ProPublica

Journalism in the Public Interest

Cancel

Seven of the Most Striking Ways States Have Loosened Gun Laws

It’s only
gotten easier to own and carry a gun nationwide in the last several years.

.

(Flickr)

Update (12/19): This post has been updated to reflect recent developments in Michigan.

Correction (12/27): This post has been corrected.

Friday’s deadly rampage at a Connecticut elementary school marked the 13th mass shooting in the United States this year. Among the 11 deadliest shootings in U.S. history, more than half took place in the last five years. During the same period, states have often relaxed their gun laws, making it easier for individuals to obtain guns, extending the places where concealed guns are permitted, or giving gun owners more robust protections.

We take a closer look at some of the more striking measures:

1. Five states allow students to carry concealed guns on college campuses     

A March 2012 Colorado Supreme Court decision held that the University of Colorado could not ban students and employees with state-issued concealed weapon permits from carrying guns on campus. The decision overturned the university’s long-standing gun ban. While school policy prohibits guns at ticketed athletic and cultural events, Boulder and Colorado Springs’ campuses now designate dorms for permit-carrying students. (Guns are still banned in other dorms). “Not a single student has asked to live where guns are allowed,” the Denver Post reported last month.

In September 2011, the Oregon Court of Appeals issued a similar ruling, allowing guns on campuses throughout the Oregon University system.

Wisconsin passed legislation in 2011 allowing college students in the University of Wisconsin school system to bring a concealed weapon on campus grounds, parking lots and “other spaces that aren’t enclosed,” according to the Wisconsin State Journal. The school can prohibit guns in buildings, but only if signs are posted at each entrance.

A law passed by the Mississippi State Legislature in 2011 broadly extended the places where concealed weapons are allowed, including college campuses, secondary schools, courthouses, polling locations, churches, bars and passenger terminals of an airport – places previously off-limits. This year, the University of Mississippi, which previously required students to leave guns in their vehicles, began allowing students to bring concealed weapons on campus, provided they have a concealed weapons permit and take an 8-hour training course.

Utah grants the least discretion: Since 2004, the state has prohibited any public college or university from banning concealed weapons, as campuses are considered state property.

2. Some states now allow you to bring guns into daycare centers, churches, and even “gun-free zones”

Last week, the Michigan Legislature passed a law that would allow concealed weapons in current “gun-free” zones such as schools, day care centers, bars, churches, hospitals and stadiums. Gun owners are required to receive eight hours of extra training before bringing guns into these places. The bill, which has yet to be signed into law, gives private business owners discretion to ban firearms on their property. On Tuesday, Michigan Gov. Rick Snyder vetoed the legislation since it lacked the same opt-out provision for non-private institutions like schools.

While Michigan’s legislation has gained attention given its timing to Friday’s shooting, it’s far from the only law of its kind. As we’ve already noted, Mississippi has also expanded the list of permissible concealed carry locations.

Elsewhere, loaded guns in bars are now allowed in Tennessee, Arizona, Georgia, Virginia and Ohio. Georgia lawmakers introduced legislation earlier this year that would expand the list of places where you can bring in a concealed weapon, proposing to allow them in colleges, places of worship and polling places.

Virginia, Louisiana and Maine allow firearms to be carried in state parks, state historic sites and state preservation areas. Recently passed federal legislation also allows the carrying of loaded guns in national parks, but only if state laws don’t interject.

3. You don't have to be 18 years old to lawfully purchase, or be sober to lawfully use, a gun in some states

In Missouri, it’s no longer a crime for an intoxicated person to handle or fire a gun, so long as they were acting in self-defense.

Federal law prohibits licensed firearms dealers from selling a shotgun or rifle to anyone under 18, or handguns to anyone under 21. Still, some states impose minimum age limits that go below these federal limits.

For instance, in Vermont, it’s legal to sell a handgun or rifle to 16-year-olds. It’s legal to sell a rifle to a 16-year-old in Maine, Alaska, Minnesota or New York. In Montana, the legal age is 14, according to the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence, a non-profit organization that tracks state gun laws.

4. Eight states have (symbolically) asserted their freedom to be exempt from federal gun regulation

Current federal gun laws set baseline standards regarding the sale and possession of guns. For instance, the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act requires licensed gun dealers to perform background checks on prospective gun purchasers. And agents with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives can conduct warrantless inspections of any licensed gun dealer – although, as we’ve previously noted, its authority has been hamstrung in recent years.

Still, eight states have passed resolutions stating that guns made and manufactured in-state shouldn’t be subject to federal regulation: Montana, Idaho, Wyoming, South Dakota, Utah, Arizona, Tennessee and Alaska.

The Montana gun activist behind the state’s legislation, whom the Wall Street Journal profiled, explained he felt he should be “free from federal laws requiring him to record transactions, pay license fees and open his business to government inspectors.”

The states’ moves are basically symbolic. The states are still following the few federal rules that exist.

But that could change. Montana Shooting Sports Association and Second Amendment Foundation have filed a lawsuit in federal court to enforce the law.

5. Some states want to make it a crime for doctors and employers to ask about your gun

In 2011, Florida became the first state to enact a law prohibiting any health care professional from asking patients whether they own guns or store them safely. A federal judge later struck down the law based on free speech grounds, stating that a physician who “counsels a patient on firearm safety…does not affect or interfere with the patient’s right to continue to own, possess or use firearms.”

Other states have followed in Florida’s footsteps: Alabama and North Carolina have introduced similar legislation in the last year.

In 2010, Indiana made it easier for people to store guns in their vehicles in a workplace parking lot. A year later, Indiana passed a law allowing job applicants and current employees to sue a private or public employer for requiring disclosure of firearm ownership or use.

6. Nearly half of states have adopted some type of “Stand Your Ground,” or “Shoot First” law

Florida and 24 other states have enacted “Stand Your Ground” laws that expand a person’s right to self-defense. Under these laws, individuals no longer have a duty to retreat to avoid confrontation in any place he or she has a right to be.

Florida was the first state to introduce such a law in 2005 – and many other states have followed suit. The law came into national spotlight when an unarmed 17-year-old teen, Trayvon Martin, was shot and killed by a neighborhood watch guard in Florida earlier this year. The shooter, George Zimmerman, was not initially charged with a crime; he has since been charged with second-degree murder and awaits trial.

7. A few states make it easy for even violent felons to get their gun rights restored

The New York Times conducted an extensive investigation into this issue last year. The story reports that in 11 states, nonviolent felons have automatic restoration of their gun rights while a handful of other states allow felons convicted of violent crimes to regain their gun rights.

