Chicago Tribune: Repeal the 2nd Amendment!

[melensdad]

Might want to write some letters to the editor over this one

Repeal the 2nd Amendment
Read the Tribune's Friday editorial on the Supreme Court ruling on firearms.

Repeal the 2nd Amendment

No, we don’t suppose that’s going to happen any time soon. But it should.

The 2nd Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is evidence that, while the founding fathers were brilliant men, they could have used an editor.

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.

If the founders had limited themselves to the final 14 words, the amendment would have been an unambiguous declaration of the right to possess firearms. But they didn’t and it isn’t. The amendment was intended to protect the authority of the states to organize militias. The inartful wording has left the amendment open to public debate for more than 200 years. But in its last major decision on gun rights, in 1939, the U.S. Supreme Court unanimously found that that was the correct interpretation.

On Tuesday, five members of the court edited the 2nd Amendment. In essence, they said: Scratch the preamble, only 14 words count. (Click here to read the full decision)

In doing so, they have curtailed the power of the legislatures and the city councils to protect their citizens.

The majority opinion in the 5-4 decision to overturn a Washington, D.C., ban on handgun possession goes to great lengths to parse the words of the 2nd Amendment. The opinion, written by Justice Antonin Scalia, spends 11 1/2 pages just on the meaning of the words "keep and bear arms."

But as Justice John Paul Stevens wrote in a compelling dissent, the five justices in the majority found no new evidence that the 2nd Amendment was intended to limit the power of government to regulate the use of firearms. They found no new evidence to overturn decades of court precedent.

They have claimed, Stevens wrote, "a far more active judicial role in making vitally important national policy decisions than was envisioned at any time in the 18th, 19th, or 20th centuries."

It’s a relief that the majority didn’t go further in its policy-making on gun control.

The majority opinion states that the D.C. handgun ban and a requirement for trigger locks violate the 2nd Amendment. By virtue of this decision, Chicago’s 1982 ban on handguns is not likely to survive a court challenge. A lawsuit seeking to overturn the Chicago ordinance was filed on Thursday by the Illinois State Rifle Association.

The majority, though, did state that the right under the 2nd Amendment "is not unlimited." So what does that mean? The majority left room for state and local governments to restrict the carrying of concealed weapons in public, to prohibit weapons in "sensitive places such as schools and government buildings," and to regulate the sale of firearms. The majority allowed room for the prohibition of "dangerous and unusual weapons." It did not stipulate what weapons are not "dangerous."

Lower courts are going to be mighty busy figuring out all of this.

We can argue about the effectiveness of municipal handgun bans such as those in Washington and Chicago. They have, at best, had limited impact. People don’t have to go far beyond the city borders to buy a weapon that’s prohibited within the city. (Click here for gun-related crime statistics)

But neither are these laws overly restrictive. Citizens have had the right to protect themselves in their homes with other weapons, such as shotguns.

Some view this court decision as an affirmation of individual rights. But the damage in this ruling is that it takes a significant public policy issue out of the hands of citizens. The people of Washington no longer have the authority to decide that, as a matter of public safety, they will prohibit handgun possession within their borders.

Chicago and the nation saw a decline in gun violence over the last decade or so, but recent news has been ominous. The murder rate in Chicago has risen 13 percent this year. Guns are still the weapon of choice for mayhem in the U.S. About 68 percent of all murders in 2006 were committed with a firearms, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

Repeal the 2nd Amendment? Yes, it’s an anachronism.

We won’t repeal the amendment, but at least we can have that debate.

Want to debate whether crime-staggered cities should prohibit the possession of handguns? The Supreme Court has just said, forget about it.

Vox Pop | Chicago Tribune | Blog

[Glock Lover]

WOW, interesting.

[jontheturboguy]

Originally Posted by Some douche bag columnist writer who thinks they know WTF they are talking about

"In doing so, they have curtailed the power of the legislatures and the city councils to protect their citizens."

I ask you this Mr./Mrs. Dumbass, please show me where gun control and or gun free zones have PROVEN to provide protection to your citizens or the general population.

*CRICKETS*

Sounds to me like...

"In doing so, they have shown the people that its your GOD GIVEN RIGHT TO PROTECT yourself and there is no longer a need to be ruled under a nanny-state."

Originally Posted by Some douche bag columnist writer who thinks they know WTF they are talking about

Chicago and the nation saw a decline in gun violence over the last decade or so, but recent news has been ominous.

