Second Amendment is not license for treason, armed revolt

According to some, the primary purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure that citizens have enough firepower to overthrow the federal government, should it become necessary to do so. If the government ever loses its fear of such a revolt, the theory goes, our liberty ends and tyranny begins.

Let me be blunt: That is mythological claptrap. But like a lot of mythological claptrap, it can push weak-minded people — the Timothy McVeighs of the world — to do stupid and dangerous things.

It is certainly true that when the Second Amendment was drafted back in the 18th century, it was plausible to believe that an armed citizenry could be a check on overweening government power. Back then, there wasn’t much difference in the weapons available to private citizens and the weapons available to the military. It could have been, and sometimes was, a more or less even fight.

Today, that is no longer the case, and it hasn’t been the case for a century or longer. Around the world, governments have access to a range of weaponry that private citizens have no hope of matching or withstanding. There is simply no comparison between the brute, deadly force that a government can wield and that wielded by private citizens, individually or collectively. Technology has rendered that aspect of the Second Amendment a dead letter.

If you want to rejuvate that aspect of the Second Amendment, you have to be willing to grant private citizens access to fully automatic weapons, Stinger anti-aircraft missiles, grenade launchers, etc. And it’s not going to happen.

That’s not just my opinion. It is also the opinion of the U.S. Supreme Court, as expressed by one of its most conservative members, Justice Antonin Scalia, in the most important Second Amendment opinion the court ever issued.

In District of Columbia v. Heller, issued in 2008, Scalia and the court made it clear for the first time that the Second Amendment “protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia.” But in that same opinion, Scalia brushed aside claims that the Second Amendment guarantees citizens the means to armed revolution. He concluded that technology has rendered that part of the amendment an archaic artifact, because “a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large” and that “no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks.”

For that reason, Scalia made it clear that the Second Amendment “does not protect those weapons not typically possessed by law-abiding citizens for lawful purposes,” and that the government is fully within its rights to ban military-style weaponry.

In Iraq, for example, gun ownership is extremely widespread, with many if not most households owning fully automatic weapons that would be banned in this country. Yet Saddam Hussein had little trouble imposing and maintaining a brutal dictatorship in that country for decades. He did not confiscate guns, because he understood that such guns posed no real threat to his tyranny.

And as Joshua Keating notes at ForeignPolicy.com, look at Tunisia and Egypt, where private gun ownership is very low but citizens have nonetheless managed to overthrow brutal military dictatorships. If government now has a massive advantage in terms of brute force, innovations such as Twitter, Facebook, cellphones and satellite TV have more than offset it in the cause of freedom.

Guns don’t overthrow tyranny or guarantee liberty. People do.

– Jay Bookman

1,326 comments Add your comment

Keep Up the Good Fight!

January 17th, 2013
8:15 am

But but but Wolverine!

Aquagirl

January 17th, 2013
8:16 am

Oh geez Jay’s done it now. Tricorn tinfoil hat parade in 3…2…1….

Granny Godzilla

January 17th, 2013
8:20 am

This will make some crazies sooooo unhappy.

Whatever will they do with their basements full of prepper gear?

.
.
.
.
Do they all have to have chin mullets?

Keep Up the Good Fight!

January 17th, 2013
8:21 am

The Tyranny crowd believes that at some point they are “justified” in killing law enforcement, govt officials and civilians. But they never tell us what the “test” is to determine when they have this “second amendment remedy”. Was it tyranny when civil rights were denied in the south by state governments (and where were they they)? Was it tyranny when Japanese Americans were sent to internment camps (and where were these “freedom fighters”? Could McVeigh have asserted a viable defense that the tyranny crowd would support by claiming that he determined he saw tyranny and he took action as is his “second amendment” remedy right?

Come on cons….tell us when does this right arise in clear and uncertain terms.

Paul

January 17th, 2013
8:22 am

Comment on the lead: cogent, accurate, expressed so any reasonable person can understand it.

Prediction on the responses: we’re going to see a new record diversion and for denial unsupported by fact.

It will be entertaining.

Unless…. some of our most vocal bloggers will will be strangely scarce today?