In Minnesota, for instance, violent felons can petition a court to regain their gun rights by showing “good cause.” There is no waiting period. In Ohio, a violent felon need only demonstrate to a judge that he or she has “led a law-abiding life” since they’ve left prison. In Washington State, felons can get their gun rights restored as long as they haven’t been convicted of any new crimes in five years. Under Washington State’s Hard Times for Armed Crimes Act, judges actually have no discretion to deny restoration based on a felon’s character or mental health.

Felons in other states have other ways to get their guns back: Georgia and Nebraska have granted a high number of pardons to restore felons’ right to bear arms even for those convicted of crimes like voluntary manslaughter or armed robbery.

And Montana makes it possible for felons to get their gun rights restored as long as they didn’t use a dangerous weapon in the commission of their crime.

Correction (12/27): This post originally said that you don't have to be 18 years old to lawfully use a gun in some states. Actually, you don't have to be 18 years old to lawfully purchase a gun in some states.

Yes and? The words are wasted without strategies to reduce the odds of these massacres happening in the future. Where are they? Submit them at http://www.at10us.com—Pick Rights/Justice, then Access to Guns. Then enter your solution ... We will hold a vote and publicize the winning solution(s). We can demand a strategy, or we can wait for the government.

Its only shocking if you are some coastal effeminate, milquetoast, latte sipping, beta-male, liberal.

“Not a single student has asked to live where guns are allowed,” Gee, you would think they would jump at the chance to be put in a ghetto.

“a physician who “counsels a patient on firearm safety…does not affect or interfere with the patient’s right to continue to own, possess or use firearms.” Uh, yes they do when that physician reports to the police that you own a gun and you are depressed.

The general trend of these laws should show you that the gun control freak s are losing.Even Nate Silver sees that.

It’s societies fault by allowing too much freedom via the video games that give points for killing, by TV that has all different scenarios of killing, the same with movies, music that stresses beat downs and killing, it’s the news media who by constant reporting of the story helps the deranged to decide to get their 15 minutes of infamy, it’s the LEGAL murder called abortion.  I am law abidding and I will NOT become a victim because I own semi-automatic weapons that are AK47 semi, AR15 semi.  It’s not the weapons.  It’s the human desensitation of responsibilty.  It’s the dumbing down of American citizens.  It’s the total lack of Christ.  It’s the total lack of knowing the difference between right and wrong.

So how many states allow firearms in the chambers of the state legislatures?

Carroll, I’m still trying to figure out how on EARTH abortion allows people to get guns and shoot others.  And for the record, it’s people like you who scare the crap out of me.  Let’s not forget…the shooter’s mother LEGALLY owned guns.  And other countries not only have SUCCESSFUL bans on those assault weapons you’re “proud” to own (for what purpose?  Useless for hunting, useless for recreation…ONLY good for hurting other people), they also get our very same video games, movies and music…and what do you know…they have NO massacres at all!

It’s the LEGAL murder called OWNING AN ASSAULT WEAPON that causes these problems.  Had this shooter’s mother NOT HAD GUNS, we wouldn’t even be talking about this today.

Jessica abortion IS part of the desensitation of America.  You remove the word MURDER from abortion.  Yes, she did own the weapons BUT, apparently didn’t have them locked up secure.  The next is they weren’t assault rifles.  I’m ex-Special Forces and an assault rifle is a weapon that is FULL automatic.  These were semi-automatics that even your Grandmother can purchase.  There are numerous semi-automatic weapons that you’re not even aware of.  That’s because they look different than what you perceive all semi-automatic weapons look like.  Your knowledge of countries that gave up their weapons are all in trouble with violence.  England just made a statement declaring for America NOT to give up our guns. Hitler took away all the guns and if you’re old enough to know about him then you’ll know he couldn’t have done/started what he did if people would have had their guns. I’m assuming this because you didn’t know what a real assault weapon is.  I will close with something I read that another commentor wrote on a site I read.  Without guns the government isn’t scared of us and can do whatever they want but with guns the government is scared of us and won’t do whatever it wants.  It keeps them in check and it’s also a deterent to other countries thinking of invading us because they know it’s not just the Military and Police who have weapons to fight them back. If I scare you then, by all means be scared.  While your being scared…...learn something about history and quit living in a make believe world.  It was people like me keeping you free to rant about things you truly do NOT understand.  In time, you will.

Find the cost of freedom, buried in the ground.

New Hampshire allows guns in the state assembly.

In Florida a felon can own a gun but cannot vote.  Where is the logic here?

I’d also like to see:

How many states require that someone asking for psychiatric help gets it.  Almost every shooter has discussed suicidal and homicidal thoughts, and most were told they couldn’t get help for it because they weren’t violent (this led to Kendra’s Law in New York City).

How many states refuse to question links to SSRIs and anti-depressives?

How many school districts have any sort of security system (cameras at entrances, “shot-spotter” microphones) at schools?

How many precincts have any law enforcement assigned to the neighborhoods where there are schools?

How many people are taking a stand against our bombing villages overseas, including children, on the pretext that a terrorist or “potential combatant” might live there, but are horrified at violence on our own kids?

How many states are working to prevent the remainder of drunk driving deaths, abuse and neglect deaths, and the many other ways kids die other than the rare gunman?

How many states have laws preventing the news from bombarding us with every single shooting, complete with animated logo and theme song, sending a clear message to every bullied or neglected kid that shooting up a school gets you a lot of attention?

How many states have any body armor restrictions at all?

Look, I hate guns and hope I never have to use one (they’re a target for thieves, and not nearly reliable enough when you most need them), but demonizing them when there are many other kids dying of other reasons we dismiss and easier ways to stop these shooters (since someone who’s willing to murder twenty children isn’t likely going to worry about getting busted for getting a gun illegally) is a little sick.

It also leads the way for the cybersecurity idiots to say that some of us shouldn’t have computers or Internet access, because of the danger some of us can cause.  It’s the slipperiest of slopes, especially when the government over the last decade or so has already decided that it’s OK to kidnap, torture, and kill American citizens on flimsy pretexts.

