Comments on: The philosophical fraud of the ‘Thune amendment’

By: Greg Camp

Greg Camp — Tue, 27 Apr 2010 05:21:39 +0000

This article uses states rights to challenge the idea of national reciprocity for handgun carry permits, but perhaps we need to read the Bill of Rights again. The Tenth Amendment covers matters not dealt with by the first nine, to be sure, but the Second Amendment specifically deals with the right to keep and bear arms. That right was not left to the states; it was reserved for the people.

By: Walt

Walt — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 20:45:31 +0000

Really, if anyone is against this, why are you against driver’s license reciprocity? This would not violate that State’s rules and rights. It would simply say that since (for example) FL issues a permit to it’s citizen, NY, you must recognize that as a valid permit. That’s all. As for where to carry, that’s a different issue. You must follow local laws. You can try creating a whole bunch of banned zones, but that would be simply challenged as a ban on guns. Remember, these laws are not for the criminals who will break all other laws anyway. They like these restrictive laws because they know you are defenseless.

By: Random Nuclear Strikes » Point, but not yet match

Random Nuclear Strikes » Point, but not yet match — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 19:02:22 +0000

[...] and dripping-with-integrity GOP and Blue Dog Dems once again. Tomorrow at noon, we get the Thune Amendment–as in John Thune from South Dakota–which assaults both the federalism they cherish in [...]

By: Jacob

Jacob — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 13:02:42 +0000

I’m sorry, but your understanding of states rights and the constitution is a little skewed. Conservatives don’t claim that states rights allow them to to do things like declare war or legalize slavery because the constitution prohibits it. In the same way, the constitution requires every state to give full faith and credit to the acts of another. Otherwise drivers licenses from one state would be invalid in others. The right to bear arms and protect ones-self are among the most important and protected by the second amendment. They don’t end at state lines and neither should the ability to exercise them. It’s kind of funny that liberals don’t mind imposing federal laws that restrict gun rights on states but oppose imposing ones that protect them. Sounds like a double standard to me.

By: Haus - Indiana

Haus - Indiana — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 06:25:07 +0000

This issue is not as black and white as some on both sides have tried to make it. There are states rights issues, but there are also the constitutional rights of American citizens to be considered as well. As others have said, this is the same thing as a drivers license. Each state has different requirements for obtaining a drivers license, but your drivers license from your state is recognized by the state you are visiting. It is however, understood that you abide by the rules of the state you are currently in. I am a states rights guy, but this is not telling states what rules to have as far as licensing, it is simply saying that those from other states who have licenses should be recognized as well. Some may ask how a “states rights” guy would be so approving of the federal government telling the states what to do. The answer is quite simple. This issue is a constitutional issue. We have a constitutional right to “keep and bear arms.” The states must follow the constitution. Just because I live in Indiana and not Ohio doesn’t mean that my constitutional right to carry a weapon while in Ohio should be voided. This bill gives clarity and protection to law abiding American citizens.

By: Austin

Austin — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 04:37:34 +0000

The right of self defense does not end at a states border. Concealed pistol permit holders are not the problem guys.

By: TxDrifter

TxDrifter — Wed, 22 Jul 2009 00:57:21 +0000

If I had a penny for every time I’ve heard that “Wild West” reference.

In his book, Frontier Violence: Another Look, author W. Eugene Hollon, provides us with these astonishing facts:

* In Abilene, Ellsworth, Wichita, Dodge City, and Caldwell, for the years from 1870 to 1885, there were only 45 total homicides. This equates to a rate of approximately 1 murder per 100,000 residents per year.
* In Abilene, supposedly one of the wildest of the cow towns, not a single person was killed in 1869 or 1870.

Zooming forward over a century to 2007, a quick look at Uniform Crime Report statistics shows us the following regarding the aforementioned gun control “paradise” cities of the east:

* DC – 183 Murders (31 per 100,000 residents)
* New York – 494 Murders (6 per 100,000 residents)
* Baltimore – 281 Murders (45 per 100,000 residents)
* Newark – 104 Murders (37 per 100,000 residents)

It doesn’t take an advanced degree in statistics to see that a return to “wild west” levels of violent crime would be a huge improvement for the residents of these cities.

The truth of the matter is that the “wild west” wasn’t wild at all … not compared to a Saturday night in Newark.

Referenced from here: http://www.examiner.com/x-3253-Minneapolis-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m2d17-Dispelling-the-myth-of-The-Wild-West

By: The decider

The decider — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 21:30:47 +0000

“However if you average 180 out over the span of 14 years (the document sites examples from 1996 to 2009) you get an average of 2. 2 Licensees out of all the CCW licensee population kill somebody each year.”

Just needed to note I made a mistake on the math. Its actually an average of 13 incidents each year.

By: The decider

The decider — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 21:07:11 +0000

If I have a driver’s license issued in California does that mean I have to get another one to drive in Arizona? And are the driving and written tests of all 50 states identical? Do all 50 states even have a written test? Even though my license was issued in California, I am inclined to believe that I have the right to drive throughout the country.

Why should the rules applied to carry conceal licenses be any different? it’s you “lib’ral folk” that have narrow justifications. You use shallow reasoning, a lack of statistics, and loophole logic to deny rights of gun owners.

For example, on bradycampaign.org there is a pdf document that lists about 180 incidents where a CCW licensee committed a gun crime over the span of 14 years. However if you average 180 out over the span of 14 years (the document sites examples from 1996 to 2009) you get an average of 2. 2 Licensees out of all the CCW licensee population kill somebody each year.

Compare that to 41,611 deaths in traffic related incidents in 1999 (ntsb.gov)

Compare that to abortion statistics where in 1996 1.37 million babies are killed each year (abortionno.org).

if you look at gun related deaths in general, the Center of Disease Control recorded about 30,000 firearm related deaths in 2006 (table 18). The suicide to homicide ratio was 5:4

Homicide and suicide is ranked 15th in leading causes of death and superceded by heart disease, stroke, chronic lower respiratory diseases, car accidents, and diabetes as well as 9 other causes of death that can be found in the center of disease control mortality report.

But I know none of you dumbasses knew any of this. None of you guys nor these politicians bother to do research which is widely available over the internet. Instead you jump to conclusions charged by emotion through personal experience as if that should be the deciding factor on policy.

Give me a break. I don’t have a CCW license, but I can definitely see a right being infringed. Nowhere in the second amendment or in any other federal document does it say that our right to bear arms and protect ourselves in self defense be limited to our home states only.

By: Bud Wiser

Bud Wiser — Tue, 21 Jul 2009 20:25:58 +0000

TG, you are right about the Soviets, and us aiding the Afghans.

DB, well, you’re just off in your little 94%er world, as usual.

Come back when you grow a brain.