli and are proud of it? Now that’s lunacy! When this idiocy about guns thing turns into armed insurrection, I wonder who’s going to be the first to ask, ‘Now what was this all about?’

Big D

February 12th, 2010
3:00 pm

DD, you are right… war or any form of armed conflict is the highest form of insanity. The sad thing is that it has become a everyday reality, therefore it must be addressed for the same reasons you buy insurance…something may just go crazy, especially with the group of under informed liberals we have running the insane asylum.

UMCP Grad

February 12th, 2010
3:02 pm

Rational Person, in the interest of fact checking, Gordon Prange wrote At Dawn We Slept. I believe Prof Goldstein as his student and maybe got some writing credit. I know this because the late Prange’s widow was in one of my history classes at the University of MD in 1981, when the book was published. Prange was a History professor at UMCP until his death in 1980. This does not diminish the veracity of Goldstein’s email, though it does call into question yours (minor as it may be).

Scout

February 12th, 2010
3:10 pm

Big D:

Just in case you haven’t seen this before:

“When civilized man can no longer stand the horror of war and refuses to fight, then he will surely be killed or enslaved by the uncivilized who can.”

Author Unknown

Chris G

February 12th, 2010
3:11 pm

Big D

I was not disagreeing with you–I was trying to say the AK was iconic because of its durability. You’re preaching to the choir. I prefer the M and its variants for accuracy. I saw a post a while back about the AK’s accuracy and barrel durability from a person with the handle FrankenMauser, and I quote:

“Accuracy is crap when they’re new. Accuracy is crap when they’re not new.

Therefore, I deem it impossible to wear one out; provided the bullets continue to exit the proper end of the tube.”

Big D

February 12th, 2010
3:12 pm

Scout, no I haven’t, but he was a smart man and I completely agree.

Big D

February 12th, 2010
3:17 pm

Chris, that’s a pretty good assessment.If you can find one of the early Chicom Polyteks you would be very surprised at how good they were made as well as being very accurate. The Marines had the Polytek M1A in the armory along with Winchester and Springfield Armory.

Chris G

February 12th, 2010
3:18 pm

Big D

I have one that was passed to me by my uncle. During his career, he served as a guard along the Berlin Wall during its construction during the early 60’s and it is a East German made 7.62mm MPi-K. Extremely rare this side of the pond, from what I understand.

MrJake

February 12th, 2010
3:21 pm

I suggest for the facts go to this link about guns.
Published by Harvard…yes, that Harvard.

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

In it, the review states that the evidence points that countries that have bans on firearms or restrictive firearm laws are just as dangerous or more dangerous than nations that have lax gun laws. The reason is not the gun (how can it be? It’s only a tool) but violence exists where guns are or are not available. People die to gun fire in this country because guns are available. To deduce that we are violent because of guns is silly. If guns are unavailable, people will still be violent. Notice in the review that statistics show countries with draconian gun laws are just as violent as others without draconian gun laws.

When a drunk driver kills a family of 4, does the news report the cause as a 2003 GMC Sierra or a drunk driver?

Problem is people blame the tool(gun) and not the person yielding it.

About dictator quotes, he’s one for you that was said:

“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing. Indeed, I would go so far as to say that the supply of arms to the underdogs is a sine qua non for the overthrow of any sovereignty. So let’s not have any native militia or native police. German troops alone will bear the sole responsibility for the maintenance of law and order throughout the occupied Russian territories, and a system of military strong-points must be evolved to cover the entire occupied country.” –Adolf Hitler

This is a tough article, as I have been attacked by just about everybody.

1. For believing that any law-abiding individual in the US can own whichever gun he/she wants for personal protection against the US Government.

2. For being a public school teacher. (I’m a high school teacher, I teach history)

the US Bill of Rights was written not to grant Americans rights, but acknowlege that these rights are unalienable rights that can never be taken away.

Rick

February 12th, 2010
3:25 pm

I’ve made this same comment on dozens of articles and posts about the Second Amendment. I read some good comments here by folks with some education and common sense. But, many comments show the ignorance taught by teachers who were taught by progressives, who learned their progressive garbage in ivy league institutions which were taken over by progressives. Originally Ivy League Schools were founded to train pastors for churches. My, how times have changed.

Part of the problem with misunderstanding why militias are mentioned in the Second Amendment with the right to bear arms. The Second Amendment states: “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 founders fully intended for all states to maintain militias to protect themselves from abuses of an overreaching central government, and from other states. Everyone who was able-bodied was a part of the militia.

“A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves …”
Richard Henry Lee, writing in Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republic, Letter XVIII, May, 1788.

“A Well Regulated militia, composed of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country.” (1st Annals of Congress, at 434, June 8th 1789. James Madison.

It should not even be a question whether or not the Second Amendment applies to the states. “And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the Press, or the rights of Conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms; …” Samuel Adams, quoted in the Philadelphia Independent Gazetteer, August 20, 1789, “Propositions submitted to the Convention of this State”

Prior to the War Between the States, each state maintained a militia, regulated by the respective governors. The militias were regulated, not citizens or guns. Both the North and South fought the war with their militias. Governors today have been stripped of their right to regulate militias by the unconstitutional National Guard Laws which were enacted under an interpretation of ‘the Militia Act of 1792.

Today, Both Israel and Switzerland’s militias are more like our Second Amendment intended for the U.S. Would that our Governors would all wake up.

MrJake

February 12th, 2010
3:25 pm

On issues of .223 or 7.62×39mm I’d take the 7.62. The .223 is great if your target is out in the open, but I’ve noticed that when people get shot at they tend to hide behind things….

I prefer my m1a, which has more ft/lb of energy and will cause a larger wound channel. Almost 2x the energy of a .223

Big D

February 12th, 2010
3:27 pm

Chris, yea that’s a completely German built AK ….very good gun. Most people who get the used AK’s( Asia and East Europe) get guns that used corrosive primers and it just eats the gun up if not cleaned properly. Stay away from that copper washed ammo from China…it’s bad.

Del

February 12th, 2010
3:34 pm

The M16 was a pos when it was first placed in service because it was pushed on the military without adequate testing. The theory of small Cal. high velocity ammo that produced somewhat of a dum dum effect upon penetration thus producing greater shock in a wounded enemy all sounded great. The problem was that the gas impingement system that Stoner used produced carbon build up in the weapons chamber and upper receiver causing jamming and stuck rounds. Stoner blamed the problem on the military’s utilization of 5.56mm ball ammunition that exceeded pressure limitations. The problem was partially solved by chrome platting the chamber and eventually the barrel. The travesty was that many lives were lost due to malfunction of this weapon in combat. The M16 and M4 have evolved into reasonably effective infantry shoulder weapons but at a cost. Even now troops are reporting instances of over penetration with the current issue 62 and 70gr 5.56 ammo. It seems ironic that 3rd. world countries can produce a simple inexpensive yet effective weapon as the AK 47 even with it’s 7.62 over penetration it was still a better performer.

Big D

February 12th, 2010
3:37 pm

Mr Jake, the M1A and M-14 are chambered for the .308 / 7.62x 51 not the 7.62x 39 AK round. I agree the full .308 round is very powerful, but the 7.62x 39 does not have that kind of power. I was in the jungle on both my tours and there is not a lot of things to hide behind.