Hey American people - how are ya? I live in Canada. We have our own debates going on every once in a while here too.
In my country, we have very specific gun control laws.
Google: Gun Politics in Canada.. wiki will explain that no, we do not allow the type of semi-automatic weapons used against these children here in Canada. At least not without a license.
The stats don’t look good either. 300% more gun-related deaths in the U.S. than Canada.
800% more gun-related homicides in the U.S. too.
We use our guns here for hunting, and suicide. You know - later after the doctors keep you alive far too long, and quality of life is a thing of the past. Walk in the woods with your shotgun. No government can tell you that you had no right to die then.
Your right to bear arms is seriously screwing up this whole world, you know. And it doesn’t scare your Government at all. In fact, if you suddenly all didn’t want your guns - THAT would scare your government! A caring, empathetic nation - is a politician’s worst nightmare. I can’t imagine growing up in a country where everyone needs a gun. I feel sorry for Americans. Even if I am completely wrong and the totally naive one in this scenario, I’d still rather be me.
Just sayin’

I didnt even read all this because it was waisting my time and is all bullshit. If everyone in america had a gun thease mass shootings wouldnt happen. If any of thoes teachers had a gun when the shooting happened maybe one   kid would of died not 26. With or without guns there will still be murders. More people die from cars crashes in 1 day then they do a hole year with guns so why not take our keys to? what are other countries gonna think when they know americans dont have guns anymore? you thinks its bad now wait untill you see how many deaths there will be when they start a war on american soil and we cant pertect our selfs. It would be to easy for them. There are to many people in america that own guns so they could never take them from us. If they were to ban guns I would hide them in a hole because im NOT giving them up and im sure theres millions of other gun owners who wouldnt either

Am I alone in reading some of these and thinking, that makes perfect sense:
“Montana makes it possible for felons to get their gun rights restored as long as they didn’t use a dangerous weapon in the commission of their crime.” So the guy that stole a car doesn’t have to give up his 2nd amendment right? Shocking I tell you.
“A year later, Indiana passed a law allowing job applicants and current employees to sue a private or public employer for requiring disclosure of firearm ownership or use.” So employers aren’t allowed to discriminate against gun owners? So sad.
“Still, eight states have passed resolutions stating that guns made and manufactured in-state shouldn’t be subject to federal regulation…” So some states are asserting that intrastate commerce isn’t interstate commerce and thus falls out of federal jurisdiction? That pesky constitution keeps getting in the way of the fed grabbing power (at least it would if SCOTUS did its job properly).

I have to say I’m impressed with the responses to this post. As anti-gun as you tried to make this ProPublica, I expected to see the masses jump on the bandwagon with you. Do you know why colleges are allowing students to carry? Did you ask that question? Because of the massacre at Virgina Tech for one. Another for what happened ath Texas A&M in the late 70’s early 80’s(?) forgive me for not having exact dates, but you guys are the “scoopers” you can research it. School shootings didn’t just start. They’ve been happening for decades. They were more prevalent in 70’s and 80’s. kid sniped students from watch tower at A&M. Slowed down in 90’s and the next generation picked back up. But Virginia Tech is a BIG reason why students can carry on campuses. You need to go back and reasearch what that kid did. Most college students are adults. They have a right to bear arms too. How should they defend themselves on campus? What is your suggestion? There is always going to be evil in this world. If you take away the guns, there will be bombs like in the Middle East. Just today in Iraq, a music store was bombed. An explosive device in a plastic baggie left in the store. How do we defend that. You think it’s some fancy explosives being used. Not hardly. Mix baking soda vinegar and glass shards and you’re going to do damage. Make Molotov cocktails and load them in cars and you have “mass damage”. Don’t have to be 16 to buy have the stuff it takes to make an Improvised Explosive Device”. But where do kids get the ideas to use guns? MOVIES AND VIDEO GAMES! Hollywood has glorified the youth and weapons. So has the music industry, and video games, but no one wants to point a finger at them. They want to throw around words like assault rifles. There’s already a ban on those. Now let’s throw the media in the mix. Because the reason you don’t know what happened in the 70’s and 80’s is because there was no mainstream media. Definitely no social media. When the media uses words like machine guns I can’t call them a journalist anymore, because they haven’t done their homework. They are no different than tabloid reporters now. I know journalists have it tough keeping up with social media, but they have become tabloidish. The reporting coming out of CT last week was deplorable. It was a horrific and tragic situation, but did it really need to be reported to the world about kids being removed one by one into a makeshift mortuary? Pictures taken and shown to parents for identification. Really? Where’s their privacy. I am a gun owner. I am a hunter. I have a semi automatic weapon. To hear a senator from California call it a “man hunter” is disgusting and ignorant.  Do any of you know what the reponse time is for 911 to you? Over 8 minutes to 25+. What are you going to do when someone is outside your house with a gun and you don’t have one? It’s a very valid question to ask yourself. I’m not being a smarta$$. I’m asking you seriously. When some crazy person is coming after you or your children how are you going to protect yourself or your family? I know exactly how to protect mine. Yes I have a conceal carry permit. Yes I carry in public. If you’re in a mall and a lunatic starts shooting do you want someone to defend you? Rightful gun owners will do that for you! I’m not a bad a$$, but I’m not gonna let a nut with a gun take me down. Take away my guns, and other rightful owners and keep resctricting us and you’ll go to your malls an schools and there will be bombings and car bombings, and stabbings, baseball bats, golf clubs, hell you’d be surprised at what can be made into a weapon. If I can’t have the upper hand or a level playing field, I can’t help you. But know that I would, if allowed to carry. My guns were purchased legally, registered, stored properly. I’m a law abiding citizen, I lay my taxes, and I AM NOT ALONE, so if you don’t do the above, if you don’t know the rules don’t follow the rules don’t contribute to your country you don’t get a say. Sorry. But even for you, if a crazy person opened fire on you I public I would do my damnedest to stop them and it’s not breaking the law, it’s saving your life.
As for Miss Canada’s comments, your country may touch ours but you’re right it’s WAY different than ours, and if it came down to a world war, Canada would be begging for or help. Canada is a peaceful place. I have been there. Your healthcare system sucks though. Your government is nothing like ours which is not a bad thing but you are comparing apples to nuts. Your comments are fruitless here.
(Excuse my typos—don’t feel like checking)

Amen Linda. Your not the only one to hold that opinion.

Jessica, Jessica, Jessica, again with the assault weapons. What is the definition of an assault weapon? What type of license do you have to have to have an assault weapon? What type of weapon was used in CT? Specifically? You can’t answer that because you don’t know. You’ve picked up on the media frenzy and political frenzy. Not an assault weapon. Do you even know what classifies a rifle as an assault weapon? Semi- Automatic? I will explain some of this to you and anyone else who reads this. First disclaimer: I am not an expert nor do I claim to be. Now, on semi vs fully (assault)  automatic weapon—you pull the trigger back and it fires repeatedly. Those are restricted/banned. A semi auto means you can only pull the trigger back once and it fires once. It’s a big, bad, mean looking gun. Yes it is. I want the person threatening me to see my gun is bigger than theirs! You better believe it! But it can only fire one bullet at a time. That’s right. My index finger has to continue to pull back to make the weapon fire. Now take your finger and practice that. Go ahead. An unpracticed finger wears out. Can guns be altered yes. Can a car be made into a bomb yes. But people who don’t know guns take these words they hear and use them improperly. You don’t have to like guns. That’s fine. Your President is protected by assault rifles. Your military uses assault rifles. So do law enforcement agencies. We are restricted to semi automatics. Ok. I can live with that. Nobody cried foul about guns with the Ft. Hood shooter. Oh his was religion. There always has to be a reason and something to blame it on. Unfortunately tragedies happen. Are there things that influence tragedies? Absolutely. But you have to factor in EVERY aspect of the equation and not pick one or two. It’s so unfortunate for the mom. She doesn’t get the chance to explain. We don’t get to know what happened. How she stored her guns, how he got them, but granted, his access was too easy to them. I’m sure she never thought in a MILLION YEARS this would happen or she would have done things differently. We all look at situations and wonder what we would have done or could done. Blame the dead mom for owning guns. Wow. Ok. If that makes you sleep better at night. Hope your not a single mom like she was, how do you protect your family?? Especially from a family member. Your own child! Did he face her before he shot her? Did he let his mom know she was going to die? Did she plead for her life? She’s already spent what 18-20 years raising a special needs child. Did you ever think what that must be like? You don’t know her. Don’t judge people, unless you’re prepared to be judged.

