Gun Control Laws - Where are we really? Where to go? (2 Viewers)

[Amused to Death]

Former Chief Justice Warren Burger was a conservative appointed by Richard Nixon. He has said in interviews “The gun lobby’s interpretation of the Second Amendment is one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American people by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime.”
If Justices want to call themselves "originalists" then maybe they should interpret 2A the way it used to be, before the NRA started buying politicians. 

Second Amendment Does Not Guarantee the Right To Own a Gun (From Gun Control, P 99-102, 1992, Charles P Cozic, ed. -- See NCJ-160164)

Annotation

Former Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court Warren Burger argues that the sale, purchase, and use of guns should be regulated just as automobiles and boats are regulated; such regulations would not violate the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Abstract

The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees a "right of the people to keep and bear arms." However, the meaning of this clause cannot be understood apart from the purpose, the setting, and the objectives of the draftsmen. At the time of the Bill of Rights, people were apprehensive about the new national government presented to them, and this helps explain the language and purpose of the Second Amendment. It guarantees, "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." The need for a State militia was the predicate of the "right" guarantee, so as to protect the security of the State. Today, of course, the State militia serves a different purpose. A huge national defense establishment has assumed the role of the militia of 200 years ago. Americans have a right to defend their homes, and nothing should undermine this right; nor does anyone question that the Constitution protects the right of hunters to own and keep sporting guns for hunting anymore than anyone would challenge the right to own and keep fishing rods and other equipment for fishing. Neither does anyone question the right of citizens to keep and own an automobile. Yet there is no strong interest by the citizenry in questioning the power of the State to regulate the purchase or the transfer of such a vehicle and the right to license the vehicle and the driver with reasonable standards. It is even more desirable for the State to have reasonable regulations for the ownership and use of a firearm in an effort to stop mindless homicidal carnage.

 

[Amused to Death]

If you want an AR15 I suspect you would get training on how to use it properly.

Is training required? If not, maybe it should be.

 

[eoMMan]

Is training required? If not, maybe it should be.

The Tulsa shooter bought his AR-15 just hours before his shooting so no, it doesn’t appear training is required.

(assuming the reports are accurate)

 

[KarmaPolice]

Wait, what?

Not sure he went that far, but it was suggested there was odd things and we should start a thread to discuss those things.  

 

[eoMMan]

ok but of all the murders/mass killings, how many high cap magazines are being used ? (that this ban would impact? )

again, I feel its a toothless laws, 10 round mags and having multiples on your person will results in many dead. Would it mean less dead yes, it might mean that in a few situations .... but my argument over and over is why not laws in laws to stop the murderer before he acts vs trying limit him to 10 shots reload vs 15 shots reload? That seems totally ignoring the core problem

So many of these murderers show no signs before the killings. How the hell are you going to figure who will snap and commit a murder before it happens?

Look at the Tulsa shooter. He was upset he still had back pain weeks after surgery. Are you not going to sell him a gun because he has back pain?

 

[moleculo]

Former Chief Justice Warren Burger was a conservative appointed by Richard Nixon. He has said in interviews “The gun lobby’s interpretation of the Second Amendment is one of the greatest pieces of fraud, I repeat the word fraud, on the American people by special interest groups that I have ever seen in my lifetime.”
If Justices want to call themselves "originalists" then maybe they should interpret 2A the way it used to be, before the NRA started buying politicians. 

Second Amendment Does Not Guarantee the Right To Own a Gun (From Gun Control, P 99-102, 1992, Charles P Cozic, ed. -- See NCJ-160164)

Annotation

Former Chief Justice of the U.S. Supreme Court Warren Burger argues that the sale, purchase, and use of guns should be regulated just as automobiles and boats are regulated; such regulations would not violate the Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

