The Virginia Tech Shooting

• April 17, 2007

I don’t have much to add to what’s already been said, and I’m late to the story anyway not having caught it until I got home from work today. It’s a real tragedy. Daily News Rush has a good post on the story over on the reader blog.
The only thing I’ll add is this: Were we a society that promoted the personal use of firearms as a tool for self defense (as our founders intended) rather than poo-pooing it at every turn the death/wounded toll from this shooting wouldn’t have made it to the double digits.
No doubt about it. The maniac would have been shot down minutes after starting this spree. As it was, the students/faculty/visitors at Virginia Tech were stuck fleeing from him like the unarmed sheep they were.
And yeah, I know. The grab-the-guns nuts are going to be saying “if we had better gun control this kid never would have gotten his gun in the first place.” Well that’s a bunch of crap. Guns exist. They’re everywhere in our society. We can’t make them disappear, even if we wanted to. The proverbial toothpaste is out of the tube and there’s no putting it back. So the best defense against this sort of thing is to arm ourselves as well as the criminals are.

Tags: Guns, Politics

http://magyartruth.blogspot.com/ Chief RZ

whatyearisit. This argument has been settled by several 20 year studies. Take a look at Washington, D. C. where all lawabiding citizens are denied their 2nd amendment rights. Highest crime/murder rate in the nation! Any drunken shootings in Florida involving Right to Carry permits? Don’t mix apples and oranges.
whatthe

Do we blame the knife for the stabbing.
Do we blame the cord for the strangling.
Do we blame the bomb for the bombing.
No, we blame the murderer in all these cases.
It is rediculous to blame the gun for a shooting, yet time after time our rights to protect ourselves diminish. As a result the students and faculty at VT had no way of protecting themselves against this terrorist (person who creates terror).
robert108

Only an idiot would try to bring nukes into this discussion; or maybe two idiots.
Hawk

Move_Zig,

I said Supreme Court cases, not circuit court cases. Circuit courts are not the law of the land.

Would anybody here argue that an average citizen has the right to own a tank, or a missle? Those are modern arms. So is it a matter of degrees?
http://www.valleydeals.com/cgi-bin/board2/YaBB.pl Kevin

Sounds like the killer was motivated by class envy, fomented by mercenary politicians.

The Chicago Tribune reports that a note was found in Cho’s Harper Hall dorm room on the Blacksburg, Va., campus. The Tribune said the note believed written by Cho, a senior English major, complained about “rich kids,” “debauchery” and “deceitful charlatans” on campus.
Bat One

Technically, Hawk is correct that US Circuit Court rulings are not nationally precedential. But the last time the US Supreme Court ruled on the question of the regulation of firearms by the individual states or the federal government and the applicability of the Second Amendment to such regulation was in US v. Miller, in 1939.

Currently, the most commonly cited circuit court rulings are from US v. Napier, from the 6th Circuit, and US v. Emerson, from the 5th. Interestingly, in Emerson, the court said,

(The Second Amendment) protects individual Americans in their right to keep and bear arms whether or not they are a member of a select militia or performing active military service or training….

Although, as we have held, the Second Amendment does protect individual rights, that does not mean that those rights may never be made subject to any limited, narrowly tailored specific exceptions or restrictions for particular cases that are reasonable and not inconsistent with the right of Americans generally to individually keep and bear private arms as historically understood in this country.

The US Supreme Court refused to grant cert in either Napier or Emerson, effectively endorsing both lower court rulings.
Hawk

We don’t even allow other countries to own nukes. But you think citizens should be able to? That is unbelievable.
bob martin