Linda your comments are right on the mark.  It’s usually people uninformed/misinformed on subjects that are the ones spreading the deceit and fear. I will continue to have my weapons with the full clips to keep myself, family and friends safe if ever a situation arises.  I love the Holy Trinity and I am a responsible gun owner and I wouldn’t ever use a weapon against anyone unless a threat left me no other option.  I believe you are the same as most gun owners are so, whatever happens with the dumbed down socialist politicians and their decisions…....don’t ever give your weapons up.  Feinstein, as an example, travels with a weapon or, at least she did, as well as, a body guard who’s packing so….what the hel* is she rambling on about.  Stand on our Second Amendment and screw the socialist politicians. Sometimes I wonder if certain individuals are steering this country towards another civil war using events like what happened as a pretense for it.

Carroll,
You’re absolutely right. I don’t like the direction my country is going. I don’t like what other countries think of us, we have become weak to some and to others like Miss Canada, crazy. We used to be feared and admired. There are still Americans that want to be feared and admired. Amazing that people think how wonderful our current President is when they really don’t know him either. Ok Mr President, if you want to take away my weapons may I have a drone to protect myself? Just how many children does he kill in a day in drone attacks? Yes our military are safer that way, but we look like bullies. We are bullies. We’re bombing places we used roger permission to bomb. Now we just bomb. Gosh I read my own words and I sound like a feakin radical! But I’m not. It’s all true. The government has always “controlled” the media and more so with Obama. He has been their darling. He’s not a President. He’s a superstar. This is a true question to ask yourself what has he done since he’s been President? Really? What has he accomplished AND succeeded. Can’t say healthcare. That’s just a law. There is no healthcare plan. Just a law. They have no actual plan for the people yet. Why do think their leaning on the states to decide what their going to do? Yes, insurance is decided on a state by state basis, but Obamacare just trumped that. Now it’s like “holy crap it passe! What do we do now?” Make the states come up with a plan. That’s why Republican led states are refusing. Arkansas has a small healthcare plan that’s decent, and I have a feeling that’s what they’re eyeballing since Obama and Gov. Bebee have been chumming since this thing started. But it is a very basic plan. Not for catastrophic coverage. I know that’s off topic off healthcare, but isn’t it interesting that that’s exactly what’s happened now. “Look over here at this new problem. Let’s deal with it first!” Healthcare may just get pushed to the wayside, which is exactly what the government needs. They aren’t ready to roll it out by 2014. Electronic Medical Records systems aren’t ready. In November on Capitol Hill they likened it the the Austrailian Railroad System. In which each state laid their own track and the train couldn’t run on all the different tracks, and had to be completely redone. That’s where ERM’s are. And they’re still throwing money at it. Amazing!! Sad to say, I’m ready to move. I know I got off topic, but that’s what our Gov’t is doing? Just why did we have so many shootings this year? Where are the congressional hearings for that? We have hearings for everything else? No, this is going straight to the floor for a vote! What’s up with that? Where’s the study on violence in video games and kids? Who’s studying violence in movies and kids? We are catering movies to a younger generation with weapons. Nobody. Because Hollywood loves Obama. Why? No really why? He hangs out with Jay-Z? A known drug dealer who stabbed someone. Did that person die? I can’t remember. But you want fundraising money from him? And the rest of the Dems go yeah, that’s cool! I’m glad Jay-Z, turned his life around. I turned my own life around too, nothing wrong with that. But I didn’t get arrested for stabbing anybody! And I don’t have music about b!t€$s & h0£s, doing this to me and that to me.  My friends growing up were radical. My preacher wasn’t radical. I don’t get the fascination for a man that has done nothing. Except secretly bomb other countries and kept it from the public and pass a healthcare law with no healthcare plan.
Anyone? I’m open for corrections. I like to see the good in everyone. But for me, middle American, small business owner, who already provides health insurance to her employees—what have YOU done for me? Nothing but take.

Gosh Carroll see what you made me do which was get off the whole topic of guns. Sorry!

Shortest comment you’ll see me write. :)

No worries Linda.  I’m just as frustrated about where this country is today as millions of other Americans.  Ranting is good.  You got it out of your system which is what many of us are doing because there’s not much else we can do for the next 4 years.  As far as getting off subject; I have to disagree with you on that…..it IS part of the subject.  Hang in there baby…hang in there.  With that said; I am a man in case you don’t know the spelling of my name.  Just think Carroll O’Connor. Alright….later on….

This is an ‘amusing’ and sadly misleading article from a supposedly “public interest” journal.  I would suggest that you either do a bit more research or rename yourself.

To wit:
Item 1: Five states have not changed their laws to “allow” students to carry firearms on campus.  Five states (so far) have had their RESTRICTIONS on citizens’ rights to carry firearms struck down down by the Courts (not changed by the legislature).  The legislature passed a law sometime in the past, which was successfully challenged, thus the more restrictive law was overturned, restoring citizens rights.

This was not a change from a more restrictive policy re: firearms, but the voiding of a change to a more restrictive policy, which preserves the status quo “permissiveness.”

Item 3:  A person need not be 18 ANYWHERE in the USA to lawfully use a firearm.  Private property and private land is free from state and federal restrictions on who may handle or use a firearm.

As for use in self-defense, this is an EXCEPTION to most existing states’ laws.

Sales and use are two entirely different issues, but your conflating them here only muddies any point you were trying to make, and widely misses the mark.

Item 4: Resolutions are not laws.

Item 5: Doctors and employers have to follow state and federal privacy laws and asking them to become “enforcement agents” for issues unrelated to their immediately cognizable role as Doctor or employer probably creates a valid constitutional challenge for being overreaching and “over broad.”