Abstract

The Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution guarantees a "right of the people to keep and bear arms." However, the meaning of this clause cannot be understood apart from the purpose, the setting, and the objectives of the draftsmen. At the time of the Bill of Rights, people were apprehensive about the new national government presented to them, and this helps explain the language and purpose of the Second Amendment. It guarantees, "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." The need for a State militia was the predicate of the "right" guarantee, so as to protect the security of the State. Today, of course, the State militia serves a different purpose. A huge national defense establishment has assumed the role of the militia of 200 years ago. Americans have a right to defend their homes, and nothing should undermine this right; nor does anyone question that the Constitution protects the right of hunters to own and keep sporting guns for hunting anymore than anyone would challenge the right to own and keep fishing rods and other equipment for fishing. Neither does anyone question the right of citizens to keep and own an automobile. Yet there is no strong interest by the citizenry in questioning the power of the State to regulate the purchase or the transfer of such a vehicle and the right to license the vehicle and the driver with reasonable standards. It is even more desirable for the State to have reasonable regulations for the ownership and use of a firearm in an effort to stop mindless homicidal carnage.

so by that interpretation, the right conferred by the 2nd is basically the US citizens have a right to a military.  interesting.

 

[Stealthycat]

This was debunked, no?

day 1 it was reported a shooter with a handgun, confronted security and got by them and killed himself in 15 minutes

day 10 we are now told a shooter with AR15, did not confront security, went through open back door and had 80 minutes before being killed by Border agents 

the teacher now says it was wide open, she saw the shooter, closed the door and called 911 and the door magically didn't lock like it was supposed to ?

 

[Amused to Death]

day 1 it was reported a shooter with a handgun, confronted security and got by them and killed himself in 15 minutes

day 10 we are now told a shooter with AR15, did not confront security, went through open back door and had 80 minutes before being killed by Border agents 

the teacher now says it was wide open, she saw the shooter, closed the door and called 911 and the door magically didn't lock like it was supposed to ?

I'm not sure what the narrative is right now. But I do know the statement that a teacher left the door open has now been refuted. That the door was closed/locked.

 

[Max Power]

So many of these murderers show no signs before the killings. How the hell are you going to figure who will snap and commit a murder before it happens?

Look at the Tulsa shooter. He was upset he still had back pain weeks after surgery. Are you not going to sell him a gun because he has back pain?

Sounds like The shooter was mad the doctor didn't give him more/better pain meds.  Which is probably a whole different can of worms to discuss when getting into gun background checks. 

 

[dkp993]

More deflection and distraction. The back door being open was the real problem. The teacher is at fault here. Mental illness is the real problem. No armed guard. School wasn’t hardened like a prison.  These are are the REAL issues.  The fact that a 18 year old can buy 2 weapons designed specifically to be easier to kill with 1000’s of rounds easier then getting a drivers license all because gun owners don’t want to be inconvenienced, nope that’s not the issue at all. It’s the back door that’s the real problem!!!!  

 

[timschochet]

 because gun owners don’t want to be inconvenienced

While I think this is true of a few gun owners, I firmly believe that the opposition to gun control is usually more principled. I disagree with them but don’t doubt their integrity (most of them.) 

 

[dkp993]

While I think this is true of a few gun owners, I firmly believe that the opposition to gun control is usually more principled. I disagree with them but don’t doubt their integrity (most of them.) 

Of course there are good gun owners with integrity (likely most are). But those same people aren’t the ones blaming the back door or teacher as the real problem.  

 

[moleculo]

While I think this is true of a few gun owners, I firmly believe that the opposition to gun control is usually more principled. I disagree with them but don’t doubt their integrity (most of them.) 

sure but ultimately, whats' the basis of their opposition?  I get "slippery slope" but ultimately that's a logical fallacy. 

Beyond slippery slope, it boils down purely to convenience - it's more hoops to jump thru to buy or sell a gun, more requirements for storage, etc, more stringent background checks, limitations on how many rounds can be loaded at a time, etc.

 

[moleculo]

Sounds like The shooter was mad the doctor didn't give him more/better pain meds.  Which is probably a whole different can of worms to discuss when getting into gun background checks. 

"are you now, or have you ever been, mad at someone?"

 

[IvanKaramazov]

so by that interpretation, the right conferred by the 2nd is basically the US citizens have a right to a military.  interesting.

Americans have a right to defend their homes, and nothing should undermine this right; nor does anyone question that the Constitution protects the right of hunters to own and keep sporting guns for hunting anymore than anyone would challenge the right to own and keep fishing rods and other equipment for fishing.