Whoever thinks gun control is the answer is a fucking idiot: read below

As far as I am concerned, Cho is a hero in my book. As being of similar nature, bullied extremely as a kid and being sexually frustrated for practically all my life, I am 34, had sex only a couple of times without paying for it. I know what he went through. The simple fact is, if just 1 women noticed cho and mabey talked to him, this probably would not have happened. The problem in todays society is that women have so much sexual choice and they all go after the 5% of men who they consider desireable (the “alpha” types), that so many men get left out in the cold, a sexually deprived desert for which there is absouletly no escape. Some men can deal with it, for others, the biological drive which has driven the human race for countless millenia to reproduce, punishes us dearly for not getting the thing which all of us deserve and need just as much as food, water and shelter; sexual companionship. This drives many men to suicide, and sometimes homicide since they see women, bullies, jocks, etc as the ones who are depriving them of this need. Women just dont understand this insatiable need men have. But for me, it would probably be similar to being chained to a post like a dog, while everyone else around you is eating fillet mignon while you are starving competing with rats for the scraps. The people know you are starving but they dont care. If you were in this position, I guarentee you would feel anger and hatred towards your opressors as well, probably to the point where you would want to kill them. This is how Cho felt!
From the extensive reading I did on Cho, it seems that right before he snapped, he was denied sex by an escort. If I were him, I would have snapped too! For a guy who’s existance was never even acknowledged by women all his life, he was probably nervous and embarassed as hell having to hire a prostitute since it was his only option, as it is for countless other men. This must have been the breaking point. Just think, if that escort had sex with him, 33 people would still be alive today.
The greater problem is that in our feminized, liberal, PC society, no one wants to mention the sexual starvation of men since that would tarnish the image of women as the pure, and innocent little angels that the media and hollywood makes them out to be and people would have to rethink the stereotype of all men being dogs, players, etc. I assure you that like 1% of men are capable of becomming players in the first place and the reason the stereotype exists is that 90% of all women are attracted to that 1% and the rest of us guys are just ignored and treated like trash by women.
I have wanted to do what cho did many times in my life and I can assure you that women have treated me like garbage all my life since I was never considered “cool” and was always a little socially awkward. It is just a shame that the media is throwing all that crap out about mental illness since it is too pussified to talk about the greater problem plauging men in this society.
I hate to say this, because I have a conscience and it is a shame the people have to die before changes can be made in society. It is just too bad that columbine did not happen 20 years earlier, as it may have saved me from a whole childhood worth of bullying and as a result my self esteem would have been more intact. It is just too bad that Cho did not select his victims better, mabey shooting up a sorority instead of just random people, then the media would have had to acknowledge sexual frustration as a major cause of this catastrophe.
Mickey

The legality of guns is not the issue, only a smokescreen.

The islamo jihadists’ have proven that any type of IED is a far more effective way to murder innocent people. Guns are for amateurs.
http://stormfront.org/ Virginia Tech

Virginia Tech reports shooting (multiple)
http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

Virgina Tech, you can take your neo-nazi crap and blow it right out your stupid, ignorant head.

I think Woof hit a nerve, that being said, stupid gun laws don’t protect anyone but the criminals from getting shot by law abiding citizens they are preying on.
robert108

By definition, gun laws are only obeyed by law-abiding people. The robbers and killers don’t give a crap.
Incidentally, guns are prohibited on campus, where it would have helped in this case. The state and federal laws are meaningless in this case. Nice try at misdirection, though, Woof.
http://SayAnythingBlog.com The_Whistler_ofnd

How about they demonstrate where the millions of concealed weapons holders have proven irresponsible.
http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

Gents,

I’ve packed heat and sold guns in Virginia (prior to 911, Florida thereafter — so my info is dated) Yes, Virginia is a Shall-Issue CCW (Concealed Carry of Weapon) state. But there were, and may still be, exceptions to concealed carry: not in government buildings (I wonder why); restaurants (the VCDL.org have been fighting this for ages) and schools.

The 18-21 window, when you think about it, may be misguided. If an 18 year old can bear arms for his country, kill others and be killed by them, he cannot carry personal arms in his own defense, assuming he passes all other criteria to earn a valid CCW?

Our mid-twenties, Asian killer would have been shot down like a dog, had any of the victims been able to carry and shoot back. This doesn’t rule out all casualties, since CCW is not universal and in everyday life packing heat doesn’t always translate into being ready for quick-draw response.