Item 7:  This might be more believable if you bothered to include even “a few” examples of such rights being restored, or that their restoration was later shown to be bad judgment because they used the firearms in a crime.  Non-violent felons have rights unrelated to their crimes restored ROUTINELY, regardless of the rights, including firearms ownership.


I find it risible that this is even presented as “news” or that you claim to have done any sort of research on this article beyond the first page of “google” results.

Interesting you mentioned your name. I assumed you were a male by the spelling, but didn’t want to say. I caught it! I’m not too old, not too young. (44)  I miss Archie Bunker! Soooo politically incorrect today, I understand. But it was comedy and he was funny. Thanks for letting me vent. Bought bullets for Christmas presents for myself and husband. $1 a round! Wow! For 223. I asked how much they’d gone up since the shooting and he said $12 a box(50). Of course he’s trying to tell me not to use them for target practice and buy as many as I can, and they’re flying off the shelves…  Easy buddy, I’m not an amateur. I’m a female I know, but I walked in here and asked you for 3 specific things. Just get them please! lol. Bear rug on my wall at work. Have to keep a picture in my desk from when I shot it. “You didn’t shoot that bear!” The picture is pretty worn out from all the times I’ve pulled it out. I have it handy. My employees even know where it’s kept to go show it too. I’m NOT an expert, but educated in what I do, tough for a female—yes. Not bulletproof though.  (Tougher than a lot of men!) Smart—yes. Aware of my surroundings—yes. Educate others—as much as I can!

My last reply was to Carroll.

To David: Thank you! I think the person who wrote this as well did not “do their homework”. I like most ProPublica ariticles even though I can tell they lean left and I lean right, but this one didn’t lean. It fell. Thank you for adding some more validity to our comments.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

Jan. 3, 2013, 10:19 p.m.

I appreciate all of the comments and opinions about this article. While true, some of the article wouldn’t stand up in a court of law, there are many eye opening things brought out for some people that don’t have a clue.

I ask all of you that are anti-gun or want only the government to possess guns, do you really think you could trust our government with this type of power?

I also ask all of those that are anti-gun or whatever if they have ever been shot at? I have. I know how it feels. The first thought on you mind is get out of the way of that lead and secondly, return fire. Of course, if some of our politicians have their way, we need to run hide and call 911.

Do those of you really understand that the media rarely reports on events where law abiding gun owners diffuse situations without firing any shots or killing anyone that would accidently or intentally take their life or someone else’s simply because the criminal was pumped up or inept in handling a firearm?

Do those of you that are anti-gun understand why the 2nd Ammendment is the #2 on the list? The second ammendment is the guardian of the other ammendments to The Bill of Rights. The only reason it was not #1 is that the free exchange of ideas is a danger to any tyranny.

Just look at our laws recently passed at the federal level (and executive orders) do some research, open your minds and your eyes to what is happening. Many states are enacting laws to counteract draconian edicts and laws coming from the federal level of our own government, here in the land of the free, home of the brave, we damn well better be brave enough to hold onto some of our freedoms when the time comes to do so.

Well said John Henry Bicycle Lucas.

Anthony Klytta

Jan. 7, 2013, 3:43 p.m.

I am shocked that what I considered to be perhaps the last bastion of unbiased reporting would print this article. For an unbiased examination of crime figures, please examine this Youtube video, which examines FBI crime statistics in the US and from the Home Office in Great Britain, and how they’ve been manipulated by gun control advocates. Thanks.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Ooa98FHuaU0

The winguts have arrived!  No mention of the NRA drafted, ALEC delivered laws to demand that all background checks be destroyed within 24 hours, hobbling police/law enforcement.  Lot’s of hot air debate on the technicality of assault vs semi-auto, but no mention on the purpose of a bayonette stud or a pistol grip.  The pistol grip on a semi automatic does one thing.  It lowers the center of gravity so that the the shooter does not have to shoulder the weapon against the recoil and he/she can just lay down repeated rounds from that extra long clip, right into a crowd.  I am USMC trained, Expert qualified 6 times and I really REALLY just want the NRA-LA, and the idiots that think they are defending liberty from a heavily armed government of tyrants to STFU and sit down.  If you really think you and your small arsenal of rounds and big clips, hand guns and AK-47s are going to defend against today’s war technology, you need to put your crack pipe down. What’s next? Sarin for civilians? LAAWs for landowners? Get real.  Drone strikes are real, and yes, in some countries they use kids and women as human shields - but please.  Stop watching doomsday preppers and come back to the community.  Fire ALEC.  Get your lawmakers to overturn pre-drafted legislation that serves the gun lobby instead of citizens.  Obama doesn’t want to take away your guns.  We just need to come together and regulate fire arm STORAGE like we do pool covers; rounds like we do narcotic dispensing; operation like we do automobile licenses and texting regulations while driving, and weaponry sales like we do titled vehicles.  If you REALLY think that your freedom is compromised in the face of these simple common sense regulations that we all embrace for public safety on all of these other topics, then you really well and truly have fallen for the grand NRA lie.  They exist to sell guns, dead children or not, and business is GOOD.  Gun sales are up, but it still stands that only 47% of households own guns.  They just buy the lie and buy more.

Although Arizona might be (symbolically) asserting their freedom to be exempt from federal gun regulation, I notice that the legislative buildings still have their little signs on the entrances stating that no firearms are allowed. Nice of them to expose the rest of us to these crazies while protecting their own workplace.

And in regards to number 7, these states might be making it easy for felons to get a gun, but no one is making it easier for any criminal to get A JOB. They ask fewer questions for gun ownership than any employer ever does and many states have no way to clean your record, no matter how small the crime or how much time has passed afterwards. So people can have guns but no jobs? Almost sounds like someone out there has plans for our burgeoning populations…

Let’s see…Where else should we allow guns? Mmmmm….All football games and NASCAR events. All bars. Soccer games. Basketball games….Well, ALL sporting events, including little league. While at it. Make it mandatory that everyone carry a loaded weapon at these events. Oh. Yeah. in keeping with the spirit of it all, make it mandatory that you can’t drive a car without a loaded firearm. Hey, why stop there? Make it illegal to appear in any public place without a loaded fire arm. We don’t have to worry about anyone getting hurt. We all know that Americans with loaded guns are sooo in control of their emotions.
In a short time the only thing left standing will be the second ammendment. Hallelujah! Amen!

Too much of laws that are now causing social disorders need to be simplified again like a fresh start by wisely chosen public servants in our Supreme Courts first of all. The nepotistic selections of super wealthy thugs cannot serve smartly enough to master the collective global-awareness of closely interconnected new generations.

