Fla. shooting survivor pleads for gun control: ‘We are children, you guys are the adults’

[Weird Tolkienish Figure]

If we are subject to the whim of 9 justices in black robes as holy writ - then liberty is truly finished.

But we are, aren't we?

[driftdiver]

Given some of the other 'rights' you've argued in favor of on this board, coming from you I find this comment amazing.

How your mind must work.

@skeeter
In his world you have a right to: (despite not being in the Constitution)

1.  kill unborn babies
2.  marry the same sex
3.  enter the country illegally
4.  confiscate peoples property

BUT you don't have a right to bear arms, despite it being in the Constitution.

[LauraTXNM]

Abortion is not a right, individual self-determination is.  Abortion is subject to various sorts of regulations and restrictions.   As for homosexual marriage,  you simply reveal your ignorance.  Same sex marriage implicates the Constitutional requirement of the law's equal protection.  Your neighbors' decision to marry under the civil law doesn't affect you or your life in any way whatsoever.   

Jazzhead, I agree with you here on the substance.

[LauraTXNM]

@Bigun   We might want to be a little careful about referencing Israel as an example.  Their gun laws are pretty restrictive.  Permits are granted to those in existing security positions and the rest are trained to assistant in a terrorist attack.

P.S. Yes, our Bill of Rights makes us unique.  It also requires us to find especially AMERICAN solutions to our problems.  I don't think any other country has the answer -- but they might have some helpful ideas.

[INVAR]

I guess I see it a bit differently.  Yelling, "Fire!" In a crowded theater should not be protected speech.

Well then let us license and regulate all speech of every kind - especially political speech, because the precedent is we cannot yell "fire" in a crowded theater.

[LauraTXNM]

We are not in a state of rebellion against tyranny.  We have a Constitution, idiot.

But we DO have some special rights guaranteed by our BoR that would help us in that instance.

[skeeter]

@skeeter
In his world you have a right to: (despite not being in the Constitution)

1.  kill unborn babies
2.  marry the same sex
3.  enter the country illegally
4.  confiscate peoples property

BUT you don't have a right to bear arms, despite it being in the Constitution.

5. force people to violate the tenants of their faith, provided they're Christians.

[driftdiver]

Abortion is not a right, individual self-determination is.  Abortion is subject to various sorts of regulations and restrictions.   As for homosexual marriage,  you simply reveal your ignorance.  Same sex marriage implicates the Constitutional requirement of the law's equal protection.  Your neighbors' decision to marry under the civil law doesn't affect you or your life in any way whatsoever.   

@Jazzhead
Can you say disingenuous?
 
Where is self-determination listed in the Constitution?   What about the babies rights?

As for the marriage issue.   Any man could marry any woman.   Any woman could marry any man.   Thats equality baby.

What my neighbor does impacts me, the community, the county, the state and the country.   

[driftdiver]

5. force people to violate the tenants of their faith, provided they're Christians.

Howd I miss that one?   thanks!

[LauraTXNM]

Well then let us license and regulate all speech of every kind - especially political speech, because the precedent is we cannot yell "fire" in a crowded theater.

Do you think the Skokie Nazis had the right to march?

[LauraTXNM]

@Jazzhead
What my neighbor does impacts me, the community, the county, the state and the country.

Definitely.  But where do we draw the line against someone impinging (sp?) on our interests? 

[Jazzhead]

@Jazzhead
Yet that right of self-defense is also under attack.  CA, Chicago, NY, and Mass all restrict self defense to some degree.

I'm not sure specifically what laws you're referring to, but if they effectively prevent a law-abiding citizen from defending his home and property, then I join you in seeking to declare such laws unconstitutional.   The Heller decision involved just such a law,  that effectively prohibited an individual from lawfully having a handgun in the home.   

[Jazzhead]

@skeeter
In his world you have a right to: (despite not being in the Constitution)

1.  kill unborn babies
2.  marry the same sex
3.  enter the country illegally
4.  confiscate peoples property

BUT you don't have a right to bear arms, despite it being in the Constitution.

That's, of course, not what I'm saying at all.  But I hesitate to lead this discussion off-topic by debating same sex marriage and abortion. 

