Liberals and guns

[Norton]

This article came through my email box this morning and I found it an interesting discussion.

Try to endure the stench of Kos's site long enough to read it
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/4/21/19133/5152/392/496931

 

[Norton]

It's not a gun totin' love fest over there, but the discussion is refreshingly on our side.

There are the requisite moonbats though:

The fact that this already has 7 tips is deplorable evidence that even here, a lot of people Just Don't Get It. Universal bearing of arms DOES NOT increase the security of any state or polity that YOU live in. The amendment reads, "a well-regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right", etc.

There are two premises in this that have simply been overtaken by
events (i.e., they are FALSE NOW, even though they MIGHT have been
true at the time of ratification), and a third that was completely hypocritical
to begin with. In the first place, if the militia means all the able-bodied
men CAPABLE of bearing arms, then THAT being "well-regulated" in so
bearing simply IS NOT necessary (or even helpful) to the security of
this or that allegedly "free" state. No state in THESE United States
FACES the kind of threat that generally arming the populace MIGHT
help to combat. The second false premise is that arming everybody
WOULD HELP the militia to be more regulated -- THE EXACT OPPOSITE
is true -- the more universally-armed everybody is, the more TROUBLE
the REGULATORS are going to have regulating them. Which is, of course,
EXACTLY HOW GUN NUTS WANT it, but is THE OPPOSITE of what the
amendment (obsoletely) presumes.

The third false premise -- and, unlike the others, this one was false
FROM THE BEGINNING -- it was just pure hypocrisy -- is that the states
that the amendment was designed to protect were "free": IN POINT OF
ACTUAL FACT, THE WHOLE INITIAL PURPOSE of the 2nd amendment was
to ENSURE THAT WHITE MEN WOULD BE WELL-ENOUGH ARMED IN LARGE
ENOUGH NUMBERS to put down slave rebellions in these states -- THAT
was the security (of a FREE state - HAH!) that was being talked about.

This amendment is obsolete, period.
The best way to prove that is to start taking it seriously.
The verb in the amendment is "infringe". To "infringe" something
means to just take a LITTLE bit off around the edges. The plain language
and meaning of the thing is that EVERY LITTLE bit of gun regulation, even
if it's just around the FRINGE, is unconstitutional. Unfortunately, our Supreme Court has always specialized in eviscerating the important parts of the document. If they would just read what it says then ALL the gun-control
laws would fall EXCEPT the ones that the state could show were contributing
to better-regulating the militia -- and even THAT would be a stretch,
grammatically -- the amendment does not say "shall not be infringed
except where such infringement would improve regulation of the militia" --
it says "shall not be infringed." PERIOD .

IT MEANS WHAT IT SAYS, NOT what Antonin Scalia says it says.
If the Supreme Court were to start ruling accordingly and striking down
gun laws, then the sheer carnage that would ensue would get us the
mandate we need to amend the constitution to address this issue rationally.
As it stands, we have a constitution that says you CAN'T regulate guns,
and a Supreme Court that says you can, and nobody has ANY legal or moral
high ground around the issue.

 

[Norton]

I like this guy AngryMouse. I probably would disagree with him on every other single issue but at least he gets it with regards to the RKBA:

I used to be as anti- as any good "liberal" until I started to think about what the Second Amendment is really about: revolution.

And once you do that, I don't understand how any true liberal can't help but love the Second Amendment.

Disclaimer:
I'm not a liberal.....I belong to the Neanderthal Party.

 

[Yankee]

Who let that one slip past the moderators at Daily Kos?. One of the best written arguments supporting the RTKBA I have read in a long time. Should have known better than to continue reading down into the comments section and now I feel like I need a shower to get the stink off of me.

 

[epc3762]

It is about time!

Finally one who gets it. Great post(s) Norton! Excellent!

 

[Norton]

Finally one who gets it. Great post(s) Norton! Excellent!

You're welcome.

I know it's become fashionable of late to proclaim oneself a gun-owning liberal, but I'm still a knuckle-dragging Cretin. I look at this purely as a "the enemy of my enemy is my friend" situation.

This is why I don't talk politics with too many people beyond 2nd amendment issues.....it pisses me off and I end up losing otherwise good friends over stupid stuff. Just ask the girl that laid out over her screwed up views on education last week after I had had about two pitchers of Yuengling

I'm sure that I would abhor nearly everything else that AngryMouse stands for, but I have to respect his clarity of thought when it comes to the 2nd.

 

[epc3762]

We need to clone Novus!

 

[VNVGUNNER]

Good read.

 

[novus collectus]

We need to clone Novus!

Ever meet Sebastian?

http://www.progunprogressive.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xH0TGaYXrq4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=be6-qysOEqE

 

[epc3762]

Him too. We need genetic variation in the species.

Ever meet Sebastian?

http://www.progunprogressive.com/
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xH0TGaYXrq4
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=be6-qysOEqE

 

[biermkr]

Norton, it gets better. I think angry mouse is a female:

Nope. I'm an old-fashioned girl. (4+ / 0-)
Recommended by:
Shadan7, cynndara, SicPlurisPoenaPrestantia, bugscuffle
I love the Constitution. I love the Bill of Rights. I love the Declaration of Independence.
It's all the other laws since then that I'd like to run through a shredder.
by Angry Mouse on Mon Apr 21, 2008 at 04:56:09 PM PDT

 

[Drmsparks]

Markos (Kos) himself is very pro second amendment. He takes a lot of flack from the people on his site for that reason. He considers the death of the anti gun agenda to be an important part of the democrats fifty state strategy. He is always running fundraisers for pro second amendment democrats throughout the West and the Rockies.

If we can get change through the democratic party he is the one who will be mainly responsible.

 

[Lunchbox]

What a great read!

Now if we could just get people to understand that point of view.

 

[novus collectus]

Markos (Kos) himself is very pro second amendment. He takes a lot of flack from the people on his site for that reason. He considers the death of the anti gun agenda to be an important part of the democrats fifty state strategy. He is always running fundraisers for pro second amendment democrats throughout the West and the Rockies.

If we can get change through the democratic party he is the one who will be mainly responsible.

 

[K31]

Just ask the girl that laid out over her screwed up views on education last week after I had had about two pitchers of Yuengling

Dump her.

 

[Rattlesnake46319]

Dump her.

Is that your only advice? Or do you have other words of wisdom?

 

[novus collectus]

Is that your only advice? Or do you have other words of wisdom?

K31's "dump her" is one of the popular jokes on MDShooters.
At least it made me laugh.

 

[alucard0822]

even a broken clock is right twice a day



good read, and an honest read. I could never understand why a group of people who claim to hold human rights in such a high reguard, become completely hypocritical when it comes to the public having the means of enforcing of those rights. We need a whole lot more of this type of support.

 

[Rattlesnake46319]

K31's "dump her" is one of the popular jokes on MDShooters.
At least it made me laugh.

I picked up on it pretty quick. Just wanted to see if there was anything else.

 

[Boxcab]

even a broken clock is right twice a day

I need to get my eyes checked... for about 3 minutes I was trying to figure out how a broken Glock could be right twice a day?

I now return you to your regularly scheduled topic...