The vision is: One globally supervising truly respectable Government such as North-America’s honest heads (Not conditioned or influenced by non-resident or outlandish groups with dishonest, old political ideas) led UN power -like honest implementors of the universl basic rules of Cosmic Creator, can positively change every outdated ways of things to be better and contemporary world-wide in this digital era of quick communication technology.

A Wise US leader of the world leaders, above political narrowness and shortcoming, has the ability now to choose the right persons by himself and by ourselves eventually.
In the sense of global co-existence of divers races in one world with peace, how a religious signboard bearing actual head of state-, e.g. a Mullah as a leader (Egypt, Iran, India, Israel, Bangladesh,Canada etc.), can be better than old belief-blind hereditary thugs that have been yet dumbly ruling most of the land pieces from Middle East to Asia to Africa to Russia to Europe and indirectly most of the ‘later found lands, including Americas ????

Peter,

You act as if people don’t already do those things.  They do. We don’t want to publicize our business, YOU DO. WE want to protect our business. Who goes crazy, and pulls a weapon?? Answer that.  Even when at the little league games and having to sit across the stands from the likes of you we would never dream of wasting our freedoms!  Yes, Americans who legally posess and own their guns are in control of their emotions. We’re not out brandishing our weapons at sporting and soccer games. It’s you who seems to need the evaluation. You with anything remotely considered a weapon I would be concerned about. Then again, probably not.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

Jan. 7, 2013, 9:14 p.m.

Gwen, thank you for the new title of wingnut. I kind of like it.

If you want to be regulated in every thing you do, go ahead, vote for those people that will do it for sure. I, for one, have enough, strike that, way to much, government intrusion into my life as it is. I’m not even going to touch on taxes I’m paying.

If you have ever read the Constitution, I would like for you to understand one thing. Thomas Jeffererson wrote it. If you read and understand that the Bill of Rights ensures us the freedoms that are rapidly being taken away from us. Wake up and smell the coffee! Part of the wording of the Constitution enables We The People to dissolve the government and establish another of our own choosing. To do this, Thomas Jefferson KNEW that tyrants will not willingly give up power. The only way to hold the government in check at that point would be under threat of arms. This would mean, at the time it was written that citizens could keep and bear arms if needed, to OVERTHROW TYRANTS. In effect, the people would be armed as same as the government. We can throw together a citizen’s militia real quick.

What difference does it make if it is a right boot or left boot on your neck?

History PROVES OUT last century over 250 million civilians were massacered by their own governments across this world.

The first step in solving the social problems for the tyrants was to DISARM THE POPULATION. If you don’t believe me, look it up. It is an inconvient group of facts.

No, I would have no defense against modern machines of war. We have perfected the art of killing our fellow man down to a technical wonder. I could however, along with a group of likeminded individuals make it extremely difficult for the mititary to operate against a population. If you don’t think there are many former military people out here that know more than you know, think again.

If you think the holocaust conditions cannot rise up again, in this country, think again. If you think that someday they won’t come get you, those of you reading this, think about it.

DHS has let contracts to purchase 1.6 billion rounds of ammunition within the last year. What is all this ammunition for? It is to protect us from terrorist? I guess I’m confused, no, I’m a wingnut.

Gwen, I would rather die on my feet than live on my knees to tyrants.


What about you?

According to some gun rights proponents, including several of the posters right here like John Henry Lucas, combat weapons to resist our potentially unjust government are a Second Amendment right!

Larry Pratt, the Executive Director of Gun Owners of America, articulated a frightening belief which I call the mythical “Resistance Clause of the Second Amendment” in an interview on national television, just 3 days after the Newtown massacre of our children. The idea, which most regular law abiding Americans are not even aware of, has a widespread following within the conservative movement. I have written about it in a piece found at “http://voices.yahoo.com/the-resistance-clause-second-amendment-11950073.html?cat=5”. The audio of the interview can be found at “http://www.softsciencegroup.com/sMvViewer/sMvView_121218_LarryPrattOnHardball121217/sMvView_121218_LarryPrattOnHardball121217.html”.

In the interview, Pratt offered the view that, “We have guns, fundamentally protected by the Second Amendment, in order to control the government…”

The host, Chris Matthews then asks “So Larry, it’s not just the right to use guns to protect your home, it’s the right to use guns to take on your government?”

Pratt: “The government has…uh… been overboard…”

After a further exchange exploring how Pratt’s anti-government reasoning for the Second Amendment applies to any branch of government that oversteps what the gun-carrying citizens want, Matthews turns (to the viewers) and says, “Well I hope everybody is listening to this. Larry Pratt, who believes that he owns guns to defend himself against the federal government or local government, or any government, right?”

Pratt: “That’s what the Second Amendment is all about.”

The large silent majority of sensible Americans need to pay attention to the poison kool-aid that right wing extremists have been effectively peddling for years about their need for combat weapons. What many are talking about behind closed doors is not personal protection or hunting. What many people are alluding to here on this comment thread is not about “freedom” and “preserving liberty.” It is about preserving their right to engage in heroic male fantasies of violently resisting any persons, group, or government that they perceive as offending, illegitimate, or contrary to their individual point of view.

As another commenter has already pointed out, the futility of seriously resisting the U.S. government would be absolute. No matter how many 30-round clips you have for your dozen assault rifles, you would be easily taken out by the U.S. military from a distance so great that you would not even see the direction the round that kills you is coming from. It is for the resistance-fantasy WING NUTS (hey John!) that are too stupid to understand this reality, that we permit virtually all members of society to easily obtain the most efficient of personal killing machines. We are no longer surprised when some of these individuals cross the line from “normal” gun-resistance fantasy to acting out their resistance fantasy against unarmed civilians.

Sadly, the rest of us look up from our video games and reality TV and take notice ONLY when that resistance is directed at 6 and 7 year olds and we are then forced to ask why our society makes it necessary for so many parents to be asked to identify the bullet-riddled faces of their once loving and trusting kids. We have a much greater obligation to our children than we do to men who have never grown up and want to be free to run around the woods dreaming of how heroic they are as they prepare to resist the oppressive “socialist” government.

My kids and I have a much more fundamental right to be able to participate in daily life in this nation in peace without worrying that there are multiple “legal” gun-toting individuals within firing distance of us. The presence of all these armed civilians require me to continuously make a quick instant psychological evaluation of each person in our proximity in order to be sure that none are, at that moment, depressed, drunk, momentarily blind with rage, and ready to start acting out their own personal resistance fantasy in the presence of my children.

If my elected government cannot provide that level of security for us then maybe I and other “liberals” will have to consider becoming heavily armed too, so we can also practice extra-judicial law enforcement and extra-judicial politics on an equal basis with the legal gun-carrying (and completely “sane”) “birthers”, “legitimate rape” science doubters, “Sharia law” fearing anti-muslim conspiracists, and Resistance Clause true-believers, since election results are no longer a sufficient Constitutional method of government control. I believe we had a Civil War to resolve these issues. Too bad the loonies want to do it all over again.