TaxPayer

January 17th, 2013
8:24 am

But… but… the War of Northern Aggression.

independent thinker

January 17th, 2013
8:25 am

“a well regulated militia being necessary for the security of a free state” – prerequisite to gun rights or claptrap nonsense per the NRA and Antonin Scalia?? How was Nancy Lanza’s possession of a small arsenal necessary for the security of the citizens of her state? Oh I forgot according to Beck and the NRA she was a check on Obama and Biden’s tyrrany. That’s why we have a toothless ATF while the NRA openly promotes trafficking in illegal gun sales.

godless heathen

January 17th, 2013
8:27 am

dead-threaded again. Jay should give us a 2-minute warning. From below:

I watched the “Hooker” video. Typical of conspiracy minded folks they latch onto inconsistencies in media reports as evidence of some sinister acts. That said I do look forward to reading a full accounting of the day’s events so some questions can be answered.

such as:

Was the father of a slain little girl really laughing at the presser on the day after his daughter was murdered?

Who was the poor guy that got drug out of the woods, placed in handcuffs and placed in the front seat of a police car? I always figured it was hunter that was in the wrong place at the wrong time. I’d like to hear his story.

Why was the medical examiner so giddy during his presser? Was he on drugs, or is he just a goofy f**k?

Aquagirl

January 17th, 2013
8:28 am

Unless…. some of our most vocal bloggers will will be strangely scarce today?

That would be a shame, I’d love to see them argue Scalia is a leftist-marxist trying to enslave ‘Merica.

JohnnyReb

January 17th, 2013
8:29 am

“Second Amendment is not license for treason, armed revolt”

Corrrect

And, it’s not doing anything to stop the Obama tyranny either.

Guns are not the problem.

As usual and most always, its the people allowing the politicans to lead them around by the nose while they strip their liberties.

Thomas

January 17th, 2013
8:30 am

Today, that is no longer the case, and it hasn’t been the case for a century or longer.

Did I miss the hookah pipe this morning? Did “we” win Afghanistan? Have “we” won the war on terror? Are we protecting our embassies? Do you really think some “private citizens” are not obtaining or do not have some type of nuclear device? Do you really think the rest of the world lives in fear and trepidation of their particular gov’t because of its weapons arsenal or because of the govt’s encroachment on personal liberty?

And no- I am not a gun nut. One hand me down 12 gauge from my father that I do not know how to load.

Bookman- you should write about the connection between prescription drugs and mass US killings-

Cherokee

January 17th, 2013
8:30 am

and right on cue….

Gale

January 17th, 2013
8:31 am

Aw Jay. Your last line brought tears to my eyes. Jeez, I have been so frustrated by the last couple days of comments. I wonder that the planet has not been tipped from its axis from all the knee jerks. Your early paragraphs made me think of Egypt and Syria, where rebellion has been bloody and fierce, with many, many noncombatants killed. Do the knee jerkers really want to see that here?

The Truth

January 17th, 2013
8:31 am

George J Westfall

January 17th, 2013
8:33 am

“Today, that is no longer the case, and it hasn’t been the case for a century or longer. Around the world, governments have access to a range of weaponry that private citizens have no hope of matching or withstanding. There is simply no comparison between the brute, deadly force that a government can wield and that wielded by private citizens, individually or collectively. Technology has rendered that aspect of the Second Amendment a dead letter.”

If your statement were true, the war in Afghanistan would have been over by now.

Gale

January 17th, 2013
8:35 am

JohnnyReb makes a good point about people being led by politicians being the problem. An informed electorate is a better tool to protect liberty.

TaxPayer

January 17th, 2013
8:35 am

As usual and most always, its the people allowing the politicans to lead them around by the nose while they strip their liberties.

You should disavow any knowledge of Bush before making such statements.

Cherokee

January 17th, 2013
8:36 am

And when the US becomes in any way like Afghanistan, that might be relevant.

JohnnyReb

January 17th, 2013
8:36 am

Have you invested yet in medical brown shirt manufacturing?

David Neckolaishen

January 17th, 2013
8:36 am

I support the NRA!!

Keep Up the Good Fight!

January 17th, 2013
8:36 am

JB: And, it’s not doing anything to stop the Obama tyranny either.

So JB, now be brave and let’s follow your statement to its conclusion. You claim that Obama is committing tyranny. Can someone now constitutionally, based on your determination of tyranny, pick up a gun, claim their “second amendment remedy” right and start killing law enforcement or government officials.

YOU have stated THERE IS TYRANNY NOW. Are you claiming YOU have a 2d Amendment remedy NOW? If so, what is YOUR reason for not “acting”?