Marine

February 12th, 2010
3:38 pm

Next week Bob’s going to have a headline “They want your gun”. No story and it will go five pages. Get a life, please. 99% have never fired for reason, 50% would freeze if they needed to. So 1/2 of you are full of it.

neo-Carlinist

February 12th, 2010
3:41 pm

I think we need to know if the Lego policeman was armed with a M-16 (.223) or AK-47 (7.62)? it’s a tough call which ammo is more effective vs. plastic criminals (or heaven forbid, dinosaurs and aliens)?

Big D

February 12th, 2010
3:43 pm

Del, you are right ..I went through boot camp with an M-14 and went to the M-16 in AIT and the nomenclature on it was XM-16 and we called it the Mattel riffle after the toy company. The small caliber was adopted by the USSR in the seventies with the AK-74.

Big D

February 12th, 2010
3:53 pm

Marine, One of my favorite things to tell the people I talk to at gun stores that have never served…it isn’t hunting till the deer shoots back. Most of us are raised so moral that when the day comes that when do you put a man in your sights it’s the worst moment of you life and you never stop thinking about.

Hillbilly Deluxe

February 12th, 2010
3:56 pm

Are they still allowed to play softball at recess like we did? Do they get to use bats?

Del

February 12th, 2010
4:03 pm

Big D,

I was in 61- until early 67. I went through boot camp with an M1 after boot camp and what was then called ITR I reported into my first infantry unit and my fire team leader said congratulations you’re going to be the BAR man. It was a sweet weapon except it was heavy to hump. I was glad when we went to the M14 a few months later. The Marine Corps wasn’t issued M16’s until the Spring of 67 right in the midst of the hill wars. I came back just before then so I never really had much personal experience with the weapon. I’ve heard others refer to it as the Mattel rifle.

neo-Carlinist

February 12th, 2010
4:27 pm

the “Mattel” reference was due to a perfect storm of events in the mid-1960’s. the M-16 was manufactured by Colt, but used a plastic handle, which was manufactured by Mattel (the toy company). Many of the original M-16s in Vietnam had the Mattel logo on the pistol grip. this, combined with the (initial) reports of poor performance in the field (specifically Vietnam) let many a grunt to dismiss the weapon as a worthless “toy”. And, as a child in the 1960’s, I played “army” with friends who had the Mattel M-16 Marauder (I had a M-14, made by a different toy company). I guess the 2nd Amendment didn’t apply to 8 year-olds, as my liberal, peacenik mom took my M-14.

Katie Barr the Door

February 12th, 2010
4:34 pm

That explains the mattel reference very satisfactorily! But how was the “Kung Fu grip” on the GI Joe reference born?

Or is that too close to DADT?

Sally

February 12th, 2010
4:55 pm

We need laws that make school administrators accountable for their actions. If they want to act like knee jerk morons then the parents should have the right to sue them PERSONALLY for their actions. Let a judge or a jury decide if the administrator was out of line and did not use common sense. If the student was harmed as a result of their actions then the student should be able to recover damages from the moronic administrator (not the school system).

jconservative

February 12th, 2010
4:57 pm

twinkletoes – The Supreme Court in its Heller decision last year said that the “militia” part of the Second Amendment had nothing to do with a right to keep and bear arms. Nothing. They ruled that the Second Am gave each “individual” the right to keep and bear arms. Sorry.

MrJake

February 12th, 2010
5:11 pm

Sorry Big D, i know the ak round is a lower weight bullet but of the same caliber (.30 cal).

I know 7.62×51mm typically run 147gr as NATO spec. I know the ak round is in the 120gr and is only running 1,200fps while .308 runs 2,600-2,800fps.

In the jungle, did you not encounter a lot of foliage? I know the .223 is flatter and you can carry more ammo with .223 than 7.62×39mm. Maybe in a jungle setting a flatter shooting round would be ideal but in a urban setting (not the thin walled huts in Vietnam) but mortar/brick stone I’d prefer the AK round to defend myself.

Del

February 12th, 2010
5:34 pm

MrJake,

You don’t want to confuse .223 with NATO military issue M193 Ball or M855 Ball ammo. M855 is now standard issue and has a steel core. It’s identified with a green tip and can penetrate 1/4″ to 1/2″ steel. You shouldn’t attempt to fire 5.56 ammo in a rifle chambered only for .223. Since most social work would be within 200 meters. urban or otherwise and with military grade ammo being what it is now, choosing an AR weapon wouldn’t be such a bad idea. In the home, however, buck shot is the better choice.

Hard Right Hook

February 12th, 2010
5:34 pm

“The AK is iconic not because it can inflict greater damage per round than the M16 and its variants, but because its durability is legendary. However, the M’s durability has been improved over the course of time and is much better than it is used to be. A lot of AK’s built today are built from sub par materials, and as a result are not as durable as those manufactured years ago.”

Kalishnikov wasn’t trying to develop a great weapon; he wanted to develop a weapon that the Russians could mass-produce cheaply. An AK version is made virtually everywhere now, the reason all those peace-loving Muslims have one, right next to their rocket-propelled grenades.

MrJake

February 12th, 2010
5:42 pm

Del,

I know 5.56 round have steel penetraters but what happens to the round after it penetrates a barrier? It fragments and loses a lot of it’s energy. .308 will still have a large portion of the bullet intact and will then still be able to cause damage to the target behind the barrier.

I’m not knocking the .223 round as I had an AR, but looking at wound profiles of .30 cal v. .22 cal there is a big difference. Especially if your target is on drugs, you will need more rounds to knock him down. You will get better results with a .30 cal bullet.

Each bullet will have it’s strength and weakness, a .223 will have a flatter trajectory and a soldier will be able to carry more ammo. A 7.62×51mm round will have 2x the torque and has better post barrier penetration and will knock a man sized target down with 1 hit (permitting it’s in or near the vitals) even if he is on a narcotic. I want to put as much energy on my target as possible not only to stop them from shooting back but to not be able to shoot again.

MrJake

February 12th, 2010
5:45 pm

I forgot to tell you Del, look at the wound profile of 62gr 5.56mm ammo vs. .30 cal. The wound profile is more than 1/3 of a .30 cal bullet. 62gr 5.56ammo penetrates great but lacks on the wound trama factor (Unless it hits a vital then it does not matter which caliber you use.)

Del

February 12th, 2010
6:00 pm

MrJake,

It really gets down to what your most comfortable with as either can get the job done. I have both in my gun cabinet and God willing I won’t need to choose one over the other.

Have a good one.

Family Guy

February 12th, 2010
6:40 pm

If we wonder why our public schools are failing, here’s part of the answer: many of those running them are idiots, incapable of exercising independent judgment or basic common sense. An administrator who thinks that a two-inch piece of plastic is a “weapon” and thus covered by an otherwise legitimate policy, is a perfect example of someone who fell into the ideal job for people who don’t have to produce anything; just go through the procedures and you can’t be fired no matter how utterly moronic your decisions. Sadly, those who have to silently endure this kind of willful obtuseness everyday are those good teachers out there who are powerless to do anything other than comply with the demands of bureaucrats who could care less about actual outcomes, only processes. Who cares what happens to the ship, as long as the deck-chairs are properly aligned?

Gerald West

February 12th, 2010
7:10 pm

Back to your usual silliness, Bob! Complain about everything, don’t know what to do about anything; label things you don’t understand “lunacy”.

