Reader comments
Court shoots down D.C. gun ban
49 comments | Read story
A small step, but a needed one | 12:25 a.m. June 27, 2008
Now maybe we can start getting rid of the Defenseless Victim Zones (what are
incorrectly called "Weapon-free Zones).
Chris | 12:36 a.m. June 27, 2008
Oh please Gary. An increased amount of guns does not equal a greater amount of
injury or violence.
The swiss require that a gun is in the home of every militia man, which was, is or will be virtually all it's male citizens. It is an integral part of their lives. Gun ownership is incredibly high. Guess what Gary? Violence is low. Crime is low.
Lets contrast that with the District of Columbia? No guns whatsoever. A place that is Highly violent, Burdensome crime rates, and ridiculous murder rates.
Not enough proof for you? Look at Great Britain. Guns are virtually regulated to non-existence. Guess what Gary? People are still killing others, Violence is up. Crime up. Yet where are all these guns you seem to believe is the cause of violent behavior.
The problem with America is not too many guns, it is too few. The Criminals have too many, the law abiding citizens don't. Unless they have an expressed zeal for the 2nd Amendment, they will not go out of their way to arm themselves lawfully. Gary, Criminals don't follow laws. You are only helping them and hurting society with your over-regulations of firearms.
The swiss require that a gun is in the home of every militia man, which was, is or will be virtually all it's male citizens. It is an integral part of their lives. Gun ownership is incredibly high. Guess what Gary? Violence is low. Crime is low.
Lets contrast that with the District of Columbia? No guns whatsoever. A place that is Highly violent, Burdensome crime rates, and ridiculous murder rates.
Not enough proof for you? Look at Great Britain. Guns are virtually regulated to non-existence. Guess what Gary? People are still killing others, Violence is up. Crime up. Yet where are all these guns you seem to believe is the cause of violent behavior.
The problem with America is not too many guns, it is too few. The Criminals have too many, the law abiding citizens don't. Unless they have an expressed zeal for the 2nd Amendment, they will not go out of their way to arm themselves lawfully. Gary, Criminals don't follow laws. You are only helping them and hurting society with your over-regulations of firearms.
GK from England | 1:59 a.m. June 27, 2008
Law abiding citizens will need to protect themselves and their families when
mobs, comprising of predominantly black youths, rampage, pillage and riot
through most cities attacking anyone they see...look what happened in New
Orleans with the mobs there! I know it sounds harsh to say such things but
people can only be prepared for the terrible times that lay ahead if they are
warned and the truth spoken.
Comments continue below
Tab L. Uno, LCSW, Clearfield, Ut | 3:24 a.m. June 27, 2008
I read the majority opinion with interest and it is well written and quiet
persuasive. This ruling pretty much maintains the status quo as to gun control
restrictions except for the total ban on weapons and specifically allows for the
regulation and restriction of private weapons as well as specifically allowing
total bans on private weapons in government buildings, schools and bans felons
and persons with mental health problems from owning weapons. In some ways this
is a well-balanced and reasoned opinion that maintain a Constitutional right to
bear arms and at the same time to provide the power of government to ensure that
reasonable and sensible restrictions are put into place.
Art | 5:11 a.m. June 27, 2008
Great day!
I encourage everyone to read the majority opinion.
(search SCOTUS Gun Ban pdf)
It is an excellent lesson in history. The one part that was most enlightening for me was from 1769 where citizens prohibited from having a gun in their homes is they didn't attend the Church of England!
It becomes clear also that the part of the 2nd Amendmant about the militia was not the operative part but only a perface. Many examples and comparisons are given.
Our very lives depend on knowing our God-given rights and the history of abuses thereto.
Thank you DN for this pretty good article.
I encourage everyone to read the majority opinion.
(search SCOTUS Gun Ban pdf)
It is an excellent lesson in history. The one part that was most enlightening for me was from 1769 where citizens prohibited from having a gun in their homes is they didn't attend the Church of England!
It becomes clear also that the part of the 2nd Amendmant about the militia was not the operative part but only a perface. Many examples and comparisons are given.
Our very lives depend on knowing our God-given rights and the history of abuses thereto.
Thank you DN for this pretty good article.
Ray | 5:42 a.m. June 27, 2008
Our founding fathers were wise concerning the 2nd Amendment. The courts should
have never been involved. Thank God for this fundamental right to bear arm, and
thank God that it takes two thirds of a majority to override a constitutional
amendment.
Pooh | 5:50 a.m. June 27, 2008
"'More guns mean more violence, more grief and more injury. There is a
high correlation between the two,' (Sackett) said."
Are you kidding? Mr. Sackett, try reading Lott's book on the irrefutable correlation between more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens resulting in less violent crime. If you have trouble understanding the mathematics, get help. It's too important for you to be so wilfully ignorant on the subject.
Are you kidding? Mr. Sackett, try reading Lott's book on the irrefutable correlation between more guns in the hands of law abiding citizens resulting in less violent crime. If you have trouble understanding the mathematics, get help. It's too important for you to be so wilfully ignorant on the subject.
