Corrente

If you have "no place to go," come here!

Virginia Tech: Repealing the Second Amendment

ddjango's picture

So you wanna wage a "war" on terror. Start by banning guns, all guns, all people. Pay attention!

Enough is more than enough. As I write, at least 32 people are dead at VT, the victims of a lone gunman, apparently with an assault rifle.

The Second Amendment to the Constitution:

"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."

OK, look, goddammit . . . it says, "a well regulated militia". Individual gun ownership has nothing to do with a well-regulated militia. And it's obvious that nothing here is well-regulated. We don't at all need a "militia" composed of individuals, except perhaps the National Guard. The Second Amendment was written at a time when individual states had no organized militias. During the Revolution, armies were created (read "bought") to respond to a specific threat, then disbanded when the conflict was over. Our Navy was created later to guard our shores and defeat piracy. Later, with guns in individual and army hands, we perpetrated the genocide of the tribes who first possessed Turtle Island.

The Gun Control Network reports:

Most Mass Gun Killers are also Legal Gun Owners - Research

The following data were prepared in the wake of the shooting in Erfurt, Germany, 26 April 2002.

In the 14 deadliest mass shootings committed in wealthy nations during the past 35 years:

  • 79% of the victims were shot with lawfully held firearms (185 of 233 victims)
  • 86% of these mass shooting (12 of 14) were committed by lawful gun owners

Many killers, like the 19-year-old who shot 16 people dead at his school in Germany, were previously law-abiding sporting shooters or pistol club members - men whose legal ownership of guns was not questioned by authorities until after the tragedy . . .

In a study of 65 high-profile multiple-victim shootings in the United States during 40 years, 62% of handgun shootings and 71% of long gun shootings were committed with legally acquired firearms (Violence Policy Center, 2001)

Private gun ownership in the 21st century should be a crime. Protecting private property is the police force's job. I remember at least two widely reported incidents in which kids were killed by an armed property owner who objected to their trespassing. Guns for "sport" hunting are an anachronism. Non-human species are enough in short supply without humans killing them for fun.

Here's the history of the "right to bear arms."

Here are some other stats, from he@lth:
# In 1998 (the most recent year for which there are statistics) 10 young people a day died from gunshot.

# Gun homicide is the fourth leading cause of death for young people 10-14 years of age and the second leading cause of death for young people 15-24. [National Center for Health Statistics, 1997.]

# Gunshot wounds are the leading cause of death for both African-American and white teenage males [Journal of the American Medical Association].

# One in six parents say they know a child who accidentally shot himself or herself with a gun [Harvard School of Public Health].

# A youth aged 10-19 committed suicide with a gun every six hours in 1995 -- 1,449 young people in one year [National Center for Health Statistics, 1997].

# At a national level, emergency room data verify that suicide attempts with firearms are almost always fatal -- for every gun suicide, there is less than one nonfatal injury. [Journal of the American Medical Association, 1995].

# Suicide is nearly 5 times more likely to occur in a household with a gun than in a household without a gun. [Kellerman, A.L. et al., N Engl J Med 327, 1993.]

# In 1996, 2 people were murdered by handguns in New Zealand, 15 in Japan, 106 in Canada, 213 in Germany, and 9,390 in the United States. [FBI Uniform Crime Report]

# Nine out of ten young people who are murdered in industrialized countries are slain in the United States [United Nations Children’s Fund report, "The Progress of Nations" quoted in St. Paul Pioneer Press, 9/26/93].

# Guns kept in the home for self-protection are 43 times more likely to kill a family member or friend than to kill in self-defense. [ Kellermann and Reay, N.E. Journal of Medicine]

# Every two years, more Americans die of gunshot than there were American soldiers killed during the entire Vietnam War [National Center for Health Statistics, Department of Defense Almanac].

Repeal the Second Amendment. Down with the NRA. Close down arms makers, dealers, and other merchants of death.

WHAT PART OF DEATH DON'T YOU UNDERSTAND, FOOL?

0
No votes yet

Comments

chicago dyke's picture
Submitted by chicago dyke on

are you going to shoot and kill those who won't give them up?

i'm all for peaceful society, and everything you've laid out points towards better policies with respect to guns. but i'm here to tell you, having grown up in the country where gun ownership is second only to football as a religion: those folks will literally kill and die before giving up their guns. the types who sit around watching Red Dawn DVDs and subscribing to NRA email lists will never, ever give up their guns. criminals too, i think.

this is a good idea, but i don't think it's the solution.

onealbear's picture
Submitted by onealbear on

"As I write, at least 32 people are dead at VT, the victims of a lone gunman, apparently with an assault rifle."