It’s not a teacher’s job to determine whether something that looks like a weapon might endanger the children in her charge. You’d be the first to raise hell if a child got stabbed by that 2′ plastic rifle, or blinded by a toy pellet gun brought into the classroom.

Parents don’t want their children in a school that allows anything that looks like a weapon! There’s no telling what the children of the crazies of the American gun culture will find laying around the house, and may bring to school. Zero-tolerance is the right policy. The teacher in Staten Island did the right thing.

My F150is dirty

February 12th, 2010
7:14 pm

Even the honest to god freaks at Daily Kos and Democrat underground, seem to support gun rights- most of em anyway- Great websites to troll, by the way. The angst, pain, outrage, and suffering is fine entertainment.

I bet the gun issue is pretty much hands off to the left- just a political lost cause. Now if the right would give it up on abortion…

JTex

February 12th, 2010
7:25 pm

Because, of course, conflating the idiocy of a rule-happy bureaucrat with legitimate concerns about the massive proliferation of guns and a culture that seems to worship them isn’t specious at all.

I have no problem with regulated gun ownership, but suggesting that this story somehow informs the very legitimate disagreement that many people in this country have with the completely unfettered ownership of guns that the NRA desires is intellectually dishonest, and just plain silly.

I’m still not sure why we accept so many limitations of the government regulation of Speech, in my opinion vastly more important than the ownership of guns, yet shriek “UNCONSTITUTIONAL!!!” when a law is passed to prevent a 5-year-old from buying a fully automatic rifle.

See…I can do hyperbole, too.

john boggess

February 12th, 2010
7:55 pm

why aren’t we passing laws to prevent this kind of stupid action?
In fact, why aren’t we passing laws to do away with state control of our schools??!

Aardvark

February 12th, 2010
8:04 pm

We forget that in order to become an “educator”, you need to check your brain and common sense at the door. I come from an academic family (parents, grandparents, cousins) but they were “old school” before the mid-1960’s when the current lunacy started to take hold. Could there possibly be a correlation between the rise of teachers unions and the stupidity that has come about?

Scout

February 12th, 2010
8:15 pm

Big D:

When we you in ? I was a Hollywood Marine (fall of ‘66) and then India 3/4 1967 (V.N.)

By the way, I used the Remington 700 with Redfield 3X9 Power Scope ……………. :o )

Jason

February 12th, 2010
9:35 pm

My son had “hundreds” day at school Thursday. This is when they celebrate the 100th day of school by bringing 100 of somthing, and he wanted to take 100 legos. In the bag of legos was a half inch long starwars laser. He was hauled to the principals office and we were called. They said they felt bad because it was an honest mistake on our part, but becuase of their “zero tolerece policy” He was Written up and it will go on his permanent record. He is in 1st grade. We seem to talk a great deal about diversity in schools but when it comes to the diverse population of us who leagaly and responsibly own guns, and responsibly train our children likewise. We are shunned and labled. Sad sorry state or should I say country of affiares.

Rational Person

February 12th, 2010
9:58 pm

“JoseyWales
February 12th, 2010
1:36 pm

Rational person:

I really don’t care if he said it or not; that wasn’t the point. And if you take a little time to actually read some history, …”

You just confirmed my point that you’re not distinguishing between the real and the imaginary. And I’ve probably been reading history for longer than you’ve been alive. One of the things I’ve gleaned is that amateurs (such as a militia) are pretty much helpless when matched up against a real army. That’s the lesson of the American Revolution, the War of 1812, Machiavelli’s Florentine militia, the Georgia Militia in the Civil War, and so on.

Leif Rakur

February 12th, 2010
10:00 pm

Quoting Big D:

“…need to read the dialog for the 2nd amendment before commenting on it. It’s a tough read, but start with the Federalist Papers.”

Two-thirds of the Federalist Papers were written by Alexander Hamilton and John Jay. They obviously considered the people’s right to keep and bear arms to be a right of the political community to a militia defense, not a right of individuals to carry arms on private missions.

Hamilton and Jay supported framing the Second Amendment idea for the Constitution in this way:

“That the people have a right to keep and bear arms; that a well-regulated militia, including the body of the people capable of bearing arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defence of a free state.”

In the all-militia context, the body of the people “capable of bearing arms,” was a reference to those capable of providing militia service. It wouldn’t make any more sense to parse “bear arms” to mean “carry arms” in the first clause than to equate “bearing arms” to “carrying arms” in the second. And the substitutions wouldn’t result in a coherent statement.

Scout

February 12th, 2010
10:09 pm

To Leif Rakur :

Sorry pal, the U.S. Supreme Court disagrees with you and guess what? They get to make the rulings not you.

Jason:

1) I wouldn’t stand for that. Get an attorney and sue the heck out of them personally.

2) Also, go back to the school and look in every book in the library or used in a class (you have that right) and see if you can find a picture of a weapon (i.e., a soldier carrying an M-1 up Omaha Beach on D-Day).

Then contact the administrators who supervise that principle/librarian and attempt to have them disciplined for allowing such a thing in school. Oh the horror if a child saw that.

3) Then pray that somehow we can someday get rid of these types of idiots in our government schools.

P.S. Now that I am thinking about it, I wonder if any Marines have visited that school? You know, those guys who wear “crossed rifles” under their enlisted rank?

God help us ……………. it’s hard to believe we have sunk this far as a nation.

Steve Lyons

February 12th, 2010
10:17 pm

Is this teacher an escapee from a psychiatric ward? Must think “It’ll put your eye out”……

Time to privatize the schools so idiots like that will be unemployed.

Davo

February 12th, 2010
10:42 pm

Enter your comments here

Leif Rakur

February 12th, 2010
10:51 pm

To Scout:

The Supreme Court makes mistakes, don’t you think?

Or maybe your agreed with the Supreme Court when it said that the National Guard is the modern militia. The Court cited the Constitution in doing so, and subsequently the Fifth Circuit cited the Court as authority for making a similar pronouncement:

“The National Guard is the modern Militia reserved to the States by Art. I. 8, cl. 15, 16, of the Constitution.” ( U.S. Supreme Court, Maryland v. United States, 1965)

“We begin our consideration of this appeal with full recognition that the national guard is the militia, in modern-day form, that is reserved to the states by Art I, 8, cls. 15, 16 of the Constitution. Maryland v. United States, 381 U.S. 41, 46 (1965).” (Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals, James H. Lipscomb v. Federal Labor Relations Authority (2003) )

Not surprised

February 12th, 2010
10:56 pm

Opinions are like names – - – everybody has one. The rub is to have an INFORMED one. Those mired in their ignorance are beyond help. Those who wish not to make fools of themselves will acquaint themselves with the many quotes of the Founding Fathers. Missing from all comments on this page and from the truly ignorant about the meaning of the 2nd Admendment, they might , for starters, explain to the rest of us this quote: “I ask sir, WHAT IS THE MILITIA? It is the WHOLE people except for a few politicians.” George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights and the Virginia Declaration of Rights). And how about this one? “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of firearms!” Thomas Jefferson. Another? “A free people ought to be armed.” George Washington. That there are many, many more, from these three people, and from John Adams (most responsible for getting the Declaration of Independence pushed through) to Ben Franklin to many, many others for those with the least bit of intelligence or inclination to look up, leave no doubt as to what they meant about the 2nd Amendment.