Pardon Me? | 6:25 a.m. June 27, 2008
This article asks how the supreme court ruling will impact the states ability to
require guns on campus.
How would this impact this? The court increased peoples ability to keep and bare arms, which is already allowed on Utah campuses. If this were to be impacted, it would have to be disallowed. Which the court ruling would not do.
Don't understand what the author of this article was thinking.
How would this impact this? The court increased peoples ability to keep and bare arms, which is already allowed on Utah campuses. If this were to be impacted, it would have to be disallowed. Which the court ruling would not do.
Don't understand what the author of this article was thinking.
Gary S. | 6:27 a.m. June 27, 2008
For starters, I am not the Gary S. quoted in the article. I disagree with him.
:-)
Whew. The Republic survives. It's sad that it survives by a narrow 5-4 crapshoot, but at least it survives.
Looking through history, freedom-friendly leaders wanted people to have guns to help prevent government abuses. Dictators and tyrants wanted to take guns away to protect their power. I'm grateful that 5/9 of the Supreme Court sided with freedom over tyranny in this case.
I live near D.C. I hope this ruling will help D.C. fix its crime problem. If D.C. does not fully comply with the ruling, it would be a good opportunity to end D.C. home rule. I'm not sure how well D.C. would fare under Congress's control, but they can't do worse than the D.C. government has done.
This landmark decision would not have happened without the Constitution-abiding Supreme Court justices appointed in recent years. It highlights the importance of electing John McCain, who in most respects abides the Constitution himself.
Whew. The Republic survives. It's sad that it survives by a narrow 5-4 crapshoot, but at least it survives.
Looking through history, freedom-friendly leaders wanted people to have guns to help prevent government abuses. Dictators and tyrants wanted to take guns away to protect their power. I'm grateful that 5/9 of the Supreme Court sided with freedom over tyranny in this case.
I live near D.C. I hope this ruling will help D.C. fix its crime problem. If D.C. does not fully comply with the ruling, it would be a good opportunity to end D.C. home rule. I'm not sure how well D.C. would fare under Congress's control, but they can't do worse than the D.C. government has done.
This landmark decision would not have happened without the Constitution-abiding Supreme Court justices appointed in recent years. It highlights the importance of electing John McCain, who in most respects abides the Constitution himself.
pchenderson | 7:39 a.m. June 27, 2008
Yes, I agree with the Supreme Courts decision on �Second
Amendment� rights. Washington DC (and other States) have
gone too far in taking away Constitutional Rights from US Citizens (those honest
citizens without mental or psychological problems). As a side note,
�All States that have adopted Concealed Weapons Permits for
qualifying citizens have experienced a decrease in crime for each year of
adoption�. What does that say about decreasing crime?
Criminals could care less for the gun laws of individual States. It is time to
quit punishing �law abiding� citizens
for the actions of the �criminally
minded�! Punish criminals by taking away their relative
rights, not the rights of �honest
citizens�! The ruling had nothing to do with
"legislating from the bench"! It completely has to do with
interpreting the "Constitution Of The United States" the ONLY way it
reasonably can to be interpreted! The problem is some States (District) enjoy
ignoring the "Constitution Of The United States" and it takes Supreme
Court Cases like this one to FINALLY MAKE IT TO THE HIGHEST COURT in reeling
them back consistent with Constitutional Law (Check and Balance).
Nate | 7:45 a.m. June 27, 2008
I disagree that this ruling may not have some potential impact on Utah's
firearm laws. Scalia specifically acknowledged government's ability to
regulate the carrying of concealed weapons.
Interestingly though, his interpretation of the phrase "bear", his reference to open carry laws struck down by State Constitutions,and his noted exclusion of open carry in his list of permissable regulations seem to indicate that overly restrictive open-carry restrictions may be unconstitutional. Once the incorporation issue is addressed, and I don't think the court can square this opinion with their other incorporation case law and fail to incorporate, this issue will likely be litigated.
I always believed that the Court would in its current configuration find that an individual right existed. (Mainly based on Kennedy's revelations during oral argument.) However, I was concerned that Kennedy would insist writing the opinion and forever muddle any right granted with incomprehensible multi prong balancing tests or even insist on rational basis scrutiny that would gut any meaningful consitutional protections.
Scalia brilliantly clarified the obvious and did so without encumbering the second amendment with the Court's rediculous fundamental right jurisprudence.
Finally we had a good day for Freedom and Common Sense.
Interestingly though, his interpretation of the phrase "bear", his reference to open carry laws struck down by State Constitutions,and his noted exclusion of open carry in his list of permissable regulations seem to indicate that overly restrictive open-carry restrictions may be unconstitutional. Once the incorporation issue is addressed, and I don't think the court can square this opinion with their other incorporation case law and fail to incorporate, this issue will likely be litigated.