Jed Eckardt

January 17th, 2013
8:36 am

And the presidency is not a license to sign away constitutional rights, either, Bookman. But whatever. Tell that to the folks in Germany when Hitler came to power. Their guns were taken and they had no way to fight back. Six million Jews murdered because they had no way to defend themselves. Gun confiscation under Stalin……millions died with no way to fight back. Oh, but that won’t happen in America, right Bookman? Right?

Keep Up the Good Fight!

January 17th, 2013
8:36 am

Correction: JohnnyReb not JB. My mistake

Granny Godzilla

January 17th, 2013
8:37 am

Liberty Strippers??

Do they dance on a flag pole?

godless heathen

January 17th, 2013
8:37 am

In District of Columbia v. Heller, issued in 2008, Scalia and the court made it clear for the first time that the Second Amendment “protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia.”

Good enough for me. Good day.

stands for decibels

January 17th, 2013
8:38 am

This commentary on the actual reasons behind the 2nd Amendment (that it was basically a wet, sloppy BJ to slave owners) seemed to upset the tender feefees of our Towncrier yesterday. Since it’s on-topic, I’ll repost.

http://truth-out.org/news/item/13890-the-second-amendment-was-ratified-to-preserve-slavery?tmpl=component&print=1

In the beginning, there were the militias. In the South, they were also called the “slave patrols,” and they were regulated by the states.

In Georgia, for example, a generation before the American Revolution, laws were passed in 1755 and 1757 that required all plantation owners or their male white employees to be members of the Georgia Militia, and for those armed militia members to make monthly inspections of the quarters of all slaves in the state. The law defined which counties had which armed militias and even required armed militia members to keep a keen eye out for slaves who may be planning uprisings.

[...]

By the time the Constitution was ratified, hundreds of substantial slave uprisings had occurred across the South. Blacks outnumbered whites in large areas, and the state militias were used to both prevent and to put down slave uprisings. [...]

These two possibilities worried southerners like James Monroe, George Mason (who owned over 300 slaves) and the southern Christian evangelical, Patrick Henry (who opposed slavery on principle, but also opposed freeing slaves).

Own your history, 2nd Amendment fans.

(I’ll go right on thinking it was a cowardly, poorly written-by-committee PoS from the get-go. We’re stuck with it, but that doesn’t mean that we have to be chained to it by those who have a romantic notion of what it was really all about.)

Steve-USA (I don't have all the answer's, I don't even know all the questions)

January 17th, 2013
8:38 am

I agree with the Jay’s article. I do enjoy though how the Supreme Court is either geniuses or political hacks depending upon if their decision backs ones opinion or not.

TaxPayer

January 17th, 2013
8:38 am

The cons are now Afghan patriots. :lol:

Keep Up the Good Fight!

January 17th, 2013
8:39 am

Jed, Hitler actually gave more gun rights…but you don’t deal in reality do you?

Aquagirl

January 17th, 2013
8:39 am

That said I do look forward to reading a full accounting of the day’s events so some questions can be answered.

Heathen, if a father of a murdered child acts in a way you consider “abnormal” that’s simply not your business. Unless your kid has been blown away by a crazy you don’t know what you’d do. You and every other random d00d have snap-formed opinions and prurient curiosity, so what? The world doesn’t revolve around them.

This Hooker conspiracy—like others—is simply an example of a-holes with University of Google degrees thinking they know everything about everything.

Cherokee

January 17th, 2013
8:39 am

Sorry Jed. Wrong.

http://www.salon.com/2013/01/11/stop_talking_about_hitler/

The law Hitler signed in 1938 actually made guns more accessible, not less.

stands for decibels

January 17th, 2013
8:40 am

Tell that to the folks in Germany when Hitler came to power.

More guns would’ve meant the targeted minorities could’ve been dispatched even more quickly by Kraut freelancers, likely as not.

JamVet

January 17th, 2013
8:41 am

Obama tyranny…

First moronic phrase of the day from the blog’s paranoid fringe.

This is not going to turn out well for the new age rebels traitors.

Just ask the surviving government/America haters at Ruby Ridge…

Gale

January 17th, 2013
8:42 am

The war in Afghanistan cannot be won because the people are not interested in a central government, not their own or anyone else’s.

Ken

January 17th, 2013
8:42 am

I think that Mr. Bookman’s next to last paragraph said that the Arab spring once again proved that the pen is mightier than the sword.

Jay

January 17th, 2013
8:43 am

Afghanistan? Yes, let’s talk Afghanistan.