And if the militia people are so smart, try telling the rest of us why, with the remaining nine amendments dealing with protecting INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS, they would stick one in protecting the right of the State (i.e., Federal and State government)? And why placed second after freedom of speech, at that? Lastly, enlighten us all as to why gun rights are today enshrined in THE CONSTITUTIONS OF 44 STATES ! ! !

Scout

February 12th, 2010
11:08 pm

Leif Rakur:

Of course they make mistakes (i.e., Dread Scott and Roe vs. Wade) but as I said before …………. they get the last say – unless “the people” decide to pass a Constitutional Amendment.

I assume you are familiar with the Supreme Court ruling in the Washington, D.C. case that “people” means “individuals” just as “people” does in the other Amendments. Whether or not the “militia” is today’s National Guard is irrelevant to that principle. “Individuals” still have the right to bear arms.

H Stan Boring, PHC, USN, (Ret.)

February 12th, 2010
11:34 pm

“If a squirrel gets run over by a car, you can’t say the squirrel was trying to kill himself.” This is way off point. I have no idea who Lewis Black is or was, but I had that very thing happen to me. I disturbed young man ran forcefully into th side of my car, so hard he dented it with his knees. He was in fact attempting suicide. He succeeded several days later when the bus he ran in front of ran over and killed him. I know this because his father called me and told me what happened, so I would not feel bad about the incident with his son.

Reading the exchanges in these comments saddens me at the level of discourse into which we seem to have fallen

Navy Chief

Leif Rakur

February 12th, 2010
11:50 pm

Quoting “Not surprised”

” Missing from all comments on this page and from the truly ignorant about the meaning of the 2nd Admendment, they might , for starters, explain to the rest of us this quote: “I ask sir, WHAT IS THE MILITIA? It is the WHOLE people except for a few politicians.” George Mason (father of the Bill of Rights and the Virginia Declaration of Rights).”

The implication that this Mason quote is a significant statement about the size of the militia is quite misleading. If you read a little further, you find that Mason was really saying that the militia was made up of all classes of the people, not stating that it was made up of every individual person. At the time (1788), the Virginia militia “amounted to 50,000,” as Governor Randolph put it. The population of Virginia in 1788 was not too far under 747,550, which was the number given in the 1790 Census. Therefore, the militia in Virginia consisted of about 1 in every 13 or 14 persons, not the whole population.

Froggy

February 12th, 2010
11:58 pm

I was born in 1936 I beleive i have lived thru the best years this country will ever see the late 40s & and all the way thru the early 70s After Reagan (the first Hollywood person) was elected progress (except technical) failed to advance The only improvement has been for the well to do. The average person has been held in place. and the teachers were able to teach. Not police.

Leif Rakur

February 13th, 2010
12:22 am

To “Not Surprised”:

Jefferson and other founders no doubt had great respect for the personal use of firearms. But that doesn’t mean they believed that was what the Second Amendment was about. Jefferson was a strong advocate of the Bill of Rights and often wrote his list of subjects that should be included. But he never listed the personal use of private arms. After the Bill of Rights had been adopted, he referred to the Second Amendment as “the substitution of militia for a standing army.” That was in a letter to Dr. Joseph Priestley, June 19, 1802.

Leif Rakur

February 13th, 2010
12:27 am

To Scout:

So we agree that the Supreme Court makes mistakes. I believe it made one in Heller.

Greengiant

February 13th, 2010
12:42 am

If all firearms, knifes, bows and arrows, swords. spears, were outlawed. Human beings
would kill each other with their bare hands.

DirtyDawg

February 13th, 2010
1:02 am

Reading all this crap I think I’m beginning to believe the theory that generations of breathing air filled with particulate matter and carbon dioxide from burned fossil fuels has turned too many of us into ‘lizard-brained’ humanoids. All too many of us can do is to violently strike out at things we are incapable of understanding, let alone appreciating. And as for ‘empathy’, you’re kidding, right?

DirtyDawg

February 13th, 2010
1:03 am

Enter your comments here

Jason

February 13th, 2010
1:06 am

To Scout: Thanks for the support my friend but I have to deal with these people for the next 13 years. So with a bitter taste in my mouth I apologized for our oversight. However I am all the more resolved that my family will be trained and proficient in the use of firearms for defense, hunting and sport. We have that right as Americans and I intend to support it. It just does not make sense to me to make waves, considering that this is the only school that my kids can attend in the small town that I live in. In any case we are sliding down a slippery slope and I hope we can stop the slide before we end up in dire straits.

Leif Rakur

February 13th, 2010
1:17 am

Quoting “Not Surprised”:

[W]hy, with the remaining nine amendments dealing with protecting INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS AND FREEDOMS, they would stick one in protecting the right of the State (i.e., Federal and State government)?”

The “people” in the Second Amendment refers to the people as a whole. The word “people” is a collective noun. That means it can stand for a collection of persons, although it can also be used to refer to the individuals that make up the collection. As is done today, the founders applied the noun both ways. There was no rule saying that it must be used the same way throughout a document or from provision to provision. The opening words of the Declaration of Independence, for instance, use “people” collectively and then refer back to that noun in both a collective and a non-collective way —- and all in one sentence!

Joseph Story, in his “Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States” makes pertinent observations on this subject:

“§ 454. XVIII. And this leads us to remark, in the next place, that it is by no means a correct rule of interpretation to construe the same word in the same sense, wherever it occurs in the same instrument. It does not follow, either logically or grammatically, that because a word is found in one connexion in the constitution, with a definite sense, therefore the same sense is to be adopted in every other connexion, in which it occurs… Men of ingenious and subtle minds, who seek for symmetry and harmony in language, having found in the constitution a word used in some sense, which falls in with their favourite theory of interpreting it, have made that the standard, by which to measure its use in every other part of the instrument…. It was very justly observed by Mr. Chief Justice Marshall, in The Cherokee Nation v. The State of Georgia, that “it has been said, that the same words have not necessarily the same meaning attached to them, when found in different parts of the same instrument Their meaning is controlled by the context. This is undoubtedly true. In common language, the same word has various meanings; and the peculiar sense, in which it is used in any sentence, is to be determined by the context.” (Joseph Story, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, Chapter V – Rules of Interpretation, 1833)

The context of the Second Amendment’s right of the people to keep and bear arms is all ahout a well regulated militia, not about carrying personal arms on private missions.

Dasing

February 13th, 2010
4:00 am

To’ too many guns.’..If you ever encountered American history (not high school history) you would know the Milita in that amendment is “Every abled-bodied man from 16 to 60″ note,’ EVERY ‘ And another term used is ‘ the people ‘ If you cannot understand those simple words, please refrain from displayimg your stupidity!!

Dasing

February 13th, 2010
5:08 am

Please note in the context of ‘abled-bodied’ It means physicaly, mentaly, and legaly able to perform milita service. And just because the latter goverments in the us did not want to fund the milita as originaly provided for, does not make the National Guard a constituional milita, It still is a select Milita which was a very bad taste in the mouths of all the colonists,Founding Fathers not withstanding!

Jarhead1982

February 13th, 2010
5:25 am

Yeah Rational person, you are a military genius and have thought your position through thoroughly and completely.

Research all insurrections and rebellions since the 1600’s just to simplify things. Count those successful versus not and you have somewhere between 20-25% of all those succeeding. Please demonstrate to everyone how this is not a concern to any government?

