| | |
|
GunCulture 36 - 21 Apr 2010 - Main.JuliaS
|
| |
| META TOPICPARENT | name="WebPreferences" |
|---|
"Then came, Oscar, the time of the guns.
And there was no land for a man, no land for a country,
| | | The idea that the state is coming to take our guns away is simply false. This is especially true in the commonwealth of Virginia, where just a few months ago the General Assembly passed a bill dramatically scaling back many of the state’s gun control restrictions. We are now among the most liberal states in the country in terms of purchase and carry restrictions. | |
<
< | Things look good for gun-rights advocates on the national level as well. As we await the Supreme Court’s opinion in the case of McDonnell? v. Chicago (which challenges a Chicago gun ban), it should please us to remember that all five Justices who joined the majority opinion in DC v. Heller still sit on the Court today. Heller, of course, was the 2008 case that struck down the DC gun ban and emphatically declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual, rather than collective, right. We have every reason expect that the forthcoming McDonnell? decision will incorporate that right as binding against the states. I get the impression that those attending yesterday’s rally do not understand how huge a coup this is for gun-rights advocates; we will soon be living in a time of unprecedented constitutional protection of the right to bear arms. The man quoted in your article who suggested that the right to bear arms is “in jeopardy of being taken out of our Constitution” could not be more wrong. | >
> | Things look good for gun-rights advocates on the national level as well. As we await the Supreme Court’s opinion in the case of McDonnell? v. Chicago (which challenges a Chicago gun ban), it should please us to remember that all five Justices who joined the majority opinion in DC v. Heller still sit on the Court today. Heller, of course, was the 2008 case that struck down the DC gun ban and emphatically declared that the Second Amendment protects an individual, rather than collective, right. We have every reason to expect that the forthcoming McDonnell? decision will incorporate that right as binding against the states. I get the impression that those attending yesterday’s rally do not understand how huge a coup this is for gun-rights advocates; we will soon be living in a time of unprecedented constitutional protection of the right to bear arms. The man quoted in your article who suggested that the right to bear arms is “in jeopardy of being taken out of our Constitution” could not be more wrong. | | | Moreover, it behooves us to remember that the right of the state to restrict gun rights in certain ways is an American tradition as deeply-rooted as the general right to bear arms. The General Assembly of Virginia has placed restrictions on the manner and means of arms bearing for nearly 400 years, both before and after the passage of the American Constitution and its second amendment. Who could own guns, where they could bring them, what type of guns were allowed, and how guns could be sold and traded have been matters clearly within the state’s regulatory domain since long before our nation’s founding. In fact, under a 1677 Virginia law – which recognized that the unrestricted liberty to bear arms “hath been found to be very prejudicial to the peace and welfare of this colony” – armed men who assembled in groups of five or more were deemed to be “riotous and mutinous.” During the colonial era, everyone who attended yesterday’s rally could have been arrested for mutiny. | | | Finally, even if the fear of losing our gun rights was justified (it's not), and even if gun rights were truly a vital element of the American tradition (they’re not), the rhetoric of yesterday’s rally would still be a completely inappropriate way to respond. Spreading the idea that “we are in a war,” or that “they’re coming for everything because they’re a bunch of socialists” is malicious and irresponsible. That’s the kind of talk that really does incite violence. | |
<
< | Ultimately, I am writing to remind those who attended yesterday’s rally that no one is coming for your guns. Not only that, but our nation wasn’t founded on the principle that you get to carry your gun anywhere you want. It was founded on the principles of open discourse, democratic decision-making, and respect and tolerance for the opinions of our fellow citizens. And when you use the rhetoric of war to oppose some illusory political desire to restrict gun rights, you do a grave injustice the democratic principles of our great nation. | >
> | Ultimately, I am writing to remind those who attended yesterday’s rally that no one is coming for our guns. Not only that, but our nation wasn’t founded on the principle that we get to carry our guns anywhere we want. It was founded on the principles of open discourse, democratic decision-making, and respect and tolerance for the opinions of our fellow citizens. And when you use the rhetoric of war to oppose some illusory political desire to restrict gun rights, you do a grave injustice the democratic principles of our great nation. | | |
-- JuliaS - 25 Oct 2009 |
|
| Revision 36 | r36 - 21 Apr 2010 - 19:36:43 - JuliaS |
| Revision 35 | r35 - 20 Apr 2010 - 21:30:13 - JuliaS |
|
|
|
This site is powered by the TWiki collaboration platform.
All material on this collaboration platform is the property of the contributing authors.
All material marked as authored by Eben Moglen is available under the license terms CC-BY-SA version 4.
|
|
| | |