With all the guns in private hands there, how “free” are its people?

How was freedom and liberty faring under the Taliban dictatorship before we arrived? Did all those guns allow the Afghans to employ “Second Amendment remedies” and overthrow the viciously repressive Taliban? No, not even close. The Taliban had a death grip on most of the country.

So yes, let’s throw Afghanistan into the argument.

Granny Godzilla

January 17th, 2013
8:43 am

Wait….based on the info Jay provided….Antonin Scalia is a Liberty Stripper?

Ba da bing!

Simple Truths

January 17th, 2013
8:43 am

Claptrap!
Skewed polls!!

Ok, just wanted to get that out of the way.

JamVet

January 17th, 2013
8:43 am

Six million Jews murdered because they had no way to defend themselves.

Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid.

Matt Eckardt

January 17th, 2013
8:43 am

What wisdom, Bookman…..I guess that’s why no revoloution ever succeeded during the 20th century, right? Nothing happened in Russia, Cuba, China…….because the rebels didn’t have access to the right weapons, right Bookman? Yeah, the governments won all those battles, right? To borrow a phrase of yours…..Mythological claptrap.

Brendan O'Brien

January 17th, 2013
8:44 am

A whole low of selective history here. Also a low of misunderstanding about the second amendment. The gun ownership is a private, individual balance of the people who give the government consent to rule. You characterize that balance of power as if it is about troops lining up on a field against private gun owners all at once. Crazy and unjustified characterization, small arms on an individual level were used both in this country and others to protect against government forces and prevent greater atrocity. You use Iraq as an example of where gun ownership failed to prevent a dictatorship, just because some citizens have guns doesn’t mean that all of them do. For example gun ownership was very low in this country among blacks, native americans and Japanese, all groups we have oppressed and murdered at the hands of government firearms. Yes, whites had guns but that doesn’t mean they were in the right hands needed to prevent oppression. German had firearms during Nazi rule but firearms were explicitly confiscated from Jews, so the only people who had guns were the German who SUPPORTED the Nazis. Just like in Iraq, there is NOW widespread gun ownership, but back when Sadaam was committing genocide was unlikely as widespread as it is now among the Kurish people, And lastly the weakest argument possible is to say, well if a tyrannical government was to commit genocide on our own people we would do very little to stop them so we should disarm even more. If anything the fact that the people of this country couldn’t stop a systematic genocide if it came to that, is an argument for better arming and better balancing the power against the people so that the government will only rule when it has the consent of the people. Weak article.

Marco112

January 17th, 2013
8:44 am

Would all the brave gun control people please put signs in their yards declaring their homes to be a gun free zone?Would that ensure the criminal element would respect your decision and never do violent crimes again?

Don Abernethy

January 17th, 2013
8:45 am

Why is Hollywood and the violent films and video games not mentioned in the wonderful 24 steps?? Could it be that Hollywood owns the White House??

Get me Rex Kramer

January 17th, 2013
8:46 am

I agree with you 100%. However, much of the NRA strategy is that giving in at all will only lead those who want to outlaw all guns to be further embolden. Their commercial speaking of Obama’s children having armed security was completely out of line, but I do understand their ultimate goal.

JohnnyReb

January 17th, 2013
8:47 am

Good Fight – apparently you do not think Obama’s 19, 23 or ever how many executive orders are tyranny.

It’s a big jump from personal liberty and 2nd rights to attacking people. Everyone I know looks at this debate from a defensive posture, not offense.

Granny Godzilla

January 17th, 2013
8:47 am

Marco112

January 17th, 2013
8:44 am

Would all the brave gun control people please put signs in their yards declaring their homes to be a gun free zone?Would that ensure the criminal element would respect your decision and never do violent crimes again?
.
.
.
Sure, right after you post notice of the arsenal in your basement.

JamVet

January 17th, 2013
8:47 am

Could it be that Hollywood owns the White House??

If they do it is in part because you immoral minority hypocrites cannot give them your money fast enough…

Arnold Pierson

January 17th, 2013
8:48 am

If government weapons are so overmatched for citizens with guns, then why are we having such a tough time winning the war on terror? Our billions of dollars spent on weapons can hardly keep up with armed children and IEDs.

You are wrong.

stands for decibels

January 17th, 2013
8:48 am

Would all the brave gun control people please put signs in their yards declaring their homes to be a gun free zone?

we’ve cycled back to THIS ancient gun-nut trope, have we?