Guess Vietnam never happened? Guess all those insurgents in Iraq & Afghanistan should’ve died off over 8 years ago. Care to explain how these technologically challenged fighters compared to the US technological and firepower manage to fight on today?

There are 3 million us citizens in active, reserves for military and police throughout the world today. There are 100 million law abiding gun owners in the US today per ATF studies. There are at minimum 35 million retired military personnel in the civilian population today, guess they all lost their skill sets by the universal mind wipe machine they must go through upon discharge from service right?

There are what, about 1,000 politicians who would be the arbi-”traitors” of such a uprising versus 100 million law abiding gun owners. Remember, 1,000 targets, or 100 million targets, who has less to do eh? Of course you have thoroughly thought out the effects of collateral damage and the effects it would have on support for such rebels. Much less how the media would have to be muzzled. After all, the government would wisely turn loose GBU’s, mines, tanks, napalm, MLRS, heavy artillery, fighter bomber attacks or full auto fire into civilian populations of the US, eh?

So what is the manpower required to secure Federal, state, and county lines were the “only ones” to go all big bother on us? How would such control projected to lines of communications and travel throughout the US, resources and logistics necessary to accomplish this control eh?

How would the government pull all the military and police instantaneously back to the mainland US to control and fight the citizens while leaving all our country’s assets and commitments around the world unprotected? Who or what would step into that void and what would be the result worldwide?

What would be the cost to logistically make such a move?

Of course such rebels don’t have access to ANY military equipment by acquisition or sympathetic sources right?

We wouldn’t see ANY smuggling of arms and munitions from ANY outside entity who would have interest in some destabilization, like Iran, China or so many other “enlightened” countries do on a daily basis eh?

Of course we have no examples of rebels manufacturing arms and ammunition clandestinely. Maybe the gun smiths in Afghanistan don’t make copies of Enfield rifles from basic tools. Maybe the Israelis didn’t manufacture Sten guns and millions of rounds of 9mm ammunition in clandestine factories again using simple tools during their fight for independence in the late 40’s eh?

No Rational Person, you have no freaking rational clue about military capabilities of the citizenry, the cost, manpower requirements, anything. So as you have demonstrated not even an inkling of rational thought about what is or isn’t militarily capable, you need to change your moniker.

Scout

February 13th, 2010
8:38 am

Leif Rakur: Sorry, but a ruling is a ruling. Otherwise, we have anarchy. You have the option of working on a Constitutional Amendment to change the 2nd. Have at it.

Jason: I hear you. Do what’s best for your familty.

I bet Leif doesn’t have a sign by his mailbox saying, “There Are No Weapons in This House”.

Del

February 13th, 2010
9:08 am

Some of the Jack A$$ types on this blog would have no problem murdering babies but they have a real problem interpreting the 2nd. Amendment and an individuals right to self defense. Some will even draft an epistle (probably a cut and paste) that essentially says nothing other than they don’t like gun ownership or Supreme Court rulings.

Scout

February 13th, 2010
9:22 am

Enter your comments here

Scout

February 13th, 2010
9:23 am

Del:

Ooo Rah! Let ‘er rip! Thanks for “walking point” this morning ………………..

Del

February 13th, 2010
9:36 am

Hey Scout,

Semper Fi. Have to go clear snow off my drive way. So I’m out…have a good one.

Hank Williams Jr.

February 13th, 2010
9:48 am

I’ve got a shotgun, a rifle and a 4 wheel drive and a country boy WILL survive !!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Song now 30 years old people, said it then , truer today than ever.

Try to take my guns…………

Just try.

Rick

February 13th, 2010
9:52 am

If the Anti- Second Amendment folks on this thread would read the comments about the intentions of the founders of the Bill of Rights, there would be no misunderstanding on the true meaning. All governors, if they would raise us militias made up of all able bodied citizens owning and bearing their own weapons, automatic or not, with proper ‘regulation’ into units and groups, they would be fulfilling the amendment’s intent. “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.” Note: A “well regulated militia,” not well regulated individuals. Also not “being necessary to the security of a free state.”

Evidence of an Individual Right

In his popular edition of Blackstone’s Commentaries on the Laws of England (1803), St. George Tucker (see also), a lawyer, Revolutionary War militia officer, legal scholar, and later a U.S. District Court judge (appointed by James Madison in 1813), wrote of the Second Amendment:

The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, and this without any qualification as to their condition or degree, as is the case in the British government.

In the appendix to the Commentaries, Tucker elaborates further:

This may be considered as the true palladium of liberty… The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest limits possible. Whenever standing armies are kept up, and the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction. In England, the people have been disarmed, generally, under the specious pretext of preserving the game: a never failing lure to bring over the landed aristocracy to support any measure, under that mask, though calculated for very different purposes. True it is, their bill of rights seems at first view to counteract this policy: but the right of bearing arms is confined to protestants, and the words suitable to their condition and degree, have been interpreted to authorise the prohibition of keeping a gun or other engine for the destruction of game, to any farmer, or inferior tradesman, or other person not qualified to kill game. So that not one man in five hundred can keep a gun in his house without being subject to a penalty.

Not only are Tucker’s remarks solid evidence that the militia clause was not intended to restrict the right to keep arms to active militia members, but he speaks of a broad right – Tucker specifically mentions self-defense.

“Because ‘[g]reat weight has always been attached, and very rightly attached, to contemporaneous exposition,’ the Supreme Court has cited Tucker in over forty cases. One can find Tucker in the major cases of virtually every Supreme Court era.” (Source: The Second Amendment in the Nineteenth Century) Source: http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/19thcentury.htm.

Hank Williams Jr.

February 13th, 2010
10:13 am

Send lawyers , guns and money, the sh-t has hit the fan !!!!!!!!!!!

uzicarlo

February 13th, 2010
10:14 am

Wow! I am ever so glad to have left NY. Reading stories like this about how our schools are treating guns makes me ever-so-gladder : – )

NADRA ENZI AKA CAPT. BLACK

February 13th, 2010
10:14 am

Seems the Nuremburg defense of ” I was just following orders ” has found new life in the unlikely ranks of American public education staff!?! Training our children to be inmates seems the new priority. Blind obedience to authority creates slaves.

http://www.captblack.info

Tory II

February 13th, 2010
10:42 am

QUOTE:
“States like New Jersey and Massachusetts have these licensing requirements, and have much lower rates of gun-related violence and death,” said Frosh, chair of the Judicial Proceedings Committee, which will hear the bill. “So we think we can significantly improve public safety.”

Gun control laws don’t reduce crime rates, they increase them.

Chicago has a total ban on handguns and many other types of weapons, but has very high rates of gun-related violence and death. Only shotguns are allowed (in the home) and they must be registered. In Chicago there are murders of all kinds every week. So the most stringent gun controls, handgun, knife, and assault rifle bans, have not improved public safety. For a State Senator to make such a claim clearly portrays the corruptive nature of Maryland politicians. Senator Frosh is clearly a bold-faced liar who also intends to capitalize his career by taking advantage of hoplophobes (citizens who have been brainwashed by the newsmedia about the benefits of gun possession).

The 2nd amendment was included into the Bill of Rights to prohibit GOVERNMENT from regulating weapons. “Govt” includes Senator Frosh. Senator Frosh, by attempting to create more useless gun control laws is also demonstrating his contempt for the Bill of Rights and a “rule of law” that specifically applies to him. Frosh is exactly the type of politician the 2nd amendment was written for (the kind that would disarm us for the purpose of controlling us).