Uh? Were you born or do you just live under a ****ing rock? Gun crimes have continued to rise in Chicago and cities under Chicago law (Gary etc).

Originally Posted by Some douche bag columnist writer who thinks they know WTF they are talking about

The murder rate in Chicago has risen 13 percent this year. Guns are still the weapon of choice for mayhem in the U.S. About 68 percent of all murders in 2006 were committed with a firearms, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

Bingo. And I bet you over 90% of those guns used were all STOLEN!

STOLEN STOLEN STOLEN STOLEN STOLEN. Not bought at a gun show, a store, or even with a back ground check.

STOLEN. STOLEN STOLEN. VERB. TO STEAL. STOLEN.

Fact. Of all the states that have the ability for a citizen to own and carry a firearm for self defense, crime has gone down. More important, crime using a FIREARM has gone down.

40 states people offer the right to carry a handgun.

Those 40 states have not shown a crime wave of "gun crimes."

In fact, its been the opposite.

The states that do not allow a citizen to be armed or CCW, crime has gone up.

The people in Chicago need to watch this...

Myth: Gun Control Reduces Crime

And then read this...

http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-fa...5-0-screen.pdf

Ah but aha! Ignorance is not bliss you a-holes. :do2:

[Dogman]

Sounds like the editor is a Daley wantabe. A lot of great responses sent in, I don't think he reads his own paper.

[Kirk Freeman]

Good.

Let the media do this. Let them call for an abolition of the Bill of Rights.

Let all of America see who their enemy is--the media. This is fantastic news as it forces the media to drop the mask and come into the open.

[Ri22o]

Originally Posted by Kirk Freeman

Good.

Let the media do this. Let them call for an abolition of the Bill of Rights.

Especially the 1st Amendment, which protects their Right to say whatever in the hell they want. :rolleyesedit:

I would use the 2nd Amendment to protect the 1st :do2:, just as much as I would use the 1st to protect the 2nd .

[Quarterbore]

Yup, using the First Amendment to try to destroy the Second Amendment makes as much sense using our Second Amendment rights to crush their First Amendment rights that they are trying to use to crush our Second Amendment rights.

Read that again opcorn2:

[melensdad]

Originally Posted by jontheturboguy

. . . And I bet you over 90% of those guns used were all STOLEN!

STOLEN STOLEN STOLEN STOLEN STOLEN. Not bought at a gun show, a store, or even with a back ground check.

STOLEN. STOLEN STOLEN. VERB. TO STEAL. STOLEN.

I was reading an Illinois crime/gun trace report not too long ago. It said that roughly 50% of the firearms used (and traced) in crimes in Chicago were legally purchased inside the state of Illinois. And many were purchased by women!

Apparently the drug dealers, gang bangers, meth addicts, etc who have criminal records typically have a girlfriend who has no criminal record. They have the girlfriend get an Illinois FOID card, then they have the girlfriend buy the gun legally. Hmmm . . . guess all those Illinois gun laws are working pretty well.

[Dogman]

Originally Posted by melensdad

I was reading an Illinois crime/gun trace report not too long ago. It said that roughly 50% of the firearms used (and traced) in crimes in Chicago were legally purchased inside the state of Illinois. And many were purchased by women!

Apparently the drug dealers, gang bangers, meth addicts, etc who have criminal records typically have a girlfriend who has no criminal record. They have the girlfriend get an Illinois FOID card, then they have the girlfriend buy the gun legally. Hmmm . . . guess all those Illinois gun laws are working pretty well.

No No, I'm sure that's not right because that would be illegal in Illinois, buying a gun then giving it to a criminal, they have gun laws to protect people. :rolleyesedit:

[jontheturboguy]

Originally Posted by melensdad

I was reading an Illinois crime/gun trace report not too long ago. It said that roughly 50% of the firearms used (and traced) in crimes in Chicago were legally purchased inside the state of Illinois. And many were purchased by women!

Apparently the drug dealers, gang bangers, meth addicts, etc who have criminal records typically have a girlfriend who has no criminal record. They have the girlfriend get an Illinois FOID card, then they have the girlfriend buy the gun legally. Hmmm . . . guess all those Illinois gun laws are working pretty well.

Possibly, although I think the bigger question is:

-Since it was a report by the state of Illinois, the "crimes" commited are "crimes" according to who?