Cho used a 9mm Glock and a 22 pistol, not an assault rifle. It is way too easy to buy automatic weapons and clips for those weapons. But I gree with CD-- unfortunately, there is no hope for your plan to ban all guns. Ain't enough ATF agents in the world to get that done, even if you brought out the National Guard, The Marines and the Army (who as I recall are otherwise occupied for the next few years.)

Submitted by [Please enter a... (not verified) on

There are some real serious flaws with the logic of the original poster. I know they're thinking with good intentions, and that their heart is in the right place, but I don't think that a gun band is right.

For one thing, it makes a mockery of everything that America is about. Not the goal, but the argument itself. Our ancestors shed their blood to gain some measure of freedom for this country. Those that came between us and them shed even more blood, in war and in protest movements, to expand those freedoms. It is a violation of everything that America is supposed to be to argue that we must lay down any of our freedoms in the service of ending bloodshed. That's not what this country is about. Why don't you find an argument that doesn't hide behind children, and that doesn't use the same logic Republicans use to demolish our right to privacy and choice.

Secondly, have you and I lived in the same country these last couple of years? GWB didn't teach you that Republicans hate democracy? You don't think that in 50 years, they won't try to use the army to enforce a dictatorship? You don't think maybe we might want those guns, that gun powder, the body armor and all sorts of others things when that happens? I know it's popular to declare that it wouldn't matter, that we could do nothing against the army anyway. Personally, in light of the success of the Iraqi insurgency, that argument is bull shit. Guns would make a difference, and it's the only external check we have.

So, you're making an abhorrent argument that makes heavy use of a right wing shibboleth (more freedom = less safety), you're also making it to further a short-sighted argument. Gee, imagine why that wouldn't be all that persuasive to people who don't already want to ban guns.

Submitted by lambert on

... I've gone 180-degrees on gun bans. Since I take authoritarian rhetoric seriously, I have to conclude that a Rwanda-like scenario isn't a fantasy and can happen here. Too bad, but there it is.

I think Moynihan had the right idea: You can't control guns, but you can control the ammo. Start with the armor-piercing stuff and go on from there.

No authoritarians were tortured in the writing of this post.

Alice Marshall's picture
Submitted by Alice Marshall on

The civil rights movement also took authoritarian rhetoric very seriously. None of them carried guns. None of the union organizers of my acquaintance carry guns.

The way to fight authoritarian rhetoric is with sustained non-violent confrontation. It worked in India, Selma, Argentina, the Phillipines, South Africa, Eastern Europe, and everywhere else it has been tried.

Guns are not the answer.

onealbear's picture
Submitted by onealbear on

Every time one of these nightmares occurs, we later learn that the shooters were able to walk into a Walmart or Kmart and buy huge stockpiles of hollow points and other deadly ammo without any problem. This tragedy was much worse because the guy had a vest full of loaded clips.

I am not sure that I agree with your overall sentiment about being well armed for fear of the authoritarian regime we are living under, but I am going to give it some serious thought this afternoon while I watch Terry Gilliam's Brazil.

MJS's picture
Submitted by MJS on

"...but I don’t think that a gun band is right."

I Have a Gun Band
by mjs

I ditched my guitar
I trashed my bass
I burned my sitar
And left not a trace

I axed the piano
And smashed my kazoo
Gave my sax to a monkey
Who plays at the zoo

(chorus)
Who needs an instrument?
Who needs a chord?
Get yourself a gun band
You'll never be bored
You'll never be bored
I have a gun band
I have a gun band
I have a gun band
We're playing tonight
We're playing tonight
I have a gun band
We'll shoot out the lights
We'll shoot out the lights

We play overseas, sometimes
Sometimes we play here
When we are playing
We drown out the cheers

We played in a nightclub
Not a bad gig
We played on a campus
New graves you will dig

Who needs an instrument?
Who needs a chord?
Get yourself a gun band
You'll never be bored
You'll never be bored
I have a gun band
I have a gun band
I have a gun band
We're playing tonight
We're playing tonight
I have a gun band
We'll shoot out the lights
We'll shoot out the lights

Bullets are musical
They fly like a song
They target their listeners
Burn that little ones

Our fans are on fire
They dance and they dance
With death and desire
And blood on their pants

We pull the triggers
We aim at you
We are the show now
Oh, what can you do?

