1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

D.C. Law Suit

Discussion in 'Legal' started by priv8ter, Dec 26, 2002.

  1. priv8ter

    priv8ter Well-Known Member

    So, I was listening to NPR this morning with my wife, and they did a good feature on a group of folks that are once again preparing to file a lawsuit against the District of Columbia for not allowing them to even own firearms, let alone not carry them. All in all, I thought it was a fairly well handled piece, with almost no spin. A few points stand out to me though:

    1)The Violence Policy Center pretty much hates John Ashcroft. His position right now is making it hard for them crack down on gun ownership. Well, wasn't that the point of him taking that position?

    2)The Justice Department feels that Ashcroft has put them in a bad position. They say his policy of individual gun rights, while wanting to punish gun crime offenders is stradeling the fence.

    Why does the belief in gun ownership being an individual right in anyway conflict with wanting tough punishments for people that violate gun laws? I don't see that. In fact, I want that! Let us all own guns, and then start crushing people that use them in a crime. I am OKAY with that.

    I'm sure nothing will come out of it for several years, but at least some of us are out there fighting the good fight. And get this...the guy that they interviewed as spearheading the Lawsuit? He just happens to be a homosexual. They are going to be one of our biggest allies in the RKBA...hope we treat them right.
  2. Cliff

    Cliff Well-Known Member

    Last summer I happened to meet a pro gun gentleman from a group known as the Pink Pistols. they're a pro gun shooting club with many chapters around the country whose membership are mostly gay. They're very involved in RKBA issues and I came away from our conversation with a different perspective on gay folks and guns.I just never did equate the two,but I was totally wrong,thats what being educated about a issue will do,right? As with any group the anti's are going to be very evident,but in talking issues with him I realized that there is a very deep pro gun fever running through the gay community,and not just men either,woman as well. A very educating, eye opening experience.
  3. Blackhawk

    Blackhawk Member In Memoriam

    It's not. Punishing citizens for no crime whatsoever is easily distinguished from punishing criminals.

    I've reviewed the AG's position on the issue, and it seems perfectly consistent. A citizen has RKBA under the Constitution unless and until he's convicted of a crime, which puts him under the "reasonable exceptions" doctrine.

    Most citizens have never stolen sacks of cash left unattended in an open armored car. If they had that opportunity, some citizens would have stolen it.

    The grabbers seem to think that citizens should never have the opportunity to commit a gun crime by denying their RKBA just as if they had previously committed gun crimes. The AG just said, "No, the Constitution guarantees otherwise legally unimpaired citizens the RKBA."
  4. KMKeller

    KMKeller Well-Known Member

    I believe BlackHawk has the gist of it...
  5. Trisha

    Trisha Well-Known Member

    (with a grateful nod to the chaplain...)


    I see this in a much simpler light: I don't want any gun laws.


    This makes our Republic self-regulating and necessitates the active participation of all. The goblin ends up cowering in the dark as the overwhelming majority of good, ordinary Americans visibly empower themselves against the goblins predations with open, competent demonstrations of absolute intolerance.

    The government is not under any conceptualization the worthy administrator of determining who may perpetuate an inherent right to self-defense save those incarcerated ("No free man shall be debarred the use of arms," yes?).

    I see no grey area of exceptions to this.

    We must be resolved to claim and cherish our unique responsibilities to renew our Republic that we are and remain "The new breed of man" that so confounded and terrified the British - and as such we will truly become our government again; albeit to the dismay of many now on the Beltway who crave power.

    Does that mean all should have unbridled access to owning machine guns and grenade launchers and field howitzers and more?

    That's already the case for the wealthy who are so inclined - and I have friends who gleefully and proudly own armoured personnell carriers, fully restored...

    We cannot abdicate, out of convenience, any ownership of our responsibility to our inheritors!


  6. Cliff

    Cliff Well-Known Member

    Hey Trisha,
    Hell of a quote you got there!
  7. priv8ter

    priv8ter Well-Known Member


    I hope you don't think I was encouraging gun laws as far as ownership rights go. The only gun laws I advocate are for criminals that use a firearm in the commision of a crime.

    I too, like your tag line.
  8. Trisha

    Trisha Well-Known Member

    The signature/tag is just the truth...


    And after seeing the USA PATRIOT Act passed, I feel the fine blonde hair on the back of my neck when the government passes a new definition of who may be arbitrarily (and in secret) named "criminal."

    I don't see our Republic having a "justice system," at best it's an exercise in politicized jurisprudence. Better than what exists anywhere else - but I see no reason not to press for improvement by simplification, yes?

    To hold any crime over the future of any person after the sentence of society has been fulfilled eliminates both the free public's conscience to integrate the human into the immediate community - as well as undermining the presumably penitant human from unfettered access to demonstrate a renewed character free of predjudice. (I have been called naive before - but I look to see the brightest and best in everyone, until actions prove irreconcilably otherwise; as in my own past many chose to refute any such potential in me soley for economic reasons...)

    Will ex-convicts risk failure and repetition of their compulsions to commit atrocities?

    Perhaps much, much less in a free and armed polite society.

    I relinquish no personal responsibility to "the system" to govern any free person with some constructed onus. I see a thousand local armed free Americans far more a potent deterrent to a presumed potential for any criminal behavior by any person than a faceless, mindless bureaucracy.

    Perhaps you and I can at least agree to disagree on this?


  9. priv8ter

    priv8ter Well-Known Member

    Like you last line

    I like your last line. The cool thing about this site is we CAN disagree and be polite about it. But, in this case, I'm not sure we disagree, we just aren't starting from the same place.

    I had to read your post a few times because you used big words like jurisprudence. Did I mention I used to be a sailor? Aye, Aye, sir is kind of my max.

    You feel that once a prisoner is released from Jail, all debts are paid and they should have all rights restored. I can be made to agree with that. My condition? Prison sentences for violent offenders should measure more on the order of decades than months.

    I also agree with your opinion as regarding a polite and armed society. When we reach that point, then I would be okay with shortening jail times. But for now, I guess we will need to disagree. At least we can agree on the whole 2nd Amendment thing though.

    Hugs back,

  10. PATH

    PATH Well-Known Member

    Vermonts gun laws should be the standard for the nation!
  11. WilderBill

    WilderBill Well-Known Member

    Good idea Path. For consistancy sake, I beleive we should all just adapt the least restrictive set of laws.
    A good beginning would be to force all states to recognize all out of state CC permits.
  12. tyme

    tyme Well-Known Member

    Blackhawk, I propose this.

    Every single citizen except THR members, over the course of the next 5 years, will be tested. They will each be given an opportunity, in a controlled environment they know to be free from surveillance, to steal $4 million USD in a nondescript canvas bag. After the vast majority of U.S. citizens take the money, the great problem of our generation is solved. They have proven themselves to be criminals - felons in fact. We certainly can't jail them all, so they'll be free - maybe probation, maybe community service. Those who didn't take the money probably had physical limitations preventing them from carrying that much weight, so they're guilty too. Now we're the bourgeoisie, they're the proletariat, and they have no firearms rights. They're criminals, right?

Share This Page