Thursday, June 26, 2008

McCAIN & B-HO On DC Gun Ban***WITH UPDATE

Mc Cain:

“Today’s decision is a landmark victory for Second Amendment freedom in the United States. For this first time in the history of our Republic, the U.S. Supreme Court affirmed that the Second Amendment right to keep and bear arms was and is an individual right as intended by our Founding Fathers. I applaud this decision as well as the overturning of the District of Columbia’s ban on handguns and limitations on the ability to use firearms for self-defense.

“Unlike Senator Obama, who refused to join me in signing a bipartisan amicus brief, I was pleased to express my support and call for the ruling issued today. Today’s ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller makes clear that other municipalities like Chicago that have banned handguns have infringed on the constitutional rights of Americans. Unlike the elitist view that believes Americans cling to guns out of bitterness, today’s ruling recognizes that gun ownership is a fundamental right -- sacred, just as the right to free speech and assembly.
“This ruling does not mark the end of our struggle against those who seek to limit the rights of law-abiding citizens. We must always remain vigilant in defense of our freedoms. But today, the Supreme Court ended forever the specious argument that the Second Amendment did not confer an individual right to keep and bear arms.”

Obama:



Ruh Roh: In Response To A 1996 Independent Voters Of Illinois Questionnaire, Obama Indicated That He Supported Banning The "Manufacture, Sale And Possession Of Handguns." Question: "Do you support state legislation to ... ban the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns?" Obama's Response: "Yes." (Independent Voters Of Illinois Independent Precinct Organization 1996 General Candidate Questionnaire, Barack Obama Responses, 9/9/96)
Obama Was Director Of Anti-Gun Joyce Foundation, Which Spent Millions On Gun-Control Causes. "Adding even further skepticism to Obama's claim of support for the 2nd Amendment is his previous service as a director of the Joyce Foundation. Since 2000, the Joyce Foundation has provided over $15 Million in funding to radical gun control organizations such as the Violence Policy Center and the Illinois Council Against Handgun Violence. The Joyce Foundation is tightly linked to the Soros Open Society Instit ute -- an extremist group that advocates a worldwide ban on civilian firearm ownership." (Illinois State Rifle Association, "ISRA Blasts Candidate Obama On His Record Of Hostility Toward Law-Abiding Firearm Owners," Press Release, 8/24/04)
In 2004, Obama Voted Against Self-Defense Rights. "[Obama] opposed letting people use a self-defense argument if charged with violating local handgun bans by using weapons in their homes. The bill was a reaction to a Chicago-area man who, after shooting an intruder, was charged with a handgun violation." (Ryan Keith "Obama Record In State Legislature Offers Possible Ammunition For Critics," The Associated Press, 1/17/07)
In 2004, Running For U.S. Senate Obama Called For Federal Legislation To Pre-Empt State Concealed Carry Laws. "In a February survey of Democratic primary candidates for the U.S. Senate by the Tribune, Obama said he opposed allowing ordinary citizens to carry concealed weapons and that a federal law banning concealed carried weapons except for law enforcement is needed." (Liam Ford, "Keyes Backs Law On Concealed Guns," Chicago Tribune, 8/25/04)
On December 21, 1999, Obama Discussed The Penalties One Would Receive If Carrying A Firearm Illegally. (State Of Illinois 91st General Assembly Regular Session Senate Transcript, www.ilga.gov, 12/21/99, p. 20-23)
• Obama: "Senator Emil Jones has offered - and I think this is an excellent idea that gets at the concerns that everybody on that side of the aisle has had, which is that we would create a felony offense and a misdemeanor offense, depending on the kinds of weapons you're carrying. Basically, the provision would say that there are category one weapons: handguns, sawed-off shotguns, sawed-off rifles, other firearms that are small enough to store on their person, that to unlawfully possess and carry these weapons would be a felony; but, on the other hand, if you were going to be carrying a rifle or shotgun, a spring gun, other firearm that were used for hunting, then that would be a misdemeanor." ( 12/21/99, p. 21)State Of Illinois 91st General Assembly Regular Session Senate Transcript, www.ilga.gov,

12 comments:

iknowhowtospell said...

Just wondering - how many guns do you own, Victoria?

No nasty second question, no crazy gotcha follow up. I'm just interested.

kitanis said...

