Jay Maynard (jmaynard) wrote,
Jay Maynard
jmaynard

  • Mood:

Guns: not "anybody", not "anytime", not "anywhere"

wbwolf also misstates my position on gun ownership in his LJ entry. Since i can't reply to his distortion in his entry, I'll do it here.

He claims:
His position is basically any gun, any time, anywhere, anybody.


The first is more or less accurate. I believe that the Second Amendment was written to protect civilian ownership of any weapon of military utility. The Supreme Court agrees: in the case that upheld the Firearms Act of 1934's prohibition on interstate commerce in sawed-off shotguns, they ruled that it was permissible because it was not within judicial notice that they were weapons of military utility. It happens they were wrong in that, as a sawed-off shotgun is preferred by troops for close-quarters battle, but the basic principle is sound. Further, in the early years of the nation, it was not uncommon for private citizens to own cannon, and not unheard of for private citizens to own warships - and this was clearly accepted at the time.

The "any time, anywhere" is not. There are times and places when going armed is inappropriate, and placing restrictions on those is permissible in my view, so long as those restrictions are narrowly crafted to achieve an overriding state purpose - and "to prevent the possibility of an armed rampage", with no further qualification, is not enough. While I believe, for example, that the best deterrent to terrorism on aircraft is to allow passengers to carry handguns with them, I realize that this is highly unlikely to ever happen, and so I accept restrictions on carrying them there.

"Anybody" is definitely inaccurate. This is perhaps the most insidious lie coming from the Left about firearms ownership: that the NRA, and by extension "gun nuts", advocates letting anyone own firearms. This is simply wrong. There are many laws on the books that make it illegal for convicted felons, people with mental illnesses, and some others to own firearms, and I and the NRA support them fully. There are people that, by their actions, demonstrate that they should not own guns, and the law properly restricts them from it.

The distortions I've addressed are hardly unique to wbwolf (although he posted them even after I debunked them in the article he linked to in qaianna's LJ), and are spread by the leftist media over and over without any consideration of the facts. I guess it's easier to demonize gun owners than it is to refute their arguments honestly.
Subscribe

  • Someone should print this poster

    In case you can't read it, it says: VINDICATION: When the loudest critic of your policies achieves his greatest success because of them. (hat…

  • Took him long enough...

    So, President Obama finally released his birth certificate. Now we can put the matter to rest. Personally, I've always thought that whether he was…

  • Fun fact for the day

    1337% of pi is 42.

  • Post a new comment

    Error

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded 

  • 7 comments