[Right_in_Virginia]

P.S. Yes, our Bill of Rights makes us unique.  It also requires us to find especially AMERICAN solutions to our problems.  I don't think any other country has the answer -- but they might have some helpful ideas.

You miss my point @LauraTXNM .... Highlighting the gun policy in Israel can easily be turned against gun ownership in the US.

Private gun ownership in Israel, if allowed, is used as an arm of the police and the IDF with mandatory training for rapid response in a terror attack.  It is a privilege with responsibility to the state, not a right.

Opening this can of worms may not be helpful.

[driftdiver]

Definitely.  But where do we draw the line against someone impinging (sp?) on our interests?

@LauraTXNM
Well one place might be to look at the last 200 years of what was considered socially acceptable throughout this country. 

[Bigun]

Interesting -- I thought the ownership was higher than 2.5%.

@LauraTXNM @Right_in_Virginia

IMHO all that means is that we have a huge advantage over them that we are refusing to put to use!

[Jazzhead]

What my neighbor does impacts me, the community, the county, the state and the country.

So what?  What you do impacts your neighbor, in the same sense.  But your neighbor isn't causing you any HARM simply because you disapprove of his or her lifestyle. 

[Right_in_Virginia]

@LauraTXNM @Right_in_Virginia

IMHO all that means is that we have a huge advantage over them that we are refusing to put to use!

I think the argument for arming security in schools can be made--and better made-- without the Israel reference @Bigun

Why invite putting Israel's private gun laws under a microscope? 

[Jazzhead]

Private gun ownership in Israel, if allowed, is used as an arm of the police and the IDF with mandatory training for rapid response in a terror attack.  It is a privilege with responsibility to the state, not a right.

Opening this can of worms may not be helpful.

You could say the same thing about the Second Amendment, you know.   Remember the predicate clause about the "well-regulated militia".   

[driftdiver]

That's, of course, not what I'm saying at all.  But I hesitate to lead this discussion off-topic by debating same sex marriage and abortion.

@Jazzhead
Its absolutely what you are saying.  Of course you're using more gentle language but we've all seen what happens.  We all know what the goal of the gun control advocates really is, because they've told us.   The only acceptable solution for them is a total ban on civilian ownership.  Every other 'reasonable' law is just one more stop down that slippery slope.

For folks like you increased laws on law abiding citizens is your only solution.  You refuse to look at the real causes of violence. 

[LauraTXNM]

@LauraTXNM @Right_in_Virginia

IMHO all that means is that we have a huge advantage over them that we are refusing to put to use!

Agreed ;).  I tangentially mentioned Israel a while ago, because I admire their system of universal service and therefore gun destigmatization and familiarity. 

[driftdiver]

You could say the same thing about the Second Amendment, you know.   Remember the predicate clause about the "well-regulated militia".   

@Jazzhead
Now you know better then that.

[Bigun]

I think the argument for arming security in schools can be made--and better made-- without the Israel reference @Bigun

Why invite putting Israel's private gun laws under a microscope? 

@Right_in_Virginia

I'm not inviting any such thing!  I'm just pointing out that their approach to the problem is the correct way to deal with this kind of thing.

[Jazzhead]

@Jazzhead
Its absolutely what you are saying.  Of course you're using more gentle language but we've all seen what happens.  We all know what the goal of the gun control advocates really is, because they've told us.   The only acceptable solution for them is a total ban on civilian ownership.  Every other 'reasonable' law is just one more stop down that slippery slope.

For folks like you increased laws on law abiding citizens is your only solution.  You refuse to look at the real causes of violence.

I won't engage you on slippery slope arguments.  They are bogus and intellectually weak.   

Of course we need to focus on the real causes of gun violence, same as we need to focus on the real causes of motor vehicle accidents.  But that has nothing to do with the social benefits of licensure, registration and insurance.   

[Jazzhead]

@Jazzhead
Now you know better then that.

I do - I accept Heller's conclusion that the right to self defense is an individual, natural right.  But the predicate clause of the 2A is not inconsistent with a regime such as what we find today in Israel.