Don't know about Victoria.. but I will just lay it out..

I own two handguns, five rifles, three shotguns, 1 air rifle. I enjoy shooting..

How many do you own?

iknowhowtospell said...

I don't own any guns, and I'm not making any judgments on those - like yourself - who own them.

Well, most of them, at least.

Anyone who owns a semi-automatic weapon is a little crazy, if you ask me. I *do* support limits on weapons like those. But if you want to have rifles and such, I have no problem with that.

Todash19 said...

I dont view this as a win.
If anything its a step backward.

Apparently 4 out of 9 Supreme Court Justices can't read English.
see OFF alert:
http://tiny.cc/HtwPK

Keith Moore said...

As for me, iknowhowtospell... 4 .22 rifles (2 semi-auto, 1 bolt-action, 1 pump-action), 1 .3006 rifle(bolt action), 1 7mm rifle (bolt action), 1 Mosin-Nagan 91/30 7.62x54R (bolt action w/ 5-shot clip), 1 Colt .38 Special (double-action revolver), 2 12-guage shotguns (pump-action) and 1 20-guage shotgun (hinge action). Granted, only the Mosin-Nagant is mine but my household in general has a good number of weapons.

As to people who own semi-automatic weapons... well, I admit to being crazy but I don't think the general owner has anything wrong with them. Semi-auto is one of two possible actions for a pistol (which means most pistol owners have semi-auto weapons) and most .22 rifles I've seen are nice cheap little semi-auto deals with a small clip. Now, I'll give you that someone who walks around with a fully-automatic weapon can seem a bit off-kilter but I admit a deep desire to own operational versions of some historic automatic weapons like the Thompson submachine gun (American, WW2), the FG42 paratrooper rifle (German, WW2), a Sten gun (British, WW2), and a Browning Automatic Rifle (American, WW2). Oh, and my own MP5, AK47, and M2 Browning (the last one is only a pipe dream, don't worry). :D

Say what you will but there's some really cool guns out there for the dedicated and discerning collector.

Keith Moore said...

I tend to agree with you about the Supreme Court having some trouble reading a pretty clear passage from the Constitution. However, I'll point out that the reference to a well-regulated militia allows for some clever nit-picking and an excuse to read 2nd Amendment rights as belonging only to that well-regulated militia.

Still, 5-4 is a win no matter what it says about the dissenters. The problem is, the dissenters can sometimes write opinions that later Supreme Courts will cite as precedent.

Scottiebill said...

That handguns were outlawed in Washington, DC and Chicago before the SCOTUS ruled against that law was at best ineffective and silly. Anyone with any smarts at all would know that you could buy handguns on practically any street corner in both those cities at any time, day or night.

When the honest, law-abiding citizens are banned from owning them, the criminals are the only ones with the guns.

BTW, I own one hand gun, 1 two-row 12 ga. shotgun, 1 very old .351 carbine and an old single-shot .22.

iknowhowtospell said...

The issue of guns is one that I leave alone for the most part, simply because I have no interest in them whatsoever (even in a historical context).

But if one guy wants to collect guns, like Keith might, and another wants to collect autographed baseballs ... one's much "safer", I suppose, but the guy who likes guns might find the baseballs as boring as a guy like me finds guns.

Anyway, if they're registered to people who legally acquire them - all the i's are dotted, all the t's are crossed - I really don't have a problem.

On one hand, one could argue that the way to stop handgun violence is to take away all the handguns; on the other hand, one might counter-argue that the cure for road rage is to take away all the cars. So I don't think that's an answer.

It's a question of responsibility, both of the owners and the sellers.

Having no personal interest in guns, though, I do sometimes wonder about the really hard-core folks out there who have enough weaponry not only to hunt and kill a deer for food, for instance, but to shred it to pieces with blinding speed and unstoppable force.

That's not hunting to me. That's the sort of behavior that worries me.

Regardless, private ownership of guns is fine by me, but we DO need to have some sort of substantial process for background checking and so on. Again, I'm far from an expert on this stuff, but I think this is the sort of thing where you can't be careful enough.

iknowhowtospell said...

Keith wrote: "4 .22 rifles (2 semi-auto ... good number of weapons."