 

[Amused to Death]

"are you now, or have you ever been, mad at someone?"

"Five days?! But I'm mad now! I'd kill you if I had my gun."
"Yeah but you don't."

 

[IvanKaramazov]

Also, Warren Burger is just one justice who served on the supreme court.  In any decision that is not 9-0, you are guaranteed to be able to find at least one extremely well-qualified justice at the pinnacle of his or her career that has good, rational reasons for disagreeing with the majority.  That's not really very interesting.

 

[Amused to Death]

Also, Warren Burger is just one justice who served on the supreme court.  In any decision that is not 9-0, you are guaranteed to be able to find at least one extremely well-qualified justice at the pinnacle of his or her career that has good, rational reasons for disagreeing with the majority.  That's not really very interesting.

It was interesting to me that a conservative had that opinion. And he's old school, before the NRA gained so much power.

 

[moleculo]

Americans have a right to defend their homes, and nothing should undermine this right; nor does anyone question that the Constitution protects the right of hunters to own and keep sporting guns for hunting anymore than anyone would challenge the right to own and keep fishing rods and other equipment for fishing.

right, but no one looks to the constitution to limit fishing rods or automobile.

 

[moleculo]

Also, Warren Burger is just one justice who served on the supreme court.  In any decision that is not 9-0, you are guaranteed to be able to find at least one extremely well-qualified justice at the pinnacle of his or her career that has good, rational reasons for disagreeing with the majority.  That's not really very interesting.

I think the viewpoint that the 2A guarantees our right to a military is interesting.  That's not a viewpoint I had heard articulated before.  I don't care that it's a minority opinion.

 

[Amused to Death]

I think the viewpoint that the 2A guarantees our right to a military is interesting.  That's not a viewpoint I had heard articulated before.  I don't care that it's a minority opinion.

For over 200 years it wasn't the minority opinion.

 

[BladeRunner]

I think the viewpoint that the 2A guarantees our right to a military is interesting.  That's not a viewpoint I had heard articulated before.  I don't care that it's a minority opinion.

I mean, it's one opinion.  that's not even a "minority" opinion.  What word do you use to describe something so small that "minority" looks like a majority next to it?

 

[BladeRunner]

For over 200 years it wasn't the minority opinion.

Disagree.  You're taking one man's opinion and making it as if it was ALWAYS that way.  It's his opinion/interpretation.

 

[Max Power]

"are you now, or have you ever been, mad at someone?"

They ask a question about abusing controlled substances.  Maybe something along the lines of have you had any changes to your prescribed medicine in the last 30 days. This Tulsa shooter was likely having some sort of opioid related issue. 

 

[Yankee23Fan]

Yes, one for an inanimate object thats kills--the other to protect human rights.  But yeah --

Seriously.  What a ridiculous comparison. 

 

[IvanKaramazov]

I think the viewpoint that the 2A guarantees our right to a military is interesting.  That's not a viewpoint I had heard articulated before.  I don't care that it's a minority opinion.

That also doesn't seem to be Burger's viewpoint.  At least based on the abstract.

My reading is that Burger is saying that yes, the 2A protects the rights of individuals to keep and bear arms, but that right can be regulated the same way we regulate all sorts of other stuff.  I agree with him, and I've never felt that was an especially controversial POV.  (Some disagree of course, but I generally find opposing points of view to be very weak.)

Edit: I guess maybe Burger thinks that the 2A is just about the military and that he thinks the right to defend your home and the right to hunting lives in the 9A or something.  That seems like a huge stretch, but technically that view would be consistent with his abstract, too.  

 

[Yankee23Fan]

We can't honestly talk about this #### if we can't even have common ground on what stats and metrics we are using.   

Same stuff as other topics- one group uses rates or x/100k numbers, and the other looks at total numbers or if a law "stopped" something.  

How do we fix this simple step? 

Stop trying to convince people who clearly act in bad faith all the time and focus on how to beat them the right way because they are never changing and are a waste of breath and energy?

 

[BladeRunner]

Stop trying to convince people who clearly act in bad faith all the time and focus on how to beat them the right way because they are never changing and are a waste of breath and energy?

Agreed. 