But forbidding arms to the law-abiding made them victims and ensured their deaths.
http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

So yes maybe in THIS CASE having a whole bunch of students armed every day would have stopped this guy, but then over the course of an average year, how many drunken fistfights or verbal shouting arguments would have turned deadly? How many boyfriend/girlfriend arguments or breakups would have turned deadly? How many students pidded at a teacher over a bad grade might have turned deadly? Having everybody have a gun in their pocket is NOT a good answer for the world at large on a daily basis. But I predicted this suggestion would be here when I heard the story.

No more than the rest of society.
http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ proof_positive

knee jerk reactions

Is there a State waiting period? No.

So, having a Federal waiting period and Virginia being one of the states means there’s no waiting period? Knee jerk, indeed!

By definition people are law abiding till they commit a crime.

And they say the law is an ass!
whatyearisit

So yes maybe in THIS CASE having a whole bunch of students armed every day would have stopped this guy, but then over the course of an average year, how many drunken fistfights or verbal shouting arguments would have turned deadly? How many boyfriend/girlfriend arguments or breakups would have turned deadly? How many students pidded at a teacher over a bad grade might have turned deadly? Having everybody have a gun in their pocket is NOT a good answer for the world at large on a daily basis. But I predicted this suggestion would be here when I heard the story.
http://magyartruth.blogspot.com/ Chief RZ

WOOF. Negative. Criminals with long “rap” sheets are criminals, not lawabiding citizens. Had the students been allowed to carry, they would have had a fighting chance.
http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

[Begin Part Deux]

With regard to the Supreme Court, there’s nothing in Presser, Cruickshank or Miller that justifies gun control.

Indeed, the dicta in U.S. v. Verdugo-Urquidez, 494 U.S. 259 (1990) included the following:

That text, by contrast with the Fifth and Sixth Amendments, extends its reach only to “the people.” Contrary to the suggestion of amici curiae that the Framers used this phrase “simply to avoid [an] awkward rhetorical redundancy,” Brief for American Civil Liberties Union et al. as Amici Curiae 12, n. 4, “the people” seems to have been a term of art employed in select parts of the Constitution. The Preamble declares that the Constitution is ordained and established by “the people of the United States.” The Second Amendment protects “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms,” and the Ninth and Tenth Amendments provide that certain rights and powers are retained by and reserved to “the people.” See also U.S. Const., Amdt. 1 (“Congress shall make no law . . . abridging . . . the right of the people peaceably to assemble”) (emphasis added); Art. I, 2, cl. 1 (“The House of Representatives shall be composed of Members chosen every second Year by the people of the several States”) (emphasis added). While this textual exegesis is by no means conclusive, it suggests that “the people” protected by the Fourth Amendment, and by the First and Second Amendments, and to whom rights and powers are reserved in the Ninth and Tenth Amendments, refers to a class of persons who are part of a national community or who have otherwise developed sufficient connection with this country to be considered part of that community. See United States ex rel. Turner v. Williams, 194 U.S. 279, 292 (1904)

Will the person closest to whomever uttered the abomination of Sensible Gun Control please reach out and slap the living dogshit out of that idiot?

Thank you.
http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

During the last round of shrill alarmist calls for gun control in the wake of Columbine, the MSM focused on the ready availability of guns to kids — not the shooters.

The meme of ready availability was pretty much a lie, since at that time there were more controls on guns vis kids than there ever had been. Previously, young boys would often bring their guns to school for either the shooting club if they were city folk, or hunting, if rural.

Studiously avoided by the MSM, both in the school massacres coverage and the national gun-crime coverage, was a focus on the shooters themselves.

Demographics would have been very embarrassing and very politically-incorrect. Better to focus on the guns and take away the rights of everyone.

