Comments on: Morning Notes

By: speonjosh

speonjosh — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:31:58 +0000

“sometimes”? I think you miss the point. There is nothing “sometimes” about drug use / dealing. It makes no sense to continue to have many of those laws on the books. A massive waste.
Torsionbar’s post is ineffectual because no one is seriously advocating for “all” guns to be banned.

By: drax

drax — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:29:17 +0000

Prostitution, drug sales, sales of nuclear material or explosives. Just private transactions.

By: speonjosh

speonjosh — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:25:34 +0000

You forget that none of the “enumerated” rights are absolute. So, yeah, sure the license to drive a car analogy is not perfect, but, there is still an identifiable governmental and society interest in regulating gun sales / ownership / use. Which the courts have also upheld.

By: speonjosh

speonjosh — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:23:43 +0000

No, he really can’t.

By: speonjosh

speonjosh — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:20:13 +0000

I think you missed the point.
Essentially, the disparity is now too great between the government’s forces and whatever the citizens possess. At the time the Second Amendment was written, it was a very different story and arming individual citizens was a practical way to prevent tyranny. It really isn’t anymore. So this line of argument on the part of those that resist any sort of gun control measures is a bit farcical.
In any case, I’m glad the Atlantic article was brought up because I think it’s one of the best pieces recently written on the issue. Essentially, I agree with his points, which I would think you should, too. He also thinks that more people should have guns as a way of deterring mass shootings. But he also sees the wisdom of regulating gun sales as an attempt at keeping them out of the hands of those who may be plotting such shootings or otherwise planning crimes.

By: speonjosh

speonjosh — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:09:54 +0000

I’m shrugging my shoulders at your repeated declarations of what you will and won’t accept. You don’t have a choice.

By: speonjosh

speonjosh — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 18:05:59 +0000

Except that it’s not really clear what the heck it means. He’d rather have a gun than be a mass murderer?

By: drax

drax — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 15:09:42 +0000

Yes, you can pick and choose.

You know, like George Washington and Thomas Jefferson, who owned slaves.

By: Hee-Haw

Hee-Haw — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 01:14:04 +0000

Shocker, you want someone else to do all the commenting first so you can respond. Funny you call me out, yet Kev is the one who didn’t respond to my comment. Thanks for interjecting…again.

By: ballstondweller

ballstondweller — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 00:21:22 +0000

Uh-huh, sure, that makes total sense. Guns and safety totally go together. Everything supports that, except, well, the facts.