Well thought out, well said John Henry Bicycle Lucas but, I only question ONE thing you said.  The 250 million killed by their own government…...I believe that number is higher.  Remember, the very people who do not see where this country is heading will be the first to ask for help if it gets there.  Let’s just hope and pray that it doesn’t but, the indicators are there.

Tom In Laredo

Jan. 8, 2013, 9 a.m.

If the police need semi-automatics to protect themselves, then why shouldn’t the public be allowed the same protections?

And yes, I want a bigger better gun than the criminals have.  All of you gun controllers have yet to explain how criminals get guns if they are outlawed from doing so?  I am waiting for the answer on this one question.

The term assault rifle “only” refers to the platform on which the barrel and trigger action is mounted.  It really is that simple.  It has nothing to do with caliber, magazine capacity, or lethality. 

The police do not stop crimes in progress.  They pick up bodies, and look for who did it.  I prefer not to be a body they pick up.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

Jan. 8, 2013, 9:01 a.m.

Carroll, thank you for the compliement.

Carroll, yes I have read and heard higher figures. No doubt it is at least 250 million. Nobody really has an totally accurate account. The scary part is that figure does not include military or combatants.

Once I began some research into all of this, the facts and underlying facts stunned me.

Some people make fun of “preppers” well, why is our government prepping? Why is our governement building underground bunkers everywhere? Why is our government stockpiling so many provisions?
What is it that they know, but are not telling us?

In this country, we have vast natural resources, we also have a huge well trained workforce. Unfettered, we as a nation could once again be the shining example for the world. Instead, I’m sure a lot of people and other world leaders cringe at the thought of us coming to “help” them.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas
You continue to prep.  As I told many people over the years that it’s best to know how to kill someone and never do it than, being in a real life and death situation and not know how to kill someone and end up dead. There are too many flags that say to be prepared and most are coming from the government.  I WILL keep all my arms and I WILL be prepared for something but, hopefully and prayerfully for nothing.  The world today is out of control and this government knows it can’t protect us. Even the state and local government. My worry is that this President is going to drop the Constitution and that’s why they’re loading up on ammo and other provisions.  There’s just too many things happening from the left today that’s of big concern to me.  Too many Feinsteins and Bloombergs.  I believe you understand my meaning. The cringe you mentioned…Israel comes to mind.  Be safe and be prepared.

According to some gun rights proponents, including several of the posters here on this thread like John Henry Lucas, combat weapons to resist our potentially unjust government are a Second Amendment right!

Larry Pratt, the Executive Director of Gun Owners of America, articulated just such a frightening belief which I call the mythical “Resistance Clause of the Second Amendment” in an interview on national television, just 3 days after the Newtown massacre of our children. The idea, which most regular law abiding Americans are not even aware of, has a widespread following within the conservative movement. In the interview, Pratt offered the view that, “We have guns, fundamentally protected by the Second Amendment, in order to control the government…”

The host, Chris Matthews then asks “So Larry, it’s not just the right to use guns to protect your home, it’s the right to use guns to take on your government?”

Pratt: “The government has…uh… been overboard…”

After a further exchange exploring how Pratt’s anti-government reasoning for the Second Amendment applies to any branch of government that oversteps what the gun-carrying citizens want, Matthews turns (to the viewers) and says, “Well I hope everybody is listening to this. Larry Pratt, who believes that he owns guns to defend himself against the federal government or local government, or any government, right?”

Pratt: “That’s what the Second Amendment is all about.”

The large silent majority of sensible Americans need to pay attention to the poison kool-aid that right wing extremists have been effectively peddling for years about their need for combat weapons. What many are talking about behind closed doors is not personal protection or hunting. What many people are alluding to here on this comment thread is not about “freedom” and “preserving liberty.” It is about preserving their right to engage in heroic male fantasies of violently resisting any persons, group, or government that they perceive as offending, illegitimate, or contrary to their individual point of view.

As another commenter has already pointed out, the futility of seriously resisting the U.S. government would be absolute. No matter how many 30-round clips you have for your dozen assault rifles, you would be easily taken out by the U.S. military from a distance so great that you would not even see the direction the round that kills you is coming from. It is for the resistance-fantasy WING NUTS (hey John!) that are too stupid to understand this reality, that we permit virtually all members of society to easily obtain the most efficient of personal killing machines. We are no longer surprised when some of these individuals cross the line from “normal” gun-resistance fantasy to acting out their resistance fantasy against unarmed civilians.

Sadly, the rest of us look up from our video games and reality TV and take notice ONLY when that resistance is directed at 6 and 7 year olds and we are then forced to ask why our society makes it necessary for so many parents to be asked to identify the bullet-riddled faces of their once loving and trusting kids. We have a much greater obligation to our children than we do to men who have never grown up and want to be free to run around the woods dreaming of how heroic they are as they prepare to resist the oppressive “socialist” government.

My kids and I have a much more fundamental right to be able to participate in daily life in this nation in peace without worrying that there are multiple “legal” gun-toting individuals within firing distance of us. The presence of all these armed civilians require me to continuously make a quick instant psychological evaluation of each person in our proximity in order to be sure that none are, at that moment, depressed, drunk, momentarily blind with rage, and ready to start acting out their own personal resistance fantasy in the presence of my children.

If my elected government cannot provide that level of security for us then maybe I and other “liberals” will have to consider becoming heavily armed too, so we can also practice extra-judicial law enforcement and extra-judicial politics on an equal basis with the legal gun-carrying (and completely “sane”) “birthers”, “legitimate rape” science doubters, “Sharia law” fearing anti-muslim conspiracists, and Resistance Clause true-believers, since election results are no longer a sufficient Constitutional method of government control. I believe we had a Civil War to resolve the issue of whether one should militarily resist the government of the many to protect some special “right” of the few (slave ownership). Too bad the loonies want to re-fight that war all over again instead of see their kids become educated in safe school environments.

Tom in Laredo

Jan. 8, 2013, 11:10 a.m.

Where you liberals have it wrong about protections against the government is here:  Our military and it’s leaders, both civilian and military, have taken an oath to “uphold” the Constitution.  What make you think that our armed forces would be fighting against those who support the Constitution?

Should our civilian leadership ever try to subvert the Constituion, the people have the right to remove them.  The military, or hopefullyna strong percentage of it would be on the side of the Constitution.