Just earlier this week I was being told by the gun-nuts here that we couldn’t collect information about gun owners because those private homes might be targeted by gun theives.

Which is it, Marco? Try to get your story straight, won’t you?

Dennis Wayne

January 17th, 2013
8:48 am

This is nothing more than unAmerican propaganda brought to you by one of our Zionist enemies.

Thomas

January 17th, 2013
8:48 am

I guess, George, the US and Russia didn’t win the war in Afghanistan because they didn’t want to win. Further, it is not relevant to point out that the worlds greatest gov’t military cannot win a war against a third world country.

Love to hear that one from an NFL coach on Monday morning.

Anyway- normal extremist view. You shouldn’t arm yourself because it will not help against the incredible force of a gov’t. Never in the history of mankind has a gov’t tried to do anything with force against its people so there is no reason to arm yourself.

If it weren’t so sad it would be funny. Anyway- highest and best use of liberal is for them to blog each other all day v. creating value. Have a great one!

independent thinker

January 17th, 2013
8:48 am

Good ole Gawgia – haven for gun traffickers:

“”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”A fresh analysis of data for crime guns recovered by police and traced back to the dealer that sold the gun provides additional evidence showing that strong gun laws help to curb the supply of guns to the illegal market. The ATF data, available on its website, provide information on the source states of U.S. crime guns by state. The data show that states with weak gun laws have a crime gun export rate nine times higher than states with strong gun laws.

The Brady Center analyzed the data to identify patterns in the movements of crime guns across the United States, including which states have the highest rates of crime guns moving across state borders, known as the crime gun export rate (per 100,000 population).

Texas, Georgia, Ohio, Louisiana, South Carolina, Tennessee, Indiana, Mississippi, Wisconsin, Kentucky, and West Virginia are among the 31 states that together export crime guns at a rate nine times higher than states with strong gun laws.”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”"”
Georgia scored 8 out of 100 on controlling gun trafficking.
http://www.bradycampaign.org/media/press/view/14

Cherokee

January 17th, 2013
8:49 am

So, Brendan, when you use your ’small arms on an individual level … to protect against government forces’
like the local police force. or the National Guard, let us know how that works out for you.

Jay

January 17th, 2013
8:49 am

“Why is Hollywood and the violent films and video games not mentioned in the wonderful 24 steps?? Could it be that Hollywood owns the White House??”

Maybe because it WAS mentioned. As one of the executive actions, Obama committed to studies by the CDC into any possible linkage between video games/violent media and acts of violence.

Granny Godzilla

January 17th, 2013
8:49 am

Don Abernethy

January 17th, 2013
8:45 am

Why is Hollywood and the violent films and video games not mentioned in the wonderful 24 steps?? Could it be that Hollywood owns the White House??

see # 14

Christian Conservative

January 17th, 2013
8:49 am

LOL….. What exactly is the point of an assault ban Jay? Why do you and your dem friends want to take guns from people?

Jerome Horwitz

January 17th, 2013
8:49 am

We in the US have an option not available to most of the world. It’s called a VOTE. That’s your protection against tyranny. Not an AR-15.

Jed Eckardt

January 17th, 2013
8:50 am

Typical liberal crap articles, and I believe them abut as much as you Commies believe Fox news.

BW

January 17th, 2013
8:50 am

Thank you for publishing this Jay! My goodness are some of you people insane? There will never again be the conditions that were in 1776….stop pretending that you wouldn’t be crushed in an armed rebellion…and something tells me that such people wouldn’t just turn on the feds….I get the distinct feeling that some “qualms” with certain civilians would be settled as well

petrica

January 17th, 2013
8:50 am

do you suggest that US government is prepared to use say the A-bomb on it’s people?
A US top politician is still vulnerable to a bullet , and will be, despite any advances in gun technology.

indigo

January 17th, 2013
8:50 am

It’s no accident that many believe the second ammendment exists to ensure citizens have enough firepower to protect themselves against the Government.

The NRA, offical mouthpiece of gun manufacturers, has been skillfully brainwashing simple Americans to actually believe this. The real purpose, of course, is to keep gun sales booming and generous profits continuing for their Business clients.

Unfortunately, there is no cure for simple mindness. So the brainwashing and propaganda will continue and gun sales will continue and there will be all smiles in the corporate boardrooms.