Most of the mass public shootings, as Professor Lott of University of Chicago pointed out, the vast majority of these massacres took place where strong gun control measures were in place, ensuring the absence of return defensive fire. Those laws had set the stage for a shooting gallery, not a shoot-out.

Notably, a lot of those school massacres involved the presence of SSRI’s, or Selective Serotonin Reuptake Inhibitors, a recent addition to many schools.

From early reports this methodical and determined shooter was a recent immigrant who had obtained his entrance papers to the US from Shanghai, China. A more reasoned approach to fighting crime would be to focus on the criminals, establish a profile and tailor your laws and law enforcement accordingly, rather than use the blunt instrument of massive intrusions upon a Constitutionally-protected right.

We need to know more about this shooter — but dollars to donuts, the MSM will instead be leading the charge for renewed calls for Gun Control.
Hawk

The 2nd amendment doesn’t exist for hunters and sport shooters, you twit. It exists as a last-ditch defense against tyranny.

Actually it exist so that if you are in a militia you can house your own weapons so that if an armory is taken by either a tyrant or a foreign power, there is still the militia to defend us. The first clause of the second amendment is not inconsequential.
David Brown

I cannot imagine the terrible hurt the families are feeling just now. I pray god will give them the strength to carry on living. May the perpetrator be judged and sent to hell.
http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

Its a horrible deal, but immediately right after the Belt Way MSM was already asking about gun control laws and talking about how they need to do something. I predicted this would happen and it did.
Hawk

The militia is the citizenry. So tell me how limits on clip sizes and weapon types are justifiable under the 2nd amendment.
I’ll give you the hint: They aren’t.

Take it up with the Supreme Court, they are on my side.
Hawk

Move_Zig,

Why not cite any Supreme Court caselaw?

I can find just as many or more scholarly journal articles or circuit court cases that say that the first clause of the 2nd Amendment requiring a well regulated militia as you can saying it is meaningless. It is not cut and dry as much as you would want it to be. And the more your side claims that assault rifles and supersized clips are protected by the second amendment, the more you will lose. Its common sense.
http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

Sensible gun control laws may of helped.

Dammit Rob, did you let another idiot in here?

First off, sensible gun control is an oxymoron.

Just as American Leftist is an oxymoron.

As has been pointed out in this forum numerous times, and in this thread at least once, that the places with the most stringent guns laws, the sort recently found to be un-Constitutional, are the ones with the most out of control gun crime.

Even an amoeba with the faintest inkling of sentience will conclude that you are not made safer by being made defenseless.

Whether you play soccer without a cup, football without a helmet, boff a 3rd World Ho without a raincoat, you are asking for trouble.

The Israelis had this discussion years ago and because reality is very immediate and harsh in that part of the world, they quickly decided that the safest avenue was by arming the schools.

Teachers and kindergarten nurses now started to carry guns, schools were protected by parents (and often grandpas) guarding them in voluntary shifts. No school group went on a hike or trip without armed guards. The Police involved the citizens in a voluntary civil guard project “Mishmar Esrachi,” which even had its own sniper teams. The Army’s Youth Group program, “Gadna”, trained 15 to 16- year-old kids in gun safety and guard procedures and the older high-school boys got involved with the Mishmar Esrachi. During one noted incident, the “Herzliyah Bus massacre” (March ’78, hijacking of a bus, 37 dead, 76 wounded), these youngsters were involved in the overall security measures in which the whole area between North Tel Aviv and the resort town of Herzlyiah was blocked off, manning roadblocks with the police, guarding schools kindergartens, etc.

Second, Sensible Gun Control must be based upon the premise that the Second Amendment doesn’t mean what it says and that the Supremacy Clause is discarded:

This Constitution, and the Laws of the United States which shall be made in Pursuance thereof; and all Treaties made, or which shall be made, under the Authority of the United States, shall be the supreme Law of the Land; and the Judges in every State shall be bound thereby, any Thing in the Constitution or Laws of any State to the Contrary notwithstanding.