I mean to add one other thing to my previous post. Regarding your paragraph I quote above: I have absolutely no idea what ANY of that meant :)

Lew Waters said...

iknow, I think the best way to curb gun violence is to go after the criminals using them, not legal gun owners.

One community a few years ago (sorry, I don't recall where) reported success in this area by passing a law that automatically added time to sentences if a gun were involved.

Communities that are freer with gun ownership seem to have less crime as well. Mostly those with the more restrictive gun laws suffer increased crime, as is seen in both Washington D.C. and Chicago.

Britain has actually been looking into restrictive laws on knives because they are being used in more crime, their gun laws restrictive as well.

The problem isn't the instrument used but the one using the instrument in committing crime. It is the criminal that must dealt with severely, not have excuses made for them.

As for guns owned, I too have some, a 22 Magnum Revolver, an antique 32 Revolver, a .380 Semi-Auto Pistol, a 30.06 Rifle and my favorite, a .357 Ruger with the words "BUILT IN THE 200th YEAR OF AMERICAN LIBERTY" stamped on the left side.

For those that don't want to own a gun, I agree they shouldn't. But passing gun control laws only infringes on legal law-abiding gun owners. Criminals already ignore the law, why would they start following a new law on guns? Why not new laws on the criminals instead?

Many anti-gun people over the years have challeneged me with "if you have time to get to your gun, you have time to call 911," which I always answer, "true, but what do I do in the 10 to 30 minutes it may take for the Police to arrive?"

The following audio is of an actual 911 call by a woman who as being stalked as he broke into her home. In nearly 7 minutes on the phone with the 911 operator, Police still hadn't arrived and the woman was forced to defend herself or be killed.

BE FORWARNED: It may be very disturbing to some as it is graphic. Calling 911 Doesn't Always Work

Keith Moore said...

Sorry, iknowhowtospell... being one of those collector types, I tend to fall naturally into all of the jargon. I know you know what a semi-automatic weapon is (at least I hope so since you said an owner must be crazy). The decimel numbers I was using are calibers which are written in hundredths of an inch (.22 caliber is 22 hundredths of an inch). The gauges are the number of identical balls of the shotgun's muzzle diameter that can be made from a pound of lead (the larger the gauge, the smaller the shotgun). Bolt-action is a mechanism in which the shooter uses a lever on the outside of the gun to methodically load a round and eject the spent cartridge. Hinge action means that the barrel swings downward on a hinge and the bullet is placed in the exposed chamber at which point the barrel is swung back up and locked in place to be fired. Pump action is pretty much the standard shotgun action, using a pump parralel to the barrel to load and eject shells. Fully-automatic is a machinegun... easy.

7.62x54R is a special type of cartridge that's mainly used by Soviet rifles. The bullet is 7.62mm in diameter, the cartridge is 54mm in length, and the rear of the cartridge has a rim around it (thus the R).

The M2 Browning (sometimes referred to as the "Ma-Deuce") is a .50 caliber heavy machinegun from WW2. It was the standard vehicle and airplane machinegun for American forces. I don't know if it's still in operational use, however.

The Mosin-Nagant 91/30 was designed in 1891 and used by the USSR through World War II as a sniper rifle. It uses 7.62x54R ammunition and can have 5 bullets put into a chamber under the firing chamber so that it becomes slightly faster than loading each bullet manually. I'm still trying to acquire the original mounting brackets and scope to make it look fully authentic. Mine is still perfectly servicable although I don't have much in the way of places to target-shoot with it.

Sorry if you don't really care about the specifics... just thought you might find a quick rundown of my jargon useful in case of future dispute around guns.

Keith Moore said...

I'd point out a couple things, iknowhowtospell. First, very few crimes are committed with a big arsenal. Typically, even the most crazed criminal only has a couple guns on him when he's going around shooting at people. Thus, someone having tons of guns doesn't really make them any more threatening than someone with a couple since only one is required to commit a crime.
Secondly, the reason that gun owners are a little leery of registration proposals is that giving the government a list of who has guns makes it much easier if they decide to follow the path of countries like Britain and simply confiscate all the guns. Gun owners don't think they're doing something bad or illegal... they just look outside the US to other Western governments and see the police knocking on gun owners' doors and disarming them with the tacit and sometimes open approval of lawmakers. It's not an irrational concern.

Oh, and I do indeed find baseball collecting rather dull. :P