I always believed that the Court would in its current configuration find that an individual right existed. (Mainly based on Kennedy's revelations during oral argument.) However, I was concerned that Kennedy would insist writing the opinion and forever muddle any right granted with incomprehensible multi prong balancing tests or even insist on rational basis scrutiny that would gut any meaningful consitutional protections.
Scalia brilliantly clarified the obvious and did so without encumbering the second amendment with the Court's rediculous fundamental right jurisprudence.
Finally we had a good day for Freedom and Common Sense.
Ken | 7:45 a.m. June 27, 2008
I thank God for the right to keep and bear arms. Thank you Dad for my loving
upbringing and the many years we spent in the mountains hunting. I realize now,
the reason I hunted was not for the sake of the hunt but to be with my dad. No
wonder I stopped hunting when my dad did. without that trusty old 30-40 Krag
none of those dear memories would have been possible. Can you imagine going deer
hunting with out a weapon? When I vote, I will consider which of the candidates
will do their best to protect my second ammendment right to own guns and thus
enjoy the outdoors and have some defense for my property, home, loved ones and
life.
Left Coast Liberal | 7:50 a.m. June 27, 2008
Obama is alright with this ruling. A liberal having a Mitt moment? My guess is
few conservatives will call it "flip flopping."
Under this ruling, people have a right to have guns but the court didn't restrict a states right to deturmine who can own guns, the proceedures to purchase a gun and what guns are sold.
I know, the facist in conservatism couldn't strict the hand of government in your life.
This ruling with be job security for the NRA elite.
I like it that Obama isn't crying about the evil courts. That line as gotten old because conservatives have gone to that well one too many times.
Under this ruling, people have a right to have guns but the court didn't restrict a states right to deturmine who can own guns, the proceedures to purchase a gun and what guns are sold.
I know, the facist in conservatism couldn't strict the hand of government in your life.
This ruling with be job security for the NRA elite.
I like it that Obama isn't crying about the evil courts. That line as gotten old because conservatives have gone to that well one too many times.
Zell | 8:17 a.m. June 27, 2008
Interesting that only 5 of the 9 judges understand the second ammendment or its
history. The sad part about this is possible licensing-ie registration- of
firearms which will be the first step in taking away our right to self defense.
hhh1 | 8:17 a.m. June 27, 2008
Judicial activism by conservatives
The high court's 2nd Amendment opinion makes the majority's agenda clear.
The high court's 2nd Amendment opinion makes the majority's agenda clear.
ed smith | 8:29 a.m. June 27, 2008
The bill of rights clearly states that the right of the people to keep and bear
arms shall not be abridged. I'm delighted that the SC, by however small a
margin, reinforced that, but it left wide open the door to the further
infringement at a state level. As someone who no longer keeps a handgun in my
home or on my person, I still am apalled at how often the bill of rights is
assailed by those who see themselves as do gooders, peace at aLL costs, I know
more than you crusaders. The price of freedom is still and evetr will be eternal
vigilance. Lest we forget...
COSMO | 8:34 a.m. June 27, 2008
To the Founding Fathers,and their wisdom for the Bill of Rights, Praise the Lord
and pass the ammunition!
One Problem | 8:35 a.m. June 27, 2008
I am amazed that the Supreme Court was finally capable of stating that the
Constitution means what it says. The language of the 2nd amendment is extremely
clear, and reading Stevens' dissent was almost painful, watching how he
twisted meaning and logic in a vain attempt to make "the right of the
people" mean something other than what it means in the other amendments in
the Bill of Rights. Now if the Court would only agree that the Constitution
means what it says on things like the Commerce clause...
I do have one problem with the opinion, and that is that Scalia did not indicate what level of scrutiny will be applied when judging gun restrictions. I know that he hates the 3 level classification, and I agree with him that it usually just gives judges excuses for doing what they want, but at least stating explicitly that gun control laws would be judged under strict scrutiny would have sent the proper message that you better have a VERY good reason for any gun control law you want to pass. As stated, the opinion allows people to argue that "reasonableness" means the rational basis test, and everything passes that.
I do have one problem with the opinion, and that is that Scalia did not indicate what level of scrutiny will be applied when judging gun restrictions. I know that he hates the 3 level classification, and I agree with him that it usually just gives judges excuses for doing what they want, but at least stating explicitly that gun control laws would be judged under strict scrutiny would have sent the proper message that you better have a VERY good reason for any gun control law you want to pass. As stated, the opinion allows people to argue that "reasonableness" means the rational basis test, and everything passes that.
what they obsess about | 8:47 a.m. June 27, 2008
Bang! Bang!
You're dead.
You're dead.
Idaho Gun Advocate | 9:11 a.m. June 27, 2008
It is interesting to note that as all but of a few of the states passed
"shall issue" concealed carry statutes, the violent crime rate in the
US started to fall, and with the exception of one year, has continued to drop.