Rational Person

February 13th, 2010
10:48 am

After reading the posts here, I made a contribution to the Brady Campaign.

We will be living in a freaking nightmare if some of you people get your way.

Tom Carney

February 13th, 2010
11:13 am

Staten Island is part of New York City(NYC). NYC has lately set itself apart from the rest of America, mainly because of its diverse population. At one time people new to America made efforts to become Americans. Today, NYC politicians curry and preserve various factions in the NYC venue for the politician’s own advantage. Since NYC denizens were at one another’s throats in the old world, to maintain SOCIAL CONTROL, only the NYC pols, their cronies and kin are let be armed there.

Safe Guns

February 13th, 2010
12:27 pm

What do Cheney and Oxendine have in common?

Gun safety, Watson!

Gun safety.

Hank Williams Jr.

February 13th, 2010
12:41 pm

Rational Person better wake up and smell the Jim Beam.
And Tom Carney, N. Yorksters better arm up.
THE 911 CRIME OF THE CENTURY WILL RETURN, bet your bottom dollar.
May happen there first, dont know.
U. S. citizens better arm up and defend yourselves and your families.
To not do this will be a mistake.

Dave

February 13th, 2010
12:53 pm

C Tucker, You are brainwashed. Why not ban pencils from school while we are “protecting the kids”. Stupid kneejerk reactions, political correctness, the liberal agenda, along with some peoples idea that they know what is best for the rest of us attitude (like you C Tucker) is what has this country in such turmoil.

A McBeth

February 13th, 2010
1:04 pm

Swede, you said “On the other hand I think it is fully appropriate to educate children at an early age that weapons of any kind are not appropriate nor permitted in the school environment. I didn’t have to deal with knives, guns, etc. at school when I was growing up even though I lived in the rural west. Kids had guns and knives, etc. but they knew if they dared to bring them on school grounds they would be seized and they would never see them again”
Unfortunately when I was in high school bullies used to follow me home and try to beat me up. Fortunately I had a knife in my pocket, after I showed it to them they backed off. I never actually had to use it, thank goodness, but its presence kept me safe. Would you rather have had them beat me up? That knife was never used improperly, in school or out, but it was always with me, including being in my pocket in class. You were just lucky, whereas I was prepared.

ron2112

February 13th, 2010
3:06 pm

That kind of political correctness in our school system is exactly why my wife and I home school our kids, not only do they not have to be “SUBJECTS” er subjected to that kind of idiocacy, we go shooting once amonth as part of our field trips. The public shool system needs your’e kids more than your’e kids need them, give home school a try and educate your’e kids, rather than having them indoctrinated into P.C.

TW

February 13th, 2010
4:06 pm

For every time a gun is used safely to defend one’s person, there are seventeen gun related suicides/unintentional lethal discharges (kids, etc.).

Though we are a young country, it’s long overdue that we should grow out of the insecure teenage phase.

Try Viagra.

David

February 13th, 2010
4:42 pm

To the anti-gun crowd:

Regarding the 2nd Amendment: ”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.” As I was once taught in school, the comma and the word “and” can be substituted for each other. Do that and you get ”A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State and the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” To me, it is obvious that the founding fathers truly believed in the right of the individual to own a firearm. Also consider, their intentions for the first 10 amendments to our Constitution were to place in writing individual natural rights that our government (or anyone for that matter) would not infringe upon.

And if that is not plain enough, my owning firearms is no one’s business. Also, I believe my right to own a guns is more important than the deaths that occur from accidental or intentional shootings that occur.

I do and will continue to carry a firearm wherever I go (albeit concealed).

Frankie

February 13th, 2010
5:27 pm

Its not the guns,knives and what else you may find in school that worries me, its the fact that these people are teaching our kids that scares the hell out of me.

BAMA

February 13th, 2010
6:38 pm

To Too Man Guns: You are the fool! The NRA is the one organization that will defend your right to act a fool as well as defend our right to bear arms. The militia? Look it up. A hint – the people. Stats verify time and a gain that armed society equals less crime. Look at Great Britain and their crime rate (move there for 6 months); look at Australia. Look at Iran where the freedom loving people are trying to regain their right to vote, their freedom. They won’t succeed. Why? Because they have no weapons; the police and military do. It’s obvious with your biased opinion you know nothing about guns nor the fact that owners know how and when to use them (stats prove this also). Research how many lives have been saved simply by owning ( not having to use) a gun. Of course I know you won’t look at statistics because you don’t want to see the truth, nor have to admit it the correctness. People like you, who probably voted for the socialists in DC as well as Obama, represent a real threat to our freedoms. This is the United States with a unique Constitution -the only nation with an amendment to guarantee the right to bear arms. Even our neighbors to the north had to give up many firearms since they have no constitutional protection. And this same Constitution gives you the 1st Amendment and the right to speak your mind, albeit it incorrect. And now, did you know, our narcissist socialists president has hinted at curtailing the 1st? Are you willing to give it up? We gun owners aren’t willing to give up or Second Amendment either. And we won’t!

Mrs. Norris

February 13th, 2010
6:39 pm

I love the remark about the TSA Bob. That was hysterical, and honorable mention to Gaboomer for the administrator crack. I have really enjoyed reading today’s comments. I find it quite amusing that so many people don’t get puns and sarcasm and don’t recognize fake names meant to insult the real person. Quite amusing. Thanks.

C. Heston

February 13th, 2010
6:58 pm

They don’t call it the Colt Peacekeeper for nothing and kudos to the electrician that shot that thug. Be a little quicker boy and maybe next time you won’t let any get away.

LT

February 14th, 2010
1:19 am

With public schools like that they should give everybody there tax money back and so parents can send their kids to whatever school they choose. By doing this your family’s beliefs would be in line with the school of your choosing. These school teachers work for the people just as politicians do and should honor everyone’s free choice. That’s freedom. In line with that people should be able to buy guns if they so choose as long as they are not breaking the law. It’s called freedom and the US Constitution spells it out. Government only exists to protect people’s rights and should not punish them if they are not hurting anyone. So who exactly did this kid hurt? The parents should sue and the administrators should pay out of their own pockets not the taxpayers.

Safe Guns

February 14th, 2010
6:33 am

Mrs Norris, don’t be amused. People do get the fake names meant to insult the real person. The replies that amuse you are coming from the same person who wrote the fake name. They are replying to themselves, pretending to be someone who didn’t get the sarcasm or the insult.

That’s what all blogs devolve into: a hanful of trolls posting hundreds of comments TO THEMSELVES.

Welcome the the AJC online.

schmed

February 14th, 2010
9:00 am

John F. Kennedy was an NRA member

Hank Williams Jr.

February 14th, 2010
9:26 am

I got a shotgun a rifle and a 4 wheel drive, a COUNTRY BOY can survive !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Second Amendment

February 14th, 2010
12:19 pm

Dear Too Many Guns, your are right. You must read (AND UNDERSTAND) the entire 2nd Amendment: ”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 define militia; a military force composed of ordinary citizens. Then put it all together. It’s about the rights of the PEOPLE. All of the Amendments are about the rights of the PEOPLE. It’s about a FREE STATE not government control. The 2nd Amendment protects all other Amendments.

