True dat.
But I was responding to this claim:
*There are no qualifiers on the First Amendment.
Conversely, the Second Amendment draws a clear distinction between “a well-regulated militia” and private ownership.*
For that argument, Heller is precisely on point. Now, if he had said, “Yes, of course there’s an individual right to possess, but it can and should be regulated in this specific instance,” then I would have addressed that claim.
It was just a bad dream. Heller never happened. If I say it often enough, it will become true!
My point was that it is a perfectly legitimate argument to suggest that restrictions on ownership of firearms are not permitted under the Second, but that restrictions on carry are permitted. That could be seen to be consistent with the wording of the Amendment. You can own, but carry in public as part of a well regulated militia. Therefore, the distinction pointed out by RNATB would be valid, and the use of Heller as a case to indicate SCOTUS thought differently would not be apposite. If you see what I mean.
Still ‘a clear distinction’ as to where you can exercise that right, a distinction which is not present in the First, but one which is not addressed by the Court in Heller.
it’s a road I think I might try to explore - given that I think ownership is a federally protected right, but carry probably isn’t (though I support state laws that allow it).
It’s interesting that you can get arrested in your own home for yelling (if it’s at a Cambridge cop, anyway) - but not for bringing a gun to a protest of the President. I wonder if any of the gun-toters was yelling, because we all know how dangerous disturbing the peace can be.
Yes, as we all know, everyone who follows politics remembers the outcome of every single recent significant Supreme Court case.:rolleyes:
The difference of course is that a bullet can’t be arrested as it crosses the property line in the event a shot is fired. The people charged with protecting the president (any president) have a hard enough job as it is without people who consider themselves good citizens making it harder.
This to me is the same thing as someone going into a VFW hall and burning an American flag. Doing that sure makes a statement about the 1st Amendment, but is that the best way to deliver your message? Or does it make you look like an attention whore who is trying to push the buttons without really thinking of the consequences?
So back to the people showing up to town halls carrying their weapons. If this were a 2nd Amendment rally, or a protest against Obama for repealing the 2nd amendment, it would make sense and people should expect it (and IMHO support it). But it’s a town hall about health care with a president who is massively unpopular with a segment of the population. Race is a factor. Politics are a factor. Crowds can easily get worked up. All it takes is one weapon going off, for any reason, and it could turn into a tragic bloodbath.
What do you think would happen if these same guys turned up outside of a bank headquarters with their weapons on display to protest the financial meltdown? It’d never happen – they’d realize that it would be irresponsible and end up hurtting their movement. Why they think showing up to protest Obama while armed is a good idea I can’t figure out.
I think the 2nd amendment is just as important as the 1st, and I cringe when people act like asses in the name of “protecting” their rights.
If they were on private property adjacent to the bank with permission from the owners, the same thing.
Bricker, are you saying that, in general, the Supreme Court has been as vigorous in protecting the Second Amendment as it has the First? That it strikes down various encroachments on both with equal aplomb? Would you say that people who are very protective of the First Amendment should express equal Indignance regarding encroachments on the Tenth?
I think the original sign carrier/customer of Arty’s Anal Haberdashery was making a threat against the president. At best it was a tacit call to arms, inspiring fellow Analcaps to jump on the bandwagon. We’ve now moved to “We will forcefully resist people imposing their will on us through the strength of the majority with a vote.” Forcefully resist. Yeah, this is headed to great stretches of freedom.
If I owned a gun (it’s on the list as a future purchase, when I have time and money to actually head to a range), I’d bring it to an Obama event. Along with a honking big sign declaring my support for Obama.
These things are not mutually exclusive, even though “blood of patriots and tyrants” guy (and others) may believe them to be.
Any particular reason you’d do so?
The difference is that the helmetless are threatening their own lives; the people who show up with guns are threatening other people. The gun lovers may not want to admit it, but that’s all this phenomenon really is; a collective death threat against the President and those who support him. It’s bullying by right wing thugs.
Anyone else remember when Rush was warning voters in Philadelphia to watch out for Black Panthers at the polls? They had what, sticks?
I haven’t had the pleasure of hearing him on this issue, is it anywhere close? I’d surely expect him to note the obvious distinctions between the two situations, clearly delineate the similarities, and come to an analytically and rationally sound conclusion–of course, one that is internally consistent.