 

[KarmaPolice]

They ask a question about abusing controlled substances.  Maybe something along the lines of have you had any changes to your prescribed medicine in the last 30 days. This Tulsa shooter was likely having some sort of opioid related issue. 

Maybe we should rely less on self reporting and more on a unified database to look these things up on people? 

 

[Max Power]

Maybe we should rely less on self reporting and more on a unified database to look these things up on people? 

I think background checks should be expanded.  It's a fine line though and I'm not sure what the appropriate place to call it is. Getting into people's medical backgrounds can be messy. 

 

[moleculo]

That also doesn't seem to be Burger's viewpoint.  At least based on the abstract.

My reading is that Burger is saying that yes, the 2A protects the rights of individuals to keep and bear arms, but that right can be regulated the same way we regulate all sorts of other stuff.  I agree with him, and I've never felt that was an especially controversial POV.  (Some disagree of course, but I generally find opposing points of view to be very weak.)

Edit: I guess maybe Burger thinks that the 2A is just about the military and that he thinks the right to defend your home and the right to hunting lives in the 9A or something.  That seems like a huge stretch, but technically that view would be consistent with his abstract, too.  

I think that's where he was going there.  The clause "being necessary to the security of a free State" defines why the militia needs weapons.  In this context, "militia" would refer to the US military, which was not a standing army at the time.   

I mean, the title of his position is "Second Amendment Does Not Guarantee the Right To Own a Gun"

 

[Stealthycat]

So many of these murderers show no signs before the killings. How the hell are you going to figure who will snap and commit a murder before it happens?

Look at the Tulsa shooter. He was upset he still had back pain weeks after surgery. Are you not going to sell him a gun because he has back pain?

so many of them DO - look at Carlos, Cruz and others ... they were known and ticking time bombs

on the Tulsa shooter I've not read all on him yet

but yes, often the signs ARE there .... but to stop them, we have to be pro-active and target everyone, not just gun owners

 

[Stealthycat]

I’ve never owned a gun, is it a good idea for me to buy a AR15?   Probably not.   

if you want one - go get one ..... if you are uncomfortable learning it, go to training 

its a good idea to get one if you want one sure

 

[Chris B.]

Gun lovers still deflecting. Same as Day 1. 

Why bother? They are immune to logic. 

 

[Grace Under Pressure]

It's definitely fair and wise to hear out the arguments of the most strident on both sides. However, if you find yourself in one of those camps, don't be surprised when you feel left out of the solutioning efforts. "Your point is noted. Good day sir."

There have been a lot of reasonable points and concessions made in here, and I think that's because at some point you have to fix the damn thing. And when kids get murdered at school, that can be an inflection point. Why it wasn't for Sandy Hook, that one still has me dumbfounded and frankly mad and discouraged that this is where we are still. So if I ever come across as short, which I really try not to do because I value this community, that's why. Having said that it has been encouraging to see the proposals and discussions going on, because it does seem like there's legitimately common ground to be had.

 

[John123]

sure but ultimately, whats' the basis of their opposition?  I get "slippery slope" but ultimately that's a logical fallacy. 

Beyond slippery slope, it boils down purely to convenience - it's more hoops to jump thru to buy or sell a gun, more requirements for storage, etc, more stringent background checks, limitations on how many rounds can be loaded at a time, etc.

I don't own a gun nor do I plan to.  Care to speculate on my motivation?  You seem to have it all figured out.

 

[moleculo]

I don't own a gun nor do I plan to.  Care to speculate on my motivation?  You seem to have it all figured out.

you tell me.  You may note that  I asked what the basis of opposition is. 

I clearly do not have it figured out because it doesn't make much sense to me.

 

[Stealthycat]

I'm not sure what the narrative is right now. But I do know the statement that a teacher left the door open has now been refuted. That the door was closed/locked.

fact - she propped it open, fact, it didn't shut right when she was scrambling to close it. I know why auto-lock doors don't lock, I've had them often enough in my building and they're always safety concerns and should always be dealt with/fixed. Could it be a first time thing? maybe, but doubtful and that shooter knew to go to that door. 

The gunman used the door to get inside, where he killed 19 students and two teachers.