Tom, what I find interesting is how the right wing think that they and only they understand the “Constitution.” Our system of government, as specified by the Constitution, provides a mechanism for deciding what the Constitution actually means. That mechanism is called the Supreme Court. Armed resistance to the elected government of the United States is not provided for in the actual Constitution. Government change is accomplished through the expression of the popular will of its citizens through the process of voting. If you think that the Supreme Court has interpreted the Second Amendment to mean that any self-appointed interpreter of the “Constitution” has the right to violently resist the laws of the United States because they don’t like some of them, then I think you have been smoking something that has fried your brain. Most military personnel and law enforcement personnel WILL defend the country from home grown “resisters” and terrorists who hold extremest views about something and try to force those views on the rest of us at the point of a gun.

Tom in Laredo

Jan. 8, 2013, 12:01 p.m.

Bryan, all I said was that the military should support those who uphold the Constitution.  I never said the people on the right are the only ones who believe in the Constitution. 

However, in the context of this argument I believe that it has been ruled that the Constitution allows for the private ownership of firearms.  The real debate here should be, do bans of weapons really make a difference the violent acts carried out by criminals.  I would argue that no, bans do not reduce violence.

I would point out that rifles are used in very few homicides each year, and actually knives are used in almost three times as many homicides as rifles.  (Source: FBI UCR stats, 2011)

Tom in Laredo

Jan. 8, 2013, 12:08 p.m.

And PS to Bryan, the government, local, state, nor federal, can protect you from harm at the hands of the common criminal.  They only respond after you have been harmed.

The criminal is a domestic enemy, and you all seem to forget that.  Self defense is protected.

Tom, I am not arguing against reasonable ownership of firearms for hunting and home protection. I own both a rifle and a handgun. I am arguing against the unreasonable ownership of “combat rifles” by people who believe they have a “Constitutional” right to militarily resist a elected government of our country.

I also think that ownership of machines of death should be a “right” that comes with an equally important demonstration of responsibility to others that are exposed to the potential harm that an unqualified/unstable individual poses to the rest of us through their possession of firearms. I think people who are found to be publicly intoxicated or drive under the influence or who commit assaults (including misdemeanor assaults) or who have been involved in domestic violence should immediately have their weapons confiscated.

People who have difficulty expressing themselves well enough to resolve life’s little disputes with words are the people who are most attracted to gun ownership fantasies. Unfortunately, I know many such “men”. Owning “combat rifles” gives many of these weak males some false fantasy that they are bigger, more manly men. That is why the makers of the Bushmaster semi-automatic “combat rifle” used in both the Newtown and Aurora shootings last year advertise their “product” by displaying the weapon with the phrase “Consider your man card reissued.”

PS to Tom and any of the other readers - Anyone who wants a textbook example of the kind of the kind of lunatic and unhinged gun-toting individual I have been talking about, please view conservative talk show host Alex Jones (who owns “more than 50” firearms to defend his family) when he was on Piers Morgan’s show last night (1/7/13) on CNN and had a 30 minute meltdown demonstrating visually for everyone to see, how mentally unstable many of these Second Amendment fanatics really are. He is exactly the type of individual that should NOT have an assault weapon. From the first moments of the interview, this man worked himself up into a nearly violent rage, with no prompting at all from Piers Morgan. Had Morgan actually verbally challenged Jones, I would bet even money that Piers would have at least been punched in the face by this “law-abiding” nut case. This guy is listened to by millions of people each day. God help our nation.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

Jan. 8, 2013, 10:57 p.m.

Carroll, the thing is, I’m not actually a “prepper” but if I want to stockpile food and provisions, I don’t think it should be any of our government’s concern.

Bryan, I will not judge you as stupid as you have judged me. I hear your logic, and I respectfully disagree. I don’t have to buy a firearm or brandish one to prove I’m a man. I already know I’m a man and prove it daily, I go out and work, and the occupation I’m in culls out the wimps and idiots pretty quickly. Bryan, shooting is a sport to me more than anything else. It does nothing for my testosterone level. I know a few women that can shoot better than me.

Bryan, I suggest you reread the Constitution. Use your logic to understand why the second ammendment was installed there. They did not intended it for us to have arms to hunt with. The founding fathers could not foresee the nation we live in today. What they could foresee is a time in the future that our government COULD become oppresive, just as I have stated before. Like I have already written, if you think that our own government would not become oppresive enough to institute a second holocaust you are kidding yourself.

All reading this please understand, I do not advocate an overthrow of our government. By no means would I attack our government. If I was attacked first, I would defend myself against anyone, including our government. I have this God given right, it was not given to me by the Constitution. I hope I have not stirred anyone into thinking of overthrowing the government. This is not my intention.

Let me make another point about myself. I don’t drink the kool-aide of the right or the left. Hence my statement above, “what does it matter if it is a right boot or a left boot on your neck?”

I do vote, every election when the poles are open, I’m there to vote. The only reason I vote in presidential elections is the postions under the president as we do not actually elect the president anyway from our popular vote. This is one of the freedoms we still have, and I do participate.

What I do advocate is the restoration of our great republic. Several things need to happen to do this. First, the Patriot Act needs to go. Second, close Gitmo and all the other little secret prisions of ours around the world, including those operated by proxy. Either charge these men with a crime and prosecute them, or release them. Stop the drone program. This program will get out of control and be used against us here in our own country if we don’t stop it now. This make indiscriminate killing of other human beings easy and not messy without any skin in the game. It reduces killing of another human being into just being a job. I could see the use of drone warfare on a battlefield, but with very limited success. It is a weapon of terror, otherwise. The war on terror is over. Let’s move on from it and learn from it. We have plenty of laws in place to defend us against any “terrorist” Abolish the NSA, abolish the DHS. We do not need them. Many of these alphabet agencies are only a drain on our economy and tax dollars that we can ill afford right now in the middle of an economic crisis. These agencies run ripshod over our individual rights without any real effective recourse from them. Unless you want to spend megabucks for an attorney to sue them. We shouldn’t need to do that, just to defend our rights. Hold those in political offices accountable criminally, if they break the laws that we have entrusted them to uphold, charge them with the crimes and try them in the courts. Don’t just let them resign to escape prosecution. Understand torture by any other name is still torture. “Enhanced interrogation techniques” is just another name, and some think renaming torture makes it legitimate.
Stop assasinating people in other countries because we have “intelligence” that they are terrorist. No longer should there be a “secret kill list” How do you get on this list? Well one thing for sure, there is only one way off of it. I don’t trust any government with this type of policy. It is not legal.

I’m sure that many of you can come up with a lot more that can go on this list of things that need to be done to restore our constitutional government to the great nation it once was. I can think of many more things that can be added, but those listed are priorities. This list would be a good start for sure.

I hopefully have grown wiser over the years, and I have discernment to see what is happening to our world, I just hope others do, too. It is up to us to try to change things for the better, we have really, really allowed this world to get in bad shape to turn it over