Skip to main content

I carry a card in my wallet; it's a little larger than a business card.  The front shows some Founding Father types gathered, discussing trophies mounted on the wall - "bear arms."  Not a trophy buck; not some exotic trophy brought back from an African safari, not... well, not "whatever."  They're "bear arms."  And I whip it out whenever some gun nut (often, with a tin-foil lined cammo hunting/military cap) starts to go ballistic about liberals/leftists/socialists/french fry eating/UN loving/tree huggers wanting to limit their 2nd Amendment right to own guns.

Here's what the back of said card looks like.  It starts out with the 2nd Amendment, verbatim:

"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."

Following that:

"Of course it's clear! Every American has the right to hang a pair of bear arms on their wall.  How could that possibly be misconstrued?"

Indeed.

Here's the point:

People will argue about the semantics of the 2nd Amendment, but what people cannot argue is virtually everyone - even those wearing tin-foil lined cammo hunting/military hats - thatwe ALREADY regulate "arms."

No one has a right to own a bazooka nor a flame thrower nor a mortar/grenade launcher; not even a machine gun (think Thompson, Uzi, AK47, fully automatic M-16, etc.)

Well "almost everyone."

But even the extremist Nation Rifle Association isn't advocating anyone's right to own a fully automatic machine gun or a couple of live grenades.

And even the 5-4 "District of Columbia v. Heller" decision (2008), via obiter dictum, affirmed the right of the government to ban ban a class of weapons - specifically, machine guns.

So we ALREADY agree (even Supreme Court Justices Scalia, Thomas, Alito, Kennedy & Roberts) that the Feds can impose "regulations" on the lawful ownership of weapons by The People.

What the argument today is, is where that line of regulation is drawn.

I'm saying the banning of assault weapons - including magazines ("clips" if you will) is on the regulatory side of the line government can ban.

Today's assault weapons, with the capacity for carnage similar to the Thompsons of the 1930's, can and should be banned.

Now.

Well, more accurately:  AGAIN.  

Because even though that card I carry in my wallet is a joke, the carnage assault weapons continue to cause is not.

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Tip Jar (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Via Chicago, TtexwiTyler

    "I never thought I'd miss Richard Milhous Nixon."

    by TwoPuttTommy on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 07:11:52 AM PST

  •  Conservatives understand that (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    TwoPuttTommy

    the Constitution should be based on "original intent". Arms, circa 1787, were muskets. Muskets take about a minute between firings, fire a single shot, and are wildly inaccurate. I supposed it is a right of all Americans to own one of these. Any other weapons designed 1789 or later would not fall under the 2nd Amendment.

  •  Connecticut (0+ / 0-)

    already has the assault weapon ban, and it did nothing

    •  Question: (0+ / 0-)

      Any idea when or where the dearly departed bought her Bushmaster?

      "I never thought I'd miss Richard Milhous Nixon."

      by TwoPuttTommy on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 07:55:38 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  True CT has a ban (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      TwoPuttTommy
      Sec. 53-202b. Sale or transfer of assault weapon prohibited. Class C felony. (a)(1) Any person who, within this state, distributes, transports or imports into the state, keeps for sale, or offers or exposes for sale, or who gives any assault weapon, except as provided by sections 29-37j and 53-202a to 53-202k, inclusive, and subsection (h) of section 53a-46a, shall be guilty of a class C felony and shall be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of which two years may not be suspended or reduced.
      ...and it looks like the shooter's mother, or whoever procured it (haven't heard a word from the father which strikes me as strange), would have been guilty of a Class C felony, whatever that is.

      Even so, stating that the ban in and of itself did not prevent the attack hardly invalidates the ban. If so, the suggestion becomes that in the aftermath of this atrocity, the ban having been judged to be insufficient, that the ban should therefore...be repealed? If anything the failure of the state statute argues for robust enforcement of a ban at the Federal level as well.

  •  Oliver Wendell Holmes (0+ / 0-)

    He said that the first amendment ended with a clear and present danger such as yelling fire in a crowded theater.  Applying that to the second would mean that the extreme mentally ill and criminals can't have them; I would also think that no one should posses weapons that could overpower the typical police force.

    Why don't we start by searching every parolees house for guns as they are they typical ones to commit gun crimes.

  •  Well, this: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    johnny wurster
    "Of course it's clear! Every American has the right to hang a pair of bear arms on their wall.  How could that possibly be misconstrued?"
    That's right up there with "herstory" in its wild ignorance of the etymology of language.

    Get your goddamned guns out of my church. This means you.

    by commonmass on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 07:52:06 AM PST

  •  A word we are skipping over like a decorative hat. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mrblifil

    KEEP

    Here's my petition.  Please sign it.

    we petition the obama administration to:
    Enforce the KEEP in the Second Amendment.

    The Charlton Heston level of gun possession. You can bear any arm but you must KEEP that arm. The gun must be in your hand or

    - Felony to fail to secure your deadly weapons.

    - An accessory charge if your weapon was used in a crime.

    - Possession of a gun w/o a serial # - intent to murder.

    And if your weapon was used in a crime and you died trying to KEEP it, your estate would be liable for all damages your weapon caused while not in your possession.

    Gun control responsibility back to the gun owners, where it belongs.

    You must physically prove continuity of possession every 5 years. If you cannot physically present the actual gun for continuity of possession, you are charged with felony-failure to secure a deadly weapon.

    God I hope other people can see the beauty of this

    Sign my White House Petition [Enforce the KEEP in the Second Amendment http://wh.gov/n8Qj]

    by 88kathy on Thu Dec 20, 2012 at 07:55:46 AM PST

  •  I think the more thoughtful advocates of bearing (0+ / 0-)

    arms would contend that the 2nd Amed. refers to the defensive or utilitarian arms an individual able-bodied person, whether in the "regulated" state militia or not, would be expected carry with him to augment the state militia if called on, or drafted to.  

    Thus, crew-served or exotic weapons whose effects or ammunition had no dual-use function were not contemplated as individual arms.

    Some might argue that since fully selectable rifles are now standard military issue they should be available to non-military gun owners, but famous gun control advocate Al Capone, et. al, made sure Congress took care of that loophole in 1934, and repeal might be difficult.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site