The landmark Supreme Court case of Marbury v. Madison was very clear on this issue:

Thus, the particular phraseology of the constitution of the United States confirms and strengthens the principle, supposed to be essential to all written constitutions, that a law repugnant to the constitution is void; and that courts, as well as other departments, are bound by that instrument.

It’s only Leftist revisionist’s contempt for the Constitution that has allowed the perversion of Gun Control to advance as far as it has.

[End Part Un]
http://www.sayanythingblog.com/ electnixon

how many drunken fistfights or verbal shouting arguments would have turned deadly?

Keep in mind that that the age limit for CCW is typically 21, so not all of the students would have been armed – only a critical mass of older, mature & trained students of teachers would have been armed.

How many of the victims would have needed to be armed to reduce the scope of this tragedy?

If you don’t support allowing students CCWs, what about the faculty & staff?

And as much as I hate to respond to WOOF, the act of carrying a joint at the same time as a handgun is typically already a felony (at least in VA):

simultaneously possessing a Schedule I or II controlled drug shall be a Class 6 felony with a mandatory minimum five year term of imprisonment
robert108

…as long as I don’t commit criminal acts with them, ownership of weapons should clearly not be against any law.

What part of that didn’t you understand? Your inability to discriminate between right and wrong is not universal.
docdave

And the more your side claims that assault rifles and supersized clips are protected by the second amendment, the more you will lose.

hawk, and where in the US Constitution are assault rifles (whatever they are – the gun control loonies keep changing that) and supersized clips (what size is that – the loonies constantly redefine that too) prohibited? The second amendment makes no distinction on the weapons permitted to the ‘people’.
The anti-gun complaint that ordinary citizens should not have military style weapons is equally false as the populance at the time of the ratification of the Constitution had weapons equivalent to the military style weapons of that era. In fact ‘well regulated militia’ is the people in general and to have a militia capable of defending our nation absolutely requires that they have the latest and best weapons. Furthermore, the 2nd Amendment words ‘shall not be infringed’ puts no limit on the type of arms the people can possess.

The 2nd Amendment invalidates all gun laws as they pretain to the general public and to read it any other way is to defy the Constitution.
http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

Oops, I guess I didn’t know about that one. I was asleep all day and watched hockey all night.
Mickey

If the serial numbers were filed off these guns as it has been reported then these guns were most likely not purchased legally. So gun control is a moot issue. Regulations only effect law abiding citizens.
Mickey

All you can do is learn from the mistakes made. A series of events set this person over the edge. He could have just as easily driven a car into crowded street of pedestrians; he could have walked into a day care with a machete; he could have thrown acid in a victims face; he could have blocked off the exits and started a midnight fire.

The availability of a handgun(s) was not the cause for the crime. A less violent world would be nice but I won’t hold my breath while we have such a large number of hypocrites right here in our own society that honor fascists and tyrants and then falsely claim to be “patriots”.
http://ndgoon.blogspot.com/ goon

Look for the media and political mercenaries to make fools of themselves with knee jerk reactions, as usual.

your right read woof’s post, pretty much makes the left’s argument pro-registration. A registration is going to stop a gun crime. If the guy has never comitted a crime an NCIC/INLETS check is going to going to determine anything.
robert108

By definition people are law abiding till they commit a crime. With or without a weapon.

Irrelevant to the fact that gun laws only affect law-abiding people. The robbers and murderers don’t give a crap about such laws.
http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/entry/homosexuality_is_wrong_-_a_compendium move_zig

Hawk, in the battle of wits, you seem to be unarmed.

Did you happen to notice all those underlined letter thingys with names of, like, CASES?

If you are just pulling your arguments out of your ass, that’s exactly where they belong.

Please, do us all — and yourself — a favor. READ this.

It’s not the BEST opinion, but pretty darn good, considering it just came out of the DC Court of Appeals.
robert108

Would anybody here argue that an average citizen has the right to own a tank, or a missle?