Clint

February 14th, 2010
2:24 pm

Hmmm. That really makes me mad. I wrote a pretty good comment yesterday but it never got posted. Anyways, the jist of it was… Besides all of the facts being stated about Our inherent, inalienable Rights to Freedom, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness, the reason for Zero Tolerance is because somewhere in Our American history people have lost the concept of being responsible and accountable. I wonder how many kids that come from a household that has a firearm of some sort and has never had the parent(s) sit down with them and fully discuss the tantamount obligation they have to respect how lethal and dangerous a gun can be. If you buy a firearm, for whatever reason, you dang well better own up to the fact that it is YOUR obligation and responsibility to teach others in your household how to properly and safely handle it. If you can’t find the time to do this then you have no business what-so-ever having possession of such a thing. In that matter, I am refering to both a gun and a family. Your an adult. Leather up and take responsibility for your actions. Seeing a gun when I was a kid was second nature to me. They were never disassembled, locked away and completely useless. There was always one near by, just in case. Even though I was taught an an early age how to properly and safely handle one, I knew perfectly well not to touch or go near any of them unless there was adult supervision or else I got my butt busted, unless something happened and I absolutely needed to use this tool. Which brings me back to the whole accountablility discussion. Anyone I knew or was around that had a gun never lamented to instruct me on practicing being safe. Get rid of the ever-present, over-reaching Government and all of the stupid, nonsensicle “Nanny” laws and regulations and start taking full credibility for yourself and your actions.

Clint

February 14th, 2010
2:27 pm

Hey Bocephus….Don’t forge tthe Beechnut.

LT

February 14th, 2010
2:39 pm

It’s not that are too many guns out there it’s there are too many idiots! I’ve been around guns since I was eight. When my kids were old enough I took them to my local target range and taught them how to shoot them, clean them and about the seriousness of guns. They now respect guns and even though mine are looked up except for the one that’s hiding in case of unwanted intruders they wouldn’t just play with any of them like they are toys. we don’t have a gun problem in this country we have a social problem. People need to parent and teach their kids.

Ronin

February 14th, 2010
3:44 pm

do we even know if the toy rifle was on safe with a round in the chamber? teacher is a quack

NRA_Member

February 14th, 2010
5:36 pm

Ted Nugent says it best.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCHtw6WbbnM

Who on are earth could successfully debate his arguement.

Hank Williams Jr.

February 14th, 2010
6:12 pm

I’D LIKE TO SPIT SOME BEECHNUT IN THAT DUDES EYES AND SHOOT HIM WITH MY OL 45 , CAUSE A COUNTRY BOY CAN SURVIVE !!

HOW BOUT THAT CLINT……..
AND THANKS FOR REPLYING…..

Graywolf

February 15th, 2010
12:09 pm

What’s next. Is that school system going to sue LEGGO for manufacturing guns without the required federal and state permits? You cold snap that little piece of plastic into with the fingers of one hand. Tell me—what kind of “weapon” is that? A pencil is a much more dangerous as a weapon, as are many other school items.

Oldshooter

February 15th, 2010
3:07 pm

Everyone here seems to be reading ths event as simply a stupid and rule-bound adminstration that can’t get beyond an overly rigid interpretation of the rules. I would submit to you (and if you think I’m gettng paranoid, go talk to your child’s school teacher or principal about how they feel, and what they teach, about guns) that this is not an administration too stupid to interpret the rules rationally, but rather an extremely anti-gun principal who wants to indoctrinate (read brainwash) her middle school students to believe that ALL GUNS ARE ALWAYS BAD. This is far more likely than the proposition that she is too ignorant or illogical to interpret the school district’s policy manual in the intended manner. She didn’t become the Principal by being stupid, but by correctly reading and following the political winds blowing through the school district. I’ll bet she would have responded in exactly the same manner if she saw a student draw a picture of a gun in art class. Maybe someone ought to ask her.

Darrell Patton

February 15th, 2010
3:20 pm

RE: To Many Guns comments. Did you know there are too many cars? I think they should all be taken away from everybody be forced onto public transportation. No more drunk drivers, hit & runs or whatever.
Peaceful

Clint

February 15th, 2010
5:36 pm

That’s even better than the original lyrics, Hank Jr. Even reminds me of Josey Wales.

Clint

February 15th, 2010
5:47 pm

Heck, Ted Nugent gets it, why can’t the rest of America get it.

I wonder if We could persuade The Nuge to run for President? Clone him and that would be the Vice President. His wife could be Secretary of State. Clone her and get the Chief of Staff. How’s about Chuck Norris for Attorney General. Clone him and you’ve got the head of the Department of Defense.

James in Darkest Arkansas

February 15th, 2010
6:08 pm

Well Regulated Militia. Well, back in the Founder’s Day, ‘well regulated’
meant ‘well equipped’ as in “regular army’ who were equipped by the State,
not that they were an army that had regular bowel movements. So, the
‘militia’ must have access to weapons suitable for use in emergencies. So,
their right to keep and bear arms was not to be infringed, as the State did’
not equip them. You need to read the articles in light of what they meant back then.

Randall Dunning

February 15th, 2010
8:02 pm

Hats back on gentlemen, the woman is stuck on stupid. What we need in the modern USA is a zero tolerance policy for anti-gun idiocy. Since when do we have to suffer such foolishness gladly?

Not surprised

February 15th, 2010
11:58 pm

To Lief Rakur: The issue can be danced around, but why avoid the “PLACED #2 IN THE FIRST TEN AMENDMENTS” – an Amendment limiting personal freedom and giving it to the State (militia) while the others check the power of the federal government? And why do you ignore the real of issue of those who whould tell others HOW, WHEN, WHERE, AND “IF” they can defend themselves? And finally unless you agree the the right of self-defense/preservation is an inherent, God-given instinct that pre-dates and supercedes any form of government then you support tyranny over liberty and common sense and fall into the “can’t change the mind of a fool” category. And maybe you should do a little more reading of the Founding Fathers’ statements so you can see the forest for the trees. I LOVE REPLIES/REBUTAL TO SELECTED POINTS WHILE PRACTICING SELECTED OMISSION/IGNORING OF OTHERS. Actions of a true liberal, academic or an attorney.

Not surprised

February 16th, 2010
12:35 am

Apolgies; failed to acknowledge your interpretion of the 2nd Amendment. It is written in plain English, AND “IS” BASED UPON THE PREVAILING THINKING at that time, and it would likely be safe to say, agreed upon by the majority of scholars who take an even wider view (historically) leading up to the Revolution. It means what it says – - – unless you are one of those of the mindset of “it depends upon the definition of ‘IS’”. And actually the whole issue is not really about the 2nd Amendment per se but of the common sense statements previously enumerated. Your view (unexplained) as to the placement of the 2nd Amendment as you interpret it flies in the face of any logic. Sorry, but you would have been on the side of the Tories, and I on the side of the Patriots and freedom. ‘Nuff said.

Not surprised

February 16th, 2010
12:39 am

correction: I know how to spell “interpretation”. It’s late.