Banderson

January 17th, 2013
8:50 am

@Marco112 – Why don’t the gun owners just put signs in their yards? The gun owners seem to get very mad when any newspaper publishes their names and addresses. Since they’re so safe with their guns, what’s the big deal?

Tom

January 17th, 2013
8:50 am

Depite your arguements you have forgotten the history of the world and how ALL great civilizations came to fall and of course how they came to power.
Indeed our forefathers could not have anticipated today’s weaponry but my arguement is they didn’t have to. What they did understand was man & mankind and how unchecked despots are created. NO one argues we shold have parity with military weapons but there needs to be a “chance” should the unthinkable ever happen. Again history is replete and even today throughout the world does not support your claim. I too wish I could live in the land of Disney but reality smacks me back to earth.

joe

January 17th, 2013
8:50 am

The African nations that have experienced revolution also had advanced weaponry, and look what happened there.

Keep Up the Good Fight!

January 17th, 2013
8:50 am

JohnnyReb, you assert again that there is tyranny being “imposed” on YOU. So now how are YOU going to “defend” under your so-called 2d amendment remedies? Are you saying that your right ONLY arises when law enforcement comes to your house? Here is your chance to clear explain to us all since you have made a determination that there is current tyranny, what the constitution permits YOU and others like YOU to do.

Finn McCool (The System isn't Broken; It's Fixed)

January 17th, 2013
8:51 am

Woohoo, I’m giving my kid land mines and grenade launchers for his birthday!

JamVet

January 17th, 2013
8:51 am

Good Fight – apparently you do not think Obama’s 19, 23 or ever how many executive orders are tyranny.

Stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid, stupid.

President Number of Executive Orders

Ronald Reagan 381
George Bush 166
William J. Clinton 364
George W. Bush 291
Barack Obama 144

Greg

January 17th, 2013
8:51 am

You might want to open up a browser and check some news sources and look for stories about what is happening in the Middle East. Armed citizens all over the Arab world are taking on corrupt governments.

Butch Cassidy (I)

January 17th, 2013
8:51 am

Jed Eckardt – “Their guns were taken and they had no way to fight back”

By all means Jed, please share with the rest of us who these people were that came to your home and demanded that you turn over your fire arms. I’m sure we’d all like to know what to look for should they come to our homes next.

Hank

January 17th, 2013
8:52 am

This is one opinion and only one. If you do not choose to have weapons of any kind that is YOUR choice but not MINE. If any one reading this crap believes that by outlawing guns killings will just disappear then you have your head in th sand. America does not need ANY more laws. Gun control has never worked and will not work in the future..get that thru your thick skulls. You can call The NRA all the names you want but the truth is still the truth. If someone wants you dead…you’re dead either by a gun, kinfe, baseball bat, or by a homemade bomb. I garentee you this…take away every gun in America and you will see the bombing attacks that they have in the Middle East and Europe.

Jtyler

January 17th, 2013
8:52 am

“Guns are an important element in any truly free society, for a society that does not trust its citizens with individually owned weapons really does not trust its citizens.” And to Cite Salon.com is ridiculous to say the least if your trying to base your argument from unbiased sources.

Paul

January 17th, 2013
8:53 am

“I support the NRA!!”

Is this the 2013 equivalent of “WOLVERINES!” ?

It was just remade, after all -

mm

January 17th, 2013
8:53 am

As usual, this only comes up when a Democrat is in the WH.

JohnnyReb

January 17th, 2013
8:53 am

“Maybe because it WAS mentioned. As one of the executive actions, Obama committed to studies by the CDC into any possible linkage between video games/violent media and acts of violence.”

Mighty weak Jay, mighty weak. Obama should have called them out specifically and you know it. But no, the hypocrite dances to their and unions strings.

stands for decibels

January 17th, 2013
8:53 am

What exactly is the point of an assault ban Jay? Why do you and your dem friends want to take guns from people?

Placing a ban on future purchases is not “taking guns from people.”

The moment we put in place something as was done in Australia, where they (wisely) implemented a buy-back program that took a boatload of arms out of circulation, you will be able to post what you posted without being a liar.

Given that you know that what you post is a lie, well, I’m not supposed to call names. But you know what you are.

tom

January 17th, 2013
8:54 am

to Jay Bookman ever hear of a place called Viet Nam,10 years,60,000 dead,tanks,b-52s,endgame?
they did not beat the army,but they did force us to leave.
Read your history.