I do. Any law-abiding citizen should be able to own any weapon he or she chooses to. What part of “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.” don’t you understand?
We don’t live in a totalitarian society, and as long as I don’t commit criminal acts with them, ownership of weapons should clearly not be against any law.
Hawk

Sensible gun control laws may of helped. It is believed that he bought both guns days before the shooting. If there was a waiting period he might of had time to cool off. He also likely had oversized clips. If he would of had to stop and reload it may of helped.

There is no reason that an average citizen needs to have oversized clips or assault weapons.
http://www.valleydeals.com/cgi-bin/board2/YaBB.pl Kevin

Look for the media and political mercenaries to make fools of themselves with knee jerk reactions, as usual.
http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

I think they should have gun lockers at the door of every building that is public and bans guns. Its foolish to have ‘islands’ like that. What is one to do? Leave it in one’s car where a crook can lift it and shoot people?
WOOFX

By definition people are law abiding till they commit a crime.
With or without a weapon.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

Goon, the “Virginia Tech” commenter is linking to a Storm Front, a neo-nazi hate site.

Woofie didn’t have anything to do with that particular comment from me.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

Virgina Tech, you can take your neo-nazi crap and blow it right out your stupid, ignorant head.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

It is believed that he bought both guns days before the shooting. If there was a waiting period he might of had time to cool off

Until the next time he got angry. He’d still have the guns then.

He also likely had oversized clips. If he would of had to stop and reload it may of helped.

Or he could have just bought more of the smaller clips.

There is no reason that an average citizen needs to have oversized clips or assault weapons.

“From time to time the tree of liberty must be watered by the blood of tyrants and patriots.”

– Thomas Jefferson

The 2nd amendment doesn’t exist for hunters and sport shooters, you twit. It exists as a last-ditch defense against tyranny.

For all the complaining you dumb libs do about Bush and what a tyrant he is, you sure don’t mind stripping citizens of their individual ability to defend themselves should things in this country truly go south.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

Can’t be much easier to get a gun than in Virginia

Virginia Tech doesn’t allow guns on campus, Woofie. You dumb libs don’t like the idea of armed citizens.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

Take it up with the Supreme Court, they are on my side.

And the Supreme Court is infallible?

Please. Get a clue. Our founder’s intent was clear, but it’s been twisted by unprincipled twits with an agenda like you.
WOOFX

Laptop,
iPod,
joint ,
X,
beer bong,
Glock 17,
ready for school.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

Privately-owned nuclear weapons will become an issue when nuclear technology is something that is available to the average citizen.

As for court rulings on 2a, Bat sums it up well. We citizens have a right to keep and bear arms, and it is not dependent upon our membership in a militia. The court does recognize that there are certain areas where the right is not absolute, but we’ve seen this with other constitutional rights. Like free speech. We recognize that we are free to say what we want, but we may not slander. And we may not exercise our free speech with a bull horn on a residential street at 3:00am.

It boils down to common sense. Is disallowing firearms in a court of law a violation of the 2nd amendment? I wouldn’t say that it is. Are regulations preventing firearms on public campuses a violation of the 2nd amendment? I don’t think they are either.

They key with Virginia Tech is not that their policy against guns was unconstitutional, but rather that it was just plain foolish.
http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

I agree with r108. Again, one can manufacture their own canon, fairly simply, and shoot cement and nails out of it or any other girsly ‘filler’. Why shouldn’t we have legal means to aquire non-homemade guns. BTW a homemade cement and nails canon makes a great surrogate for a security gate at the end of your driveway… and they thought the landmine warning sign was a joke! If a private citizen wants to buy a nuke and they have the funds and access, what’s to stop them, right r108?
http://sayanythingblog.com/readers/author/sparkiearbuckle sayanything-81

This thing is really sad. Everyone can point fingers in retrospect… But sometimes one determined nutjob can do a horrible thing. I’m not convinced that gun laws would have affected it. In Vermont we have the most lenient gun laws in the country. It doesn’t mean that every Vermonter is packing heat waiting to put down an insane shooter. All I know is that’s a lot of ‘kids’ that got killed. Its effing horrible.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

You ignorant libs and your inability to grasp that possessing/carrying a firearm is a right enshrined in the Constitution by our founding fathers.