Who needs an instrument?
Who needs a chord?
Get yourself a gun band
You'll never be bored
You'll never be bored
I have a gun band
I have a gun band
I have a gun band
We're playing tonight
We're playing tonight
I have a gun band
We'll shoot out the lights
We'll shoot out the lights

I ditched my guitar
I trashed my bass
I burned my sitar
And left not a trace

I axed the piano
And smashed my kazoo
Gave my sax to a monkey
Who plays at the zoo

Who needs an instrument?
Who needs a chord?
Get yourself a gun band
You'll never be bored
You'll never be bored
I have a gun band
I have a gun band
I have a gun band
We're playing tonight
We're playing tonight
I have a gun band
We'll shoot out the lights
We'll shoot out the lights

+++

Submitted by [Please enter a... (not verified) on

More stuff to work on. . .

kelley b's picture
Submitted by kelley b on

The Man does not fear guns. He thrives on guns, because if you use them against the Man, or even talk about using them against the Man, it means he can use bigger ones on you. The Man likes to see the People with guns, because it justifies his having the biggest killers of them all.

The Man doesn't care a rat's ass if some psycho wipes out a bunch of kids. It pleases the Man's agenda. It gives him more reason to Control in order to Secure the common wealth. His wealth being the most Secure of all. It drives the weak and the fearful into his domain of darkness.

We can not fight him with his weapons.

No Hell below us
Above us, only sky

Submitted by [Please enter a... (not verified) on

Strangely enough, it seems that all these mass shootings always happen in so called gun-free zones. Had one intelligent individual in that building had a CCW permit and their weapon on them, that fuckstick would likely have been dead long before he reached 25. Disarming the populace only leaves the criminals with guns.

Look at societies across the globe who have outlawed guns. Gun crime has gone down, yes. But violent crime has gone up exponentially. If a criminal knows you don't have a weapon, he's much more likely to make a target out of you than if he thinks you're armed, or even if he doesn't know.

Oh, and for the record, as far as the second amendment goes: “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.”-note the comma between State, and the right of the PEOPLE-not the state, not the militia, the PEOPLE-to bear arms. It's there for a reason.

You know what an unarmed citizen is? A subject.

Submitted by [Please enter a... (not verified) on

First off I think the notion of having to have a permit to carry a concealed weapon is going against the Second Amendment. However, the state says I have to have a piece of plastic permitting me to do so. That being said - I look forward to the day when the lawmakers of TN wake up and change the laws to allow those with CCW permits to pack heat any and everywhere they so desire. It is absolutely moronic to not allow the carrying of a weapon in state parks and in other municipal parks. What better place to need a weapon that another one of those gun-free zones.

Submitted by [Please enter a... (not verified) on

From the 1856 U.S. Supreme Court ruling on the Dred Scott v. Sanford case:

"If black people were entitled to the privileges and immunities of citizens, it would exempt them from the operation of the special laws and from the police regulations which Southern states considered to be necessary FOR THEIR OWN SAFETY.
It would give the persons of the negro race, who were recognized as citizens in any one State of the Union...the full liberty of speech in public and in private upon all subjects upon which its own citizens might speak; to hold public meetings upon political affairs, and TO KEEP AND CARRY ARMS wherever they went. And all of this would be done in the face of the subject race of the same color, both free and slaves, inevitably producing discontent and insubordination among them, and ENDANGERING THE PEACE AND SAFETY OF THE STATE."

All caps are mine. Notice that the decision uses fear of public safety to support its goals. Gun prohibition is used to keep subject people in their place. Also notice that the decision doesn't question the right of citizens to keep and bear arms "wherever they went."

Submitted by [Please enter a... (not verified) on

We should make hard-core drugs illegal too. This would keep drugs out of the hands of everyone and off the street.
Right...?

Woody--Tokin Librul's picture
Submitted by Woody--Tokin Librul on

all the time, with the proviso that any citizen, seeing another citizen with a drawn weapon, be compelled by law also to draw their weapon and 'cover' the first citizen to draw a weapon, and to shoot any person who also shoots...

Me? A Quick Study, But A Slow Learner

Shane-O's picture
Submitted by Shane-O on

I'm personally an anti-gun guy. I'm also big on the Constitution and its proper construction. For me, the second sentiment wins over the first.

The Second Amendment is (with original punctuation):

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.

The first phrase is a premise: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,"

The second phrase confers the right: "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Simply because the premise may not be applicable in 2007, the Constitution continues to bestow the right.

The Bill of Rights is a born rebel. It reeks with sedition. In every clause it shakes its fist in the face of constituted authority. . . . it is the one guaranty of human freedom to the American people. - Frank Irving Cobb