A Smith

January 17th, 2013
8:55 am

This article is simply wrong. It also shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the 2nd Amendment, not to mention that small arms have been historically effective against superior forces. Furthermore, the current restrictions on arms are, in fact, in violation of the 2nd amendment already; the government has already way overstepped its bounds.

Jm

January 17th, 2013
8:55 am

“Today, that is no longer the case, and it hasn’t been the case for a century or longer. Around the world, governments have access to a range of weaponry that private citizens have no hope of matching or withstanding. ”

good argument for military downsizing

petrica

January 17th, 2013
8:55 am

“As one of the executive actions, Obama committed to studies by the CDC into any possible linkage between video games/violent media and acts of violence.”

” ‘Creep in,’ said the witch, ‘and see if it is properly heated, so that we can put the bread in.’ And once Gretel was inside, she intended to shut the oven and let her bake in it, and then she would eat her, too. But Gretel saw what she had in mind, and said: ‘I do not know how I am to do it; how do I get in?’ ‘Silly goose,’ said the old woman. ‘The door is big enough; just look, I can get in myself!’ and she crept up and thrust her head into the oven. Then Gretel gave her a push that drove her far into it, and shut the iron door, and fastened the bolt. Oh! then she began to howl quite horribly, but Gretel ran away and the godless witch was miserably burnt to death. ”

This is not from a video game or from a Hollywood movie.

Nobama

January 17th, 2013
8:56 am

Let me be blunt : Bite me Jay

TaxPayer

January 17th, 2013
8:56 am

Scalia says you cons have the right to one musket per the constitution. You have to make your own musket balls though. And gunpowder.

Welcome to the Occupation

January 17th, 2013
8:56 am

JohnnyReb’s right. Well, partially right anyway.

“As usual and most always, its the people allowing the politicans to lead them around by the nose while they strip their liberties.”

This is right as long as we remember that it is primarily their economic liberties that the people allow to be deprived of them, not some vague amorphous set of liberties. And it is not entirely the politicians who are the authors of the deception either, but the class interests they represent in the most servile way.

Cherokee

January 17th, 2013
8:56 am

Good response Jed – don’t let facts get in your way. Kinda proved Keep’s point, didn’t ya…

Jed Eckardt

January 17th, 2013
8:56 am

A vote? Are you kidding me? As much voter fraud that has been perpetrated since 2000, and you talk about a vote? BWAHAHAHAHAHA!

stands for decibels

January 17th, 2013
8:56 am

Obama should have called them out specifically and you know it.

J-Reb:

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/16/transcript-obama-remarks-on-gun-violence/

And while year after year, those who oppose even modest gun safety measures have threatened to de-fund scientific or medical research into the causes of gun violence, I will direct the Centers for Disease Control to go ahead and study the best ways to reduce it. And Congress should fund research into the effects that violent video games have on young minds.

We don’t benefit from ignorance. We don’t benefit from not knowing the science of this epidemic of violence.

How much more specific would you like the President to be? How much time was he supposed to spend on *your* pet peeve? Please enlighten us.

Citizen

January 17th, 2013
8:57 am

>Guns don’t overthrow tyranny or guarantee liberty. People do.
>– Jay Bookman

Guns don’t kill people. People kill people.
-Citizen

kawasaki kid

January 17th, 2013
8:57 am

Jay, you’ve just let the cat out of the bag. Gun manufacturers want everyone to believe they must arm themselves against criminals, race riots, and the government. More sales = more profit, and scaring simple-minded folks is incredibly easy to do.

Nobama

January 17th, 2013
8:57 am

Let me be blunt : Jay – Bite Me

Banner123

January 17th, 2013
8:57 am

Jay, couple of comments and disagreements with your argument.
What is your source that Iraqis citizens had were armed during Saddam’s rule. I agree after his downfall that they pillaged the Iraqi army weapons depots and got their weapons. But during Saddam’s rule, I don’t think so.

I have heard the argument you cannot stand up to the government because of the fire power and people give examples of what happened to the Branch Davidians as proof. While I agree several dozen couldn’t stand up to them. I highly doubt if 1 Million or so people marched on Washington with their guns to state we need a change that the government could do much about that. I really doubt if it came to that, the Army, Police and other LEO’s would really try to stop them or be able to. That is what the 2nd amendment is for is for.

Whatever

January 17th, 2013
8:58 am

Jay,

My argument isn’t guns so I can go shoot somebody. My argument is that ultimately, over time, our rights keep us free and the founding fathers knew that an armed populace was an important part of that. I believe it is still as an important part of that as free speech.