Spare me. As hard as you guys fought over the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment you’d have me convinced that you knew everything about it, but you can’t be troubled to remember the decision of the Supreme Court in the most controversial, publicized decision they’ve had in years?
In this case you can’t even pretend to ignore the decision or that it happened. You remembered exactly what the decision was (as did RNATB, a frequent participant in gun-control threads). Oh, you may claim that you didn’t remember, but the claim is hardly credible.
Anyway, on to other things.
There’s nothing unreasonable about that. I absolutely agree with you. Then again, that is somewhat inconsistent with Obama’s politics, so that might not work out the way you would hope. Which is too bad, because aside from some political issues like gun control I think Obama and I see eye to eye on things.
More like “It is bad case law. Heller never should have happened. If we replace enough bad Justices with good, right-thinking judges it can be overturned.” 
If they aren’t actually in the venues, then it’s pretty much just pathetic and impotent, not a crime or a threat to the President, but the “tree of liberty” sign is treading pretty close to advocating assassination. We’ll probably see more and more of that kind of crap. I think those who pull the strings on the right really would like to incite their moron base to rid them of this troublesome community organizer, not unlike how O’Reilly got the job done with Tiller.
I can’t imagine this sort of thing happening under any previous President, or in the vicinity of Dick Cheney.
Hell, I remember being stuck on a freeway for 45 minutes because Dick Cheney “might” come down a segment of the highway several miles down the road, so the whole thing was closed off. Hell, they blocked the exit ramps and would not allow us OFF the freeway during that period.
So count me as completely mystified both by the secret service allowing this sort of bullshit, and the public and media not picking up on the fact that this sort of thing would never have been tolerated by previous administrations.
Bwah haha ha. Our evil plan is working beautifully.
Honestly? My doing so would be simply for a political counter-point than anything. It bothers me immensely that the very act of (legally) carrying a gun is equated with hostility to Obama, both politically and physically. In actuality, without a desire to make a counter-political statement, I don’t think I’d ever leave the house with a gun unless I explicitly intended to use it (e.g., hunting or target practice).
The first news report that I saw about this made me cringe a bit. I arbor a very real fear – vague though pernicious, that’s gnawed at the back of my mind since the primary season – that someone will attempt to assassinate Obama, $DEITY forbid. I’ll admit, the reaction I had to seeing this on the news was visceral, even if it wasn’t all that strong.
Upon reflection, I think that much, if not most, of my reaction was due to the fact that guns are mostly invisible in daily life (and had little to do with the fact that it was an Obama event). That is, at this point in time, I feel confident that someone who openly carries a gun in public is a responsible, law-abiding citizen. (Of course, the aforementioned “blood of patriots and tyrants” t-shirt gives me pause.) Furthermore, I believe that a person openly carrying a firearm is not only properly licensed, but also is well-versed in firearm safety/usage and is extremely unlikely to even unholster it (much less actually use it).
Given that, I do not believe that people who openly carry firearms present any real danger to anyone (beyond eliciting uncomfortable feelings in many). The further statements from the Secret Service reinforce that sentiment as it concerns Obama specifically.
I simply have a desire to break the too-simplistic, pigeon-holing, divisive narrative presented to us via the media (or at least make it more difficult). If strapping a gun on my thigh and attending an Obama event would do that, I would.
Not as much as civilians watching an Obama motorcade and having government agents pointing their weapons at them.
President Obama was in Bristol, Virginia on July 29th for a townhall like meeting at a Kroger grocery store. The President was in town to push for healthcare reform, but something occured as the motorcade passed through town, that left the crowd feeling as though they were attending a political event in a third-world country.
As the motorcade passed by the crowd, at least one (possibly two) Secret Service agent was sweeping the crowd with his MP5 (or similar weapon).
A local radio talk show received several calls from angry attendees who described the incident as Secret Service agents aiming their weapons directly at the crowd.
The only reason I know of this is that I live in the area, and listen to that particular radio show every afternoon on my way home.
And thank you, youtube.
Somehow I don’t think Jefferson envisioned the Tree of Liberty being refreshed by the spittle-flecks of immature idiots.