Travis Considine, chief communications officer for the department, said investigators had determined that the teacher, who has not been identified, propped the door open with a rock but removed it, closing the door, when she ran back inside to get her phone and call 911 after the gunman crashed his truck on the elementary school campus.

The door, he said, was designed to lock when shut, but did not. “We did verify she closed the door. The door did not lock. We know that much and now investigators are looking into why it did not lock,” Considine said.

 

[eoMMan]

so many of them DO - look at Carlos, Cruz and others ... they were known and ticking time bombs

on the Tulsa shooter I've not read all on him yet

but yes, often the signs ARE there .... but to stop them, we have to be pro-active and target everyone, not just gun owners

Pretty much damn near impossible approach. And who exactly will make these determinations? The gun seller? The gun buyer himself/herself? Who exactly will determine who should and who should not own a gun?

Do you realize how big of a complicated mess this could become?

My view is that it’s just an easy argument for gun lovers to say because we know it definitely isn’t feasible and will never happen so no gun law changes will be implemented.

 

[Stealthycat]

More deflection and distraction. The back door being open was the real problem. The teacher is at fault here. Mental illness is the real problem. No armed guard. School wasn’t hardened like a prison.  These are are the REAL issues.  The fact that a 18 year old can buy 2 weapons designed specifically to be easier to kill with 1000’s of rounds easier then getting a drivers license all because gun owners don’t want to be inconvenienced, nope that’s not the issue at all. It’s the back door that’s the real problem!!!!  

we have 98 pages here discussing everything

if anti-gun people don't want security in schools then accept what happens when security is lax ...I mean I don't know what to tell you other than that. 

 

[Stealthycat]

Pretty much damn near impossible approach. And who exactly will make these determinations? The gun seller? The gun buyer himself/herself? Who exactly will determine who should and who should not own a gun?

Do you realize how big of a complicated mess this could become?

My view is that it’s just an easy argument for gun lovers to say because we know it definitely isn’t feasible and will never happen so no gun law changes will be implemented.

and yet last week (I posted the links) multiple possible shooters were arrested/caught

and I just posted on Florida Red Flag laws and how they identified what, 200+ crazies who were threatening ?

what you're arguing now (correct me if I'm wrong) is you do not want a big complicated mess of identifying these very few people who want to hurt themsevles or others - its just too much trouble ?    

 

[Max Power]

fact - she propped it open, fact, it didn't shut right when she was scrambling to close it. I know why auto-lock doors don't lock, I've had them often enough in my building and they're always safety concerns and should always be dealt with/fixed. Could it be a first time thing? maybe, but doubtful and that shooter knew to go to that door. 

The gunman used the door to get inside, where he killed 19 students and two teachers.

Travis Considine, chief communications officer for the department, said investigators had determined that the teacher, who has not been identified, propped the door open with a rock but removed it, closing the door, when she ran back inside to get her phone and call 911 after the gunman crashed his truck on the elementary school campus.

The door, he said, was designed to lock when shut, but did not. “We did verify she closed the door. The door did not lock. We know that much and now investigators are looking into why it did not lock,” Considine said.

I thought she went outside to get her phone from her car and that was why the teacher propped the door open.  This reads that she was outside when the shooting started and ran back in because she didn't have her phone.  She called 911, but the outside door didn't lock.  Why didn't the teachers lock their classroom doors as well?  

 

[Stealthycat]

I thought she went outside to get her phone from her car and that was why the teacher propped the door open.  This reads that she was outside when the shooting started and ran back in because she didn't have her phone.  She called 911, but the outside door didn't lock.  Why didn't the teachers lock their classroom doors as well?  

my GF works in a charter school - they can't lock their rooms, and entry doors are not locked either

blows my mind - I'm sure school board decided on it or something , they didn't want to make kids feel a certain way :(

if I was that teacher and was having a smoke or something I'd damned sure make a "cell phone in car" excuse. That door was the reason that shooter entered, it'll be on that teachers mind forever on what would have been had he/she went through main entrance :(

 

[The Commish]

That also doesn't seem to be Burger's viewpoint.  At least based on the abstract.