Ron Southwick

February 16th, 2010
3:42 am

“Break a few eggs” – You are off the chart – I think your egg is broken. And the yoke – that yellow part – is showing all over your writing. Let’s get real. Deal with real problem, not toys. The teachers and administrators of schools that allow such antics to go on should be the ones suspended. Where is common sense? It doesn’t seem to be too common. Oh, and one more thing…enough with those fear mongers. From Deaf Ranger

Dg

February 16th, 2010
3:48 am

“A well-regulated militia”… If anyone here would bother to read the Federal Code – you’d know that YOU, ME, WE, The People ARE the militia. Between 18 and 45 – all able-body individuals are automatically members of it. Being “well-regulated” means that you have access to the tools necessary to do your job as a member of the militia. It’s up to US, The People, to ensure our freedom. WE, created the Government. WE, gave them certain enumerated powers. WE, did this through the Constitutions. WE, reserved all rights not specifically granted to the Government for ourselves.

We, use Guns to protect ourselves, our loved ones, and our Country against all enemies, foreign and domestic. Domestic enemies can take the form of the typical nitwit criminal, or the typical nitwit politician. That we have access to weapons means WE, The People get to ensure our reserved rights to Life, Liberty, and the pursuit of happiness at the point of a gun barrel if need be.

Children should be taught at as early an age as possible how to safely deal with weapons. When they’re old enough, they should be taught how to handle and use them. Kids that aren’t taught these valuable lessons end up harming themselves and others because the adults in their lives have failed to be responsible and have fallen victim to the shrill imbecile gun banners.

Gun bans only benefit despots and other criminals. Among others, look to what Hitler did to see the results of gun registration and banning.

NEVER AGAIN! I’m a Jew and the NRA. And yes, I do vote against all who fail to uphold our Constitutions. If you don’t want guns in your life, if you want to rely on someone else to protect you, fine that’s your choice. But don’t you dare presume to make any such choice for me, or my loved ones.

And leave children with fake guns at school alone. Especially 2″ long Lego plastic characters… the principal should be bitch slapped right out into the street then fired.

MrJake

February 16th, 2010
1:57 pm

The Supreme Court observed in U.S. v. Verdugo-Urquidez (1990) “`the people` seems to have been a term of art employed in select parts of the Constitution. The Preamble declares that the Constitution is ordained and established by `the People of the United States.` The Second Amendment protects `the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,` and the Ninth and Tenth Amendments provide that certain rights and powers are retained by and reserved to `the people.`”

The annual number of accidental gun deaths among children has declined 90% since 1975. Today, the odds against a child dying in a gun accident are a million to one. Seventy-eight times as many children die in accidents involving or due to motor vehicles, suffocation, drowning, fire, bicycles and falls. (National Center for Health Statistics)

Three out of four violent crimes committed in the U.S. do not involve firearms. Since 1991, the number of privately owned firearms in the U.S. has increased by 70-75 million, and the nation’s murder rate has decreased 43%. (BATFE and FBI)

Del,

About the .223 v. .308 You’re right, it does not do any good to shoot a firearm if you cannot connect the dots.

Thanks for the discussion. :)

MrJake

February 16th, 2010
2:01 pm

Police are under no legal obligation to provide protection for any individual. Courts have ruled the police have an obligation only to society as a whole. (Warren v. District of Columbia, 444 A.2d 1, 1981 )

The police do not have to legally protect you. What are you going to do? Reason with the intruder?

The crime rate in London is now higher than the crime rate in New York. Crimes with firearms have risen dramatically since the ban on handgun ownership was passed by Parliament. (”Gun law stalks Britain`s,” The Express, May 14, 2001)

The anti’s rhetoric continues…

MrJake

February 16th, 2010
2:05 pm

There is no evidence that anyone associated with drafting, debating, or ratifying the Second Amendment considered the right to arms anything other than a right of individual citizens. (Stephen Halbrook, That Every Man Be Armed, University of New Mexico Press, 1984, p. 83.)

So I guess I must ask the anti’s can you find any evidence that states the 2nd Amendment did not apply to individual citizens?

I’m sure they’re all in a vault somewhere, letters en masse.

Good luck…

Rick A Hyatt

February 16th, 2010
11:37 pm

For any trained martial artist, his greatest weapon is his mind.
Best leave that behind when going to school…

Rick A Hyatt

February 16th, 2010
11:44 pm

Doesn’t everyone enjoy the current political frenzy to pass pro-gun bills?
It’s because there’s a very good chance that the SCOTUS McDonald vs. the City of Chicago case may end up meaning that the States’ ability to regulate the Right To Keep And Bear Arms in any shape or form may be declared moot, completely.
Freedom restored to the People!
So I think most of these new-found pro-gun politicians just want to get credit in advance…

MrJake

February 17th, 2010
4:04 pm

Yes Rick,

It’s as if politicans create laws on which way the wind is blowing….I’d go even far enough to say they’re in it for themselves?

Whodathunk it?

Leadership is doing the right thing BEFORE you’re told to. I’m still worried about McDonald. More than likely it’ll rule that the states ca not infringe on the 2nd Amendment but SCOTUS will put in “reasonable” restrictions to which the states will have a field day, high capacity magazines, 1 gun/month purchase, 10 day waiting periods, assault rifles etc….

Clint

February 19th, 2010
5:04 pm

Rick and Mr Jake, you are both absolutely right. With all of the court cases about gun laws being un-Constitutional and the town hall meetings where politicians keep getting an earful of resentment, they are afraid of losing their jobs and they should be. The Representatives from my district of my State have done a somewhat decent job on alot of things, but I’m going to have to go ahead and vote for other people that are running. If we are going to get new blood elected into these offices, there can be no favoritism. If some need to go, they all need to go. There needs to be an example made. This is just the first step. And maybe, just maybe it will start to sink in that We are the voice and what We say is what will be the final descision. No more Pelosi, Ried, Feinstein, and the rest of their gang of bottom feeders.

john boggess

February 22nd, 2010
7:03 pm

Leif did a lot of research, but missed the point. Having the right to keep and bear arms is about the right to self defense. And in this day and age, the arms better be capable of more than one shot…

uzicarlo

February 27th, 2010
3:30 pm

I like the post where that guy and his kids go shooting once a month as a family outing. I’ve been doing something like that for a while now. Not once a month, but I think it will become once a month. My boys are getting ready now for our family outing at the range where $5.00 each gets us all day shooting. I like that. Inexpensive togetherness – no video games, no hanging out at the mall, no TV, no Ipods…you get the picture. Just constructive activity with dad. Stay well, all. God Bless America.

Sue

March 10th, 2010
2:59 pm

blogs.ajc.com, how do you do it?

Evangeline

March 10th, 2010
9:48 pm

And this is the reason I like blogs.ajc.com. Shocking post.

Margie

March 10th, 2010
9:52 pm

Great stuff. blogs.azjc.com deserves an oscar.

Saundra

March 11th, 2010
10:51 am

Jarrod

March 13th, 2010
10:25 am

This is why I like blogs.ajc.com. Love the post.

http://videotins.blogspot.com/2010/03/video-inroad.html

E D Stewart Jr

March 26th, 2010
10:20 am

Those of us who are sane must keep in mind that ALL liberals are mentally ill. On the back cover of his 2006 book, “The Liberal Mind”, Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr., MD ( professionally certified in both general and forensic psychiatry, with 40 years of professional practice) states clearly, “‘Modern liberalism’s irrationality can only be understood as the product of psychopathology. So extravagant are the patterns of thinking, emoting, behaving and relating that characterize the liberal mind that it’s relentless protests and demands become understandable only as disorders of the psyche.’ “The Liberal Mind” reveals the madness of the modern liberal for what it is: a massive transference neurosis acted out in the world’s political arenas, with devastating effects on the institutions of liberty.”