HMMMMMMMM
One problem that exists is the passive nature of the general public, as it relates to meeting the requirements for a carry permit and then carrying. Too many people have this false notion that somehow law enforcement has things in control and will be there when called. Any number of the natural and man caused disasters we have seen recently illustrate the limitations of law enforcement to protect the individual. Remember, It is the 2nd ammendment that insures the rest of the constitution. It is better to have a gun handy all the time and not need it than to need it for one minute and not have one!
One problem that exists is the passive nature of the general public, as it relates to meeting the requirements for a carry permit and then carrying. Too many people have this false notion that somehow law enforcement has things in control and will be there when called. Any number of the natural and man caused disasters we have seen recently illustrate the limitations of law enforcement to protect the individual. Remember, It is the 2nd ammendment that insures the rest of the constitution. It is better to have a gun handy all the time and not need it than to need it for one minute and not have one!
Joseph Atwater | 9:12 a.m. June 27, 2008
The 1791 Amendment is no longer applicable. We do not need guns to enforce
machoism or "I am tuffer than you cause I got a gun"Thats for the Law
enforcement men and woman who return from war and need their security
blanket..their guns.
When are you Mormons going grow up to the law of Love and not the law of a gun. "Bring on the corpses"
"Active LDS who hates guns"
Yes they do exist..
When are you Mormons going grow up to the law of Love and not the law of a gun. "Bring on the corpses"
"Active LDS who hates guns"
Yes they do exist..
LC Liberal | 9:20 a.m. June 27, 2008
I'm surprised! Serriously. Under yesterday's ruling California's
plan to have guns cut a identifier stands, bans on asault weapons stand, limits
on capasity stand.
You can own a gun in your home but a local government can just allow 22 sigle shoot rifles and comply with this "landmark" ruling.
Rush loves lying by omission.
I don't think this was that big of win
You can own a gun in your home but a local government can just allow 22 sigle shoot rifles and comply with this "landmark" ruling.
Rush loves lying by omission.
I don't think this was that big of win
Oh Please | 9:27 a.m. June 27, 2008
"a well ordered militia being necessary to the security of a free
state" is not clear English. Lawyers have argued about the meaning of this
phrase for 200 years. 5 of the judges read it one way, 4 read it another. The
language of the 2nd amendment is FAR from clear.
Hatuletoh | 9:38 a.m. June 27, 2008
I'm sure all of you here were equally enthused by the Court's ruling
that the president does not have the power to suspend the writ of habeas corpus,
even for enemy combants held outside the United States. I know I was.
To Joseph: | 9:54 a.m. June 27, 2008
Guns don't kill people. People kill people. Stop picking on guns. if we
didn't have guns you'd probably whine about swords or whatever the
main weapon of choice would be.
What is up with your law of love? Oh Mr. robber man you broke into my house, please sit here and let me get some cookies and milk! Whatever. If someone breaks into my house in the middle of the night I will be getting my gun and shotting at him/her. Nobody threatens my property, my family, or our peace of mind. You enter in my house uninvited and you enter at your own risk because I have no idea what you are planning on doing whether it will just be stealing or killing us. And I'm not going to wait for them to pull thier gun out and gamble my lifeany furher...they've already crossed the line by breaking into my house. So yes I believe in love, but I don't believe in letting them have more power/ability to hurt or kill me and my family.Self Defence is supported in the bible...you should read it sometime.
And FYI the best type of Gun Control is using both your hands.
What is up with your law of love? Oh Mr. robber man you broke into my house, please sit here and let me get some cookies and milk! Whatever. If someone breaks into my house in the middle of the night I will be getting my gun and shotting at him/her. Nobody threatens my property, my family, or our peace of mind. You enter in my house uninvited and you enter at your own risk because I have no idea what you are planning on doing whether it will just be stealing or killing us. And I'm not going to wait for them to pull thier gun out and gamble my lifeany furher...they've already crossed the line by breaking into my house. So yes I believe in love, but I don't believe in letting them have more power/ability to hurt or kill me and my family.Self Defence is supported in the bible...you should read it sometime.
And FYI the best type of Gun Control is using both your hands.
Re: Joseph Atwater | 10:06 a.m. June 27, 2008
Way to go. Take a swipe at those willing to risk their lives to protect your
freedom. There is a whole lot about being active Mormon that you don't get.
One is respect for those who serve our country. Two is, God helps those who are
willing to help themselves.
History | 10:15 a.m. June 27, 2008
Of the 9 current justices, 7 were nominated by Re-Publican Presidents.
Two of the most liberal justices (nominated by Clinton) were confirmed by votes of 93 to 3 (Ginsberg) and 87 to 9 (Breyer).
The conservative spokesperson (Scalia) and the swing vote justice (Kennedy) were both nominated by Reagun.
Two of the most liberal justices (nominated by Clinton) were confirmed by votes of 93 to 3 (Ginsberg) and 87 to 9 (Breyer).
The conservative spokesperson (Scalia) and the swing vote justice (Kennedy) were both nominated by Reagun.
Parker | 10:17 a.m. June 27, 2008
If you agree with the Court's well-reasoned ruling, please reflect on which
presidential candidate would appoint justices who would seek to overrule it. We
can't afford more Ginsbergs and Breyers if we want to remain free.