My reading is that Burger is saying that yes, the 2A protects the rights of individuals to keep and bear arms, but that right can be regulated the same way we regulate all sorts of other stuff.  I agree with him, and I've never felt that was an especially controversial POV.  (Some disagree of course, but I generally find opposing points of view to be very weak.)

Edit: I guess maybe Burger thinks that the 2A is just about the military and that he thinks the right to defend your home and the right to hunting lives in the 9A or something.  That seems like a huge stretch, but technically that view would be consistent with his abstract, too.  

This was my wondering too given the title of the piece.  Maybe I should just ignore the title and assume it's in error.  It doesn't seem to match.

 

[Kal El]

a sin tax on a Right ? Can we tax registered voters extra ?

sigh ... again, its like stopping shooters isn't a concern, you just want them to work a little harder by using different kinds of weapons to murder :(   or by being limited a little bit (and that's legally having guns, look at all the illegally having/acquiring)

I don't understand that reasoning, I just don't

An ounce of prevention, if absolutely nobody has access to firearms, then it’s a lot easier to stop mass killings. I can also bet that someone with a knife isn’t going to cause nearly as much death, but that’s not the main point here. The idea is to finally actually do something about this problem, instead of “thoughts and prayers,” or suggesting arming teachers(do you have any idea how often kids try to get into anything and everything within a classroom, not to mention that teaching is a job where a sizable portion of the students will actively make your job more stressful by virtue of you simply being a teacher and they don’t want to be there), or even claiming some hokum about “a good guy with a gun could have stopped it.” No, they would have at best limited the damage somewhat, and that’s unlikely already. Fix the mental health issue in this country, cut way back on firearm availability(I can bet that nobody actually needs any kind of assault rifle, unless they’re a really bad hunter), and screen the absolute hell out of anyone who thinks they want a gun.

 

[Max Power]

my GF works in a charter school - they can't lock their rooms, and entry doors are not locked either

blows my mind - I'm sure school board decided on it or something , they didn't want to make kids feel a certain way :(

if I was that teacher and was having a smoke or something I'd damned sure make a "cell phone in car" excuse. That door was the reason that shooter entered, it'll be on that teachers mind forever on what would have been had he/she went through main entrance :(

Well the doors at this school were lockable.  The breaching team needed a janitor to unlock the door prior to engaging the shooter.  I had assumed they didn't lock the classroom because they didn't have a heads up or time to.

Now the story is the shooter was outside for 10 minutes firing at people and a teacher knew he was coming and they still didn't lock the door.

 

[eoMMan]

and yet last week (I posted the links) multiple possible shooters were arrested/caught

and I just posted on Florida Red Flag laws and how they identified what, 200+ crazies who were threatening ?

what you're arguing now (correct me if I'm wrong) is you do not want a big complicated mess of identifying these very few people who want to hurt themsevles or others - its just too much trouble ?    

Not reading this whole thread so didn’t see your links from last week.

Same for whatever you posted regarding Florida.

Of course I don’t want a big complicated mess. Who does? If straightforward changes can be made to help identify people who want to hurt others, I’m all for it. My point, which I think your missing, is that this isn’t easy.

Have a good day.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Well the doors at this school were lockable.  The breaching team needed a janitor to unlock the door prior to engaging the shooter.  I had assumed they didn't lock the classroom because they didn't have a heads up or time to.

Now the story is the shooter was outside for 10 minutes firing at people and a teacher knew he was coming and they still didn't lock the door.

I am wondering if we are ever going to have a definitive account of exactly wtf happened in Uvalde.   Every day it seems we are updating and correcting something.  

 

[KarmaPolice]

I think background checks should be expanded.  It's a fine line though and I'm not sure what the appropriate place to call it is. Getting into people's medical backgrounds can be messy. 

I get that, I just think it's silly to think self reporting is stopping anybody who shouldn't have a gun and wants one from lying and getting one.  That's where the waiting periods come in too.  

 

[Max Power]

I am wondering if we are ever going to have a definitive account of exactly wtf happened in Uvalde.   Every day it seems we are updating and correcting something.  

They've referenced video multiple times.  Sounds like the school had a CCTV system.  Hopefully an outside investigation can shed some light on everything, because this story sucks.