Many people want to rewrite the Constitution because times have changed. That is dangerous because the 2nd Amendment will just be the first to fall. What happens when speech that is accepted today is determined to be dangerous next year? Will we let it be stripped away? According to this logic many would say yes.

Enjoy your conversation. I’m off to work.

Aquagirl

January 17th, 2013
8:58 am

Armed citizens all over the Arab world are taking on corrupt governments.

Why yes, they are. And without outside help they generally get their @$$es kicked.

Despite the con worship of the rugged ‘Merican patriot, if the French hadn’t intervened we’d still be loading crumpets into the boots of our cars.

GT

January 17th, 2013
8:59 am

Since the fall of communism the treat of a foreign invasion has withered. This tool used by such luminaries as Richard Nixon to trump a more logical opponent in campaigns has left a dark hole in the resources of the right. These homespun politicians use fear and religion as their vehicles to power.

The total impact of 9/11 was weak compared to one day in the lives of London under the night bombing of Hitler, yet it saved Bush’s second term. It is an act that never happen before Bush or after, unlike nightly bombings by the Germans. And it hasn’t been stopped by any weapon hidden under someone’s bed in this country. The largest damage this event allowed was eight years of decay to our economy while we chased ghost is the sands of a desert. I dare say because of the gun lobby we have more to fear on this side of the ocean with the home made nut than the imported ones from across the ocean.

Granny Godzilla

January 17th, 2013
8:59 am

Welcome to the Occupation

January 17th, 2013
8:59 am

Nobama: “Let me be blunt : Bite me Jay”

Probably one of the better indicators you could look for that the argument has cleanly hit its intended target.

JohnnyReb

January 17th, 2013
8:59 am

stands – if Obama had addressed all my pet peeves with the Left, it would have been a mini-series.

bubba

January 17th, 2013
9:00 am

Jay, do you actually read the opinion or do you make this stuff up as you go along? I bet that you didnt bother to read the opinion, and instead, got it from someone else. Before you spout off, please learn the difference between a Court’s HOLDING and DICTA. One has the force of law and one does not.

Christian Conservative

January 17th, 2013
9:00 am

BW

Thank you for publishing this Jay! My goodness are some of you people insane? There will never again be the conditions that were in 1776….stop pretending that you wouldn’t be crushed in an armed rebellion…and something tells me that such people wouldn’t just turn on the feds….I get the distinct feeling that some “qualms” with certain civilians would be settled as well

What you fruits on the left must realize is that sooner or later this country will be broke. And when we are broke entitlements will abruptly end. And what happened in Greece will be a hundred times over here because of the enormous population of slackers that the gubmint already props up. You’ll certainly need a gun then so when the leeches start breaking down you door to get your stuff don’t come a running to us gun owners to protect you…..

Jay

January 17th, 2013
9:00 am

I think the example of James Yeager of Tennessee is all too typical. A couple of weeks ago, the self-styled tactical gun expert posted a Youtube video in which he volunteered to fire the first shot in the looming civil war and bragged in no uncertain terms that “if this goes one inch further I’m going to start killing people.” (profanity-filled video available at http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2013/01/10/unhinged-tactical-response-ceo-threatens-to-start-killing-people-over-obamas-gun-control/)

The state of Tennessee then yanked his concealed carry permit, which is considerably more than one inch further, and the brave Mr. Yeager suddenly turned meek and mild and all apologetic. See _embedded&v=wD5kuOMIVts

Giving nuts like this encouragement to think of themselves as our first-line bastion against tyranny is dangerous and foolhardy.

Gale

January 17th, 2013
9:00 am

Video games do not cause violent behavior in society. That is a complete red herring. Do you have any idea of how many thousands of people play “shooter” games? I think the CDC already did a study on this. The problem is a macho culture that leads some *men* to think they are more manly with a mean looking gun. This is a culture problem not connected to movies and games.

Locked and Loaded

January 17th, 2013
9:01 am

Here’s something you can think about, suppose that Obama continues on his tyranical ways. Do you think that the military or law enforcement would follow his orders to disarm the American people? Remember that most law enforcement are veterans. All military and law enforcement take an oath to uphold and protect the constitution. They would be within their rights to refuse to disarm the population. Think about it who in their right mind would go around knocking on doors demanding they surrender their weapons. It would not turn out well.