Why? | 10:27 a.m. June 27, 2008
The character �Archie Bunker� played
by Carroll O�Conner said it best when his
�beatnik� daughter found out that he
had a gun to protect himself, she let him know that guns kill people, and he
responded with �would it make you fell any better if they
died after falling out of a window�. People die every day,
they should shut down Highway
111 here in the valley on the west side because all the death from all stupid impatient people who drive out of control, they should ban medications because all the over doses, they should out law alcohol because of the loss of life from drunk drivers, they should ban cars because all the lives lost in car wrecks. Let�s face it some people die because of ignorance and stupidity, Guns, Cars, Alcohol, unsafe Roads, they just help the ignorant and stupid. It has very little to do with guns, only cowards use a gun to take an inocent life.
111 here in the valley on the west side because all the death from all stupid impatient people who drive out of control, they should ban medications because all the over doses, they should out law alcohol because of the loss of life from drunk drivers, they should ban cars because all the lives lost in car wrecks. Let�s face it some people die because of ignorance and stupidity, Guns, Cars, Alcohol, unsafe Roads, they just help the ignorant and stupid. It has very little to do with guns, only cowards use a gun to take an inocent life.
Why? | 10:27 a.m. June 27, 2008
The character �Archie Bunker� played
by Carroll O�Conner said it best when his
�beatnik� daughter found out that he
had a gun to protect himself, she let him know that guns kill people, and he
responded with �would it make you fell any better if they
died after falling out of a window�. People die every day,
they should shut down Highway
111 here in the valley on the west side because all the death from all stupid impatient people who drive out of control, they should ban medications because all the over doses, they should out law alcohol because of the loss of life from drunk drivers, they should ban cars because all the lives lost in car wrecks. Let�s face it some people die because of ignorance and stupidity, Guns, Cars, Alcohol, unsafe Roads, they just help the ignorant and stupid. It has very little to do with guns, only cowards use a gun to take an inocent life.
111 here in the valley on the west side because all the death from all stupid impatient people who drive out of control, they should ban medications because all the over doses, they should out law alcohol because of the loss of life from drunk drivers, they should ban cars because all the lives lost in car wrecks. Let�s face it some people die because of ignorance and stupidity, Guns, Cars, Alcohol, unsafe Roads, they just help the ignorant and stupid. It has very little to do with guns, only cowards use a gun to take an inocent life.
Joe to Joseph Atwater | 10:34 a.m. June 27, 2008
Sorry you don't see this as an important victory for the weak over the
strong. Without firearms, women are at the mercy of stronger men, minorities
are at the mercy of majorities.
You need look no further than Hurricane Katrina to see how important this right is. Bands of looters were roving the streets. And what do the police and national guard focus upon? Taking away guns from law abiding citizens (just watch a few of the videos widely available). Given the chance, some government officials would be glad to take away your gun.
Obama says he wants to get illegal firearms off the street as part of his liberal agenda. Please note: They are already illegal yet they are still on the streets of DC, causing untold suffering to law abiding citizens. Criminals are entirely unaffected by gun registration laws, gun free zones, prohibitions on gun ownership by felons, etc.
I love my family, and I am obligated to protect them. Police do their best but cannot and are under no obligation to respond you your 911 in time to prevent your bodily harm or murder. That's how I show my love.
You need look no further than Hurricane Katrina to see how important this right is. Bands of looters were roving the streets. And what do the police and national guard focus upon? Taking away guns from law abiding citizens (just watch a few of the videos widely available). Given the chance, some government officials would be glad to take away your gun.
Obama says he wants to get illegal firearms off the street as part of his liberal agenda. Please note: They are already illegal yet they are still on the streets of DC, causing untold suffering to law abiding citizens. Criminals are entirely unaffected by gun registration laws, gun free zones, prohibitions on gun ownership by felons, etc.
I love my family, and I am obligated to protect them. Police do their best but cannot and are under no obligation to respond you your 911 in time to prevent your bodily harm or murder. That's how I show my love.
Not a gun owner but... | 10:43 a.m. June 27, 2008
Why wasn't this decision 9-0?!?!
The Supreme Court justices are there to determine whether laws passed by Congress, state legislature and even local municipalities are Constitutional. Whether the liberals like it or not, the right to "keep and bear arms" is a Constitutional right protected by the Second Amendment. It was a fundamentally important right denied the colonists by the British and was actually the root cause of the first battle of the American Revolutionary War as the British were going from Boston to Concord to seize a cache of weapons stored by the colonists for their self defense. It is even arguable that to even make citizens declare their weapons through registration violates this Amendment because it gives the government the ability to possibly cease weapons from their citizens, again violating this fundamental right.
And believe it or not I don't even own a gun but the Constitution is the Constitution and our rights, like them or not, spelled out by our Founding Fathers should be protected by the Supreme Court. So to me it is disturbing that this decision wasn't 9-0...