Why are you guys incapable of trusting the average citizen? You won’t let us keep our money to spend ourselves, you won’t us carry guns…next you’ll be saying that we’re not allowed to think what we want either.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

Hawk, why don’t you review some of the comments of our founders on the right to bear arms? You know, the folks who actually wrote the second amendment…

Here’s some quotes from the early days of our country which show you, Mr. Hawk, to be an ignorant, history-revising fool (I’ve thrown some other quotes in as well because I’m a nice, thoughtful guy concerned about your ignorance):

“the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the state…”
-PA Declaration of Rights, 1776

“To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms…”
-”Letters from the Federal Farmer,” 1787 pamphlet

“[Tyranny cannot be safe] without a standing army, an enslaved press, and a disarmed populace.”
-James Madison, autobiography

“The great object is, that every man be armed.”
-Patrick Henry

“Notwithstanding the military establishments in the several kingdoms of Europe, which are carried as far as the public resources will bear, the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”
-James Madison, Federalist 46

“No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
-Thomas Jefferson, proposed VA constitution

“Congress shall never disarm any citizen, unless such as are or have been in actual rebellion.”
-New Hampshire ratification of the Constitution

“the subjects that are protestant may have arms for their defense”"
-British Declaration of Rights 1688

“Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks. Never think of taking a book with you.”
-Thomas Jefferson, letter to his nephew

“The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to Congress a power to disarm the people.”
-Willam Rawle, “A View of the Constitution” (1825)

“…the people are confirmed by the next article [the Second Amendment] in the right to keep and bear their private arms.”"
-Tench Coxe, friend of Madison

Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.
-Noah Webster

“the people have a right to bear arms for the defense of themselves and the state…”
-PA Declaration of Rights, 1776

Had enough yet? Still going to cling to the retarded conclusion that the second amendment was a right to keep and bear arms for the National Guard only?

You do realize that certain members of our founding fathers, Madison and Jefferson for example, were actually against a standing army right? So why then would they express support for an amendment guaranteeing gun rights only for the military?

It doesn’t make sense. Your position on this issue doesn’t make sense.

Now I’m sure that you can find some court ruling or paper by an alleged constitutional scholar claiming that the 2nd amendment means guns only for the military or something like that, but they’re wrong. If we look at what the founders, who wrote the law, actually believed when it came to private gun ownership (and what they intended by writing the 2nd amendment) the only conclusion is that they were for a hands-off attitude when it came to weapons owned by citizens.

The courts aren’t infallible (see: Roe, Kelo, etc.) and law professors certainly aren’t either. I think you maybe need to sit yourself down and do a little thinking on this for yourself.
http://sayanythingblog.com robport

The first clause of the second amendment is not inconsequential.

Neither is the definition of “militia” from those times.

The militia is the citizenry. So tell me how limits on clip sizes and weapon types are justifiable under the 2nd amendment.

I’ll give you the hint: They aren’t.
WOOFX

Can’t be much easier to get a gun than in Virginia

Gun Laws in Virginia

Handguns

* Permit to purchase handgun? No.

* Registration of handguns? No.

* Licensing of owners of handguns? No.

* Permit to carry handguns? Yes. A permit is required if concealed.

Other Requirements

* Is there a State waiting period? No.

* Is there a FBI *NICS check for firearm transactions? No. State system.

* Permit to carry a concealed weapon required? Yes.

* Record of sale: No.

You Get What You Need

Create a SAB Readerblog

Blog Advice and Support
Installs and Upgrades
Theme Modifications
Custom Plugins
Theme Design
Conversions and Relocations
Hacked Site Recovery
Mobile Apps Development

SayAnythingBlog.com

The Virginia Tech Shooting

Create a SAB Readerblog

Recent Comments