The Supreme Court justices are there to determine whether laws passed by Congress, state legislature and even local municipalities are Constitutional. Whether the liberals like it or not, the right to "keep and bear arms" is a Constitutional right protected by the Second Amendment. It was a fundamentally important right denied the colonists by the British and was actually the root cause of the first battle of the American Revolutionary War as the British were going from Boston to Concord to seize a cache of weapons stored by the colonists for their self defense. It is even arguable that to even make citizens declare their weapons through registration violates this Amendment because it gives the government the ability to possibly cease weapons from their citizens, again violating this fundamental right.
And believe it or not I don't even own a gun but the Constitution is the Constitution and our rights, like them or not, spelled out by our Founding Fathers should be protected by the Supreme Court. So to me it is disturbing that this decision wasn't 9-0...
re: Oh Please | 10:55 a.m. June 27, 2008
Ok. Please include the rest of the second amendment, unless you are trying to
confuse the uneducated to believe in your manner, unless you are uneducated
yourself.
"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."
Who is the people again? Is that the militia? I don't think so. There is no other interpretation otherwise unless you allow personal bias to control your dishonesty.
"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."
Who is the people again? Is that the militia? I don't think so. There is no other interpretation otherwise unless you allow personal bias to control your dishonesty.
To "Not a gun owner" | 11:03 a.m. June 27, 2008
Amen to a great comment! Why are you not a gun owner? Look into it, It's a
fun and rewarding hobby with the ability to save your life and the lives of
those you love!
COSMO | 11:31 a.m. June 27, 2008
Joseph Atwater must have become a God,since his wisdom is above any of the
Founding Fathers,and
the, "Great Unwashed" of today. It must be very
difficult for him, and others of his perfection
to have to share the same space at church, with
such lowly characters, as are undoubtly strewn
about. Funny, I thought that his church taught
that the Constitution,and Bill of Rights was
concieved by rightous and honorable men, having
been inspired by God. Oh, maybe a new Revelation
has occured.
the, "Great Unwashed" of today. It must be very
difficult for him, and others of his perfection
to have to share the same space at church, with
such lowly characters, as are undoubtly strewn
about. Funny, I thought that his church taught
that the Constitution,and Bill of Rights was
concieved by rightous and honorable men, having
been inspired by God. Oh, maybe a new Revelation
has occured.
Anonymous | 11:53 a.m. June 27, 2008
Guns don't kill people... but they sure help.
Guns | 12:16 p.m. June 27, 2008
People don't kill people, guns don't kill people, O.J. kills people.
NRA | 12:16 p.m. June 27, 2008
Boom! Boom!
Bang! Bang!
NRA freaks are clearly nuts!
Bang! Bang!
NRA freaks are clearly nuts!
2nd amemdent killed my child | 2:04 p.m. June 27, 2008
The 2nd amendment violates my rights and the right of my family and this will
not be over until we are dead and buried. When a mother, father and family is
forced to bury their son, daughter, or sister who was shot and killed in a
school shooting they mock them. Everyone is quick to quote the 2nd amendment and
talk about their rights under it but they and those who wrote it are violating
our rights.
D.C. residents don't have representation in Congress and can't vote for the President who in turn appoint the Supreme Court justices yet these justices strike down a D.C. law because they are tyrants.
The substance of their argument is "even though the Constitution denies you the right to representation the right to bear arms which cause your children to die is more important. You voted for this law but a body that you didn't elect and which was appointed by those you did not elect will strike down a ban that protects your family.
NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION...
I can hear the tyrants say now: bow before me and worship me and those who wrote the Constitution (i.e., Antonin Scalia in 1789).
D.C. residents don't have representation in Congress and can't vote for the President who in turn appoint the Supreme Court justices yet these justices strike down a D.C. law because they are tyrants.
The substance of their argument is "even though the Constitution denies you the right to representation the right to bear arms which cause your children to die is more important. You voted for this law but a body that you didn't elect and which was appointed by those you did not elect will strike down a ban that protects your family.
NO TAXATION WITHOUT REPRESENTATION...
I can hear the tyrants say now: bow before me and worship me and those who wrote the Constitution (i.e., Antonin Scalia in 1789).
To: 2nd amemdent killed my child | 2:10 p.m. June 27, 2008
Your emotions are valued, but your emotion-based arguement is not. More kids, a
lot more, die in swimming pools than by guns each year. Other kids die by knife
and autos. All deaths are tragic but it doesn't change one of the freedoms
that make and keep us unique and free.
I am sorry for your loss and don't mock anybody.
I am sorry for your loss and don't mock anybody.
Response to murderer/voter | 2:22 p.m. June 27, 2008
COSMO | 11:31 a.m. June 27, 2008
"Joseph Atwater must have become a God,since his wisdom is above any of the Founding Fathers,and
the, "Great Unwashed" of today."
It must be difficult for you the GREAT COSMO to know that others are angry that you and those who support the 2nd amendment and the Iraq war have killed their children as if you had pulled the trigger yourself.
"It must be very difficult for him, and others of his perfection to...
I guess anyone who disagrees with you must think they are perfect. Never mind that they bury their children because of you. I can hear you now in Fast and Testimony: What? You buried your son because of me. You are a "hag" signed Ann Coulter, convert!
"Funny, I thought that his church taught that the Constitution,...inspired by God. Oh, maybe a new Revelation has occured."
The Church doesn't teach that the Constitution is without flaw. In fact, Joseph Smith and every one that has followed have pointed out that there are flaws in the Constitution and the men who wrote it were raised up for that purpose but they and they didn't want to include the 2nd amendment.
"Joseph Atwater must have become a God,since his wisdom is above any of the Founding Fathers,and
the, "Great Unwashed" of today."
It must be difficult for you the GREAT COSMO to know that others are angry that you and those who support the 2nd amendment and the Iraq war have killed their children as if you had pulled the trigger yourself.
"It must be very difficult for him, and others of his perfection to...
I guess anyone who disagrees with you must think they are perfect. Never mind that they bury their children because of you. I can hear you now in Fast and Testimony: What? You buried your son because of me. You are a "hag" signed Ann Coulter, convert!
"Funny, I thought that his church taught that the Constitution,...inspired by God. Oh, maybe a new Revelation has occured."
The Church doesn't teach that the Constitution is without flaw. In fact, Joseph Smith and every one that has followed have pointed out that there are flaws in the Constitution and the men who wrote it were raised up for that purpose but they and they didn't want to include the 2nd amendment.
The value decider has spoken | 2:34 p.m. June 27, 2008
I guess I should leave my emotions at home when I come to debate those who
killed my child. Lets debate how we feel about those caused the death of
children.
I'm so glad GREAT ONE that you value my emotions but then turn around and grind in the knife you stabbed into my back when you cast your vote by adding more insult to injury.
I guess since you are sorry for my loss which you caused that I feel much better. I'm glad you VALUE MY LOSS THAT YOU CAUSED. I'm glad to know that my emotions are valued. I really am. Let me worship at your feet right now and say "I forgive you and those who wrote the 2nd amendment for killing my child."
I'm so glad GREAT ONE that you value my emotions but then turn around and grind in the knife you stabbed into my back when you cast your vote by adding more insult to injury.
I guess since you are sorry for my loss which you caused that I feel much better. I'm glad you VALUE MY LOSS THAT YOU CAUSED. I'm glad to know that my emotions are valued. I really am. Let me worship at your feet right now and say "I forgive you and those who wrote the 2nd amendment for killing my child."
TO: The value decider has spoken | 2:41 p.m. June 27, 2008
The values you are angry about aren't mine, they are the ones the nation I
live in was founded on and because of. It is a collective value, not MY
value.
I fear you missed my point. The loss of any child is horrible and there are many more that die from means other than guns. Should those who lose children to knives join your crusade to ban them as well? Shall we ban swimming pools?
I feel bad for you loss but I don't think we should take guns away from everybody as a result.
I fear you missed my point. The loss of any child is horrible and there are many more that die from means other than guns. Should those who lose children to knives join your crusade to ban them as well? Shall we ban swimming pools?
I feel bad for you loss but I don't think we should take guns away from everybody as a result.
Re: LC Liberal | 2:45 p.m. June 27, 2008
Actually, we have no idea whether the laws you state will be upheld once the
courts analyze them. One of the unsung victories about the decision was that
the Court was finally willing to address only the issue before them. That is
what they are supposed to do, but most Justices (conservative or liberal) have
been unwilling to resist the temptation to make grand pronouncements that go
beyond what is necessary to decide the case.
The fact is that the majority opinion lays out an extremely logical, extremely easy to understand, historical decision that shows that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. The Court then indicates that the DC Ban clearly violates that constitutional protection. They indicate that the right protected by the 2nd amendment is not absolute, and that it can be curtailed in LIMITED fashion, just like the rights protected by the 1st amendment can be curtailed in LIMITED fashion.
The Court established the validity of the right, and only future court battles will define the extent of the right, but the Court's decision yesterday will make it much harder for the gun control lobby to further curtail our rights.
The fact is that the majority opinion lays out an extremely logical, extremely easy to understand, historical decision that shows that the 2nd Amendment protects an individual right to keep and bear arms. The Court then indicates that the DC Ban clearly violates that constitutional protection. They indicate that the right protected by the 2nd amendment is not absolute, and that it can be curtailed in LIMITED fashion, just like the rights protected by the 1st amendment can be curtailed in LIMITED fashion.
The Court established the validity of the right, and only future court battles will define the extent of the right, but the Court's decision yesterday will make it much harder for the gun control lobby to further curtail our rights.
How pathetic! | 2:51 p.m. June 27, 2008
I for one do not value the emotions of someone who has determined to use his/her
grief to make irrational statements in an important debate over fundamental
human rights. Can anything be more inane than to assert that those who wrote
the 2nd amendment killed your child? This misplaced sense of vengeance against
men who lived more than 200 years ago is dangerous to your psyche, as I'm
sure everyone reading these comments is now painfully aware.
I would gladly stand by your side and debate anyone who actually killed your child with a gun. Unless they were police officers in the lawful exercise of their duty, I would even stand beside you to make sure that they were punished to the full extent of the law. However, when you insist that those who believe in and defend a fundamental right to self-defense are stabbing you in the back and adding insult to injury, then no rational person will stand with you, and I, for one, believe your irrational statements should be held up to public ridicule.
I would gladly stand by your side and debate anyone who actually killed your child with a gun. Unless they were police officers in the lawful exercise of their duty, I would even stand beside you to make sure that they were punished to the full extent of the law. However, when you insist that those who believe in and defend a fundamental right to self-defense are stabbing you in the back and adding insult to injury, then no rational person will stand with you, and I, for one, believe your irrational statements should be held up to public ridicule.
To: Hatuletoh | 3:07 p.m. June 27, 2008
The primary distinction between yesterday's case and the case you are
referring to is that the right of the people to keep and bear arms is
specifically mentioned in the second amendment, while the right of habeas corpus
for foreign citizens being held outside of U.S. territory is not. There are
some very good policy reasons to extend habeas rights to foreign citizens, but
they are just that, policy arguments. The Supreme Court elevated them to
constitutional rights, which I think is probably a mistake.
COSMO | 3:15 p.m. June 27, 2008
Well Shazaam, I guess that Joseph Smith was wrong
for having a pistol.
Church Leaders teach that the 2nd Amendment was an
error on the part of the Founding Fathers?
for having a pistol.
Church Leaders teach that the 2nd Amendment was an
error on the part of the Founding Fathers?
To "How Pathetic" | 4:15 p.m. June 27, 2008
Great comment! I Agree!
LDS Doctrinal Perspective | 4:25 p.m. June 27, 2008
Does this ring a bell to anyone on this subject?
"We believe that all men are justified in defending themselves, their friends, and property, and the government, from the unlawful assaults and encroachments of all persons in times of exigency, where immediate appeal cannot be made to the laws, and relief afforded." Look it up.
"We believe that all men are justified in defending themselves, their friends, and property, and the government, from the unlawful assaults and encroachments of all persons in times of exigency, where immediate appeal cannot be made to the laws, and relief afforded." Look it up.
Add your comment
Comments are monitored. Any comments found to be abusive, offensive, off-topic, misrepresentative, more than 200 words or containing URLs will not be posted.
Words Remaining
E-mail address: For internal use only. We may want to contact you to publish your comment (not your e-mail address) in the newspaper or for a separate story idea.
Wyatt Harrison fires off a round at the gun range in Provo Canyon. The U.S. Supreme Court's ruling Thursday affirms that government can license and regulate firearms.
Related content
- Gas prices remain near 2009 high 12:24 p.m.
- AL, NL rookies of the year announced 12:21 p.m.
- UNLV coach fired after 5 seasons 12:12 p.m.
- Adams apologizes to Bills fans 12:08 p.m.
- Food summit turns down appeal 12:06 p.m.
- Ankle sprain confirmed for Paul 12:05 p.m.
- Bobcats acquire disgruntled Jackson 12:04 p.m.
- Fredette named player of the week 12:03 p.m.
- Fed will keep eye on sliding dollar 12:02 p.m.
- White House notebook 11:52 a.m.
- MWC expand? Get rid of deadweight
- Apostle's wife felt comfort in attack
- Relieved Cougs prep for Falcons
- TCU stays 4th in AP; Y. 19th, U. 23rd
- Wounded Utes limp home
- Jazz rookies had to grow up quickly
- Win in New Mexico good for Y?
- Bennett at center of GOP storm
- BYU happy to escape with victory
- Big games keep UHSAA coffers full
- TCU creams U.
233 - BYU happy to escape with victory232
- Editorial: Mormons and gay rights208
- Will state consider gay rights law?155
- Can BYU root for (ick) Utah Utes?131
- RSL heads to MLS title game130
- Utes remain silent about BCS120
- TCU stays 4th in AP; Y. 19th, U. 23rd106
- Celtics crush Jazz104
- 5A: Bingham rolls to title game92
American Express says it's not going to be a closed-wallet holiday for...
How do you handle kids and contests? Our oldest daughter, 7, is of the...
Advertisement
Latest comments
but not near as good as the NFL. Let's go put on some pads so we don't get...
In my opinion seeing his mental and social problems for what they were was a...
Just get outside you really don't need the suppliments. It takes very little...
Stephen Jackson recently said that he was as good as Kobe Bryant. It is...
Responding to Logical. BSU has won 20 WAC championships in all sports not...
Bringing in Houston and Boise State? Bad idea for a conference and bad for...
what a lame joke.
First you all complain that too many kids today are wasting away playing...
That is truly amazing Kevin! I don't know what life will be like for any...
I thought for sure that this award would go to one of the Ute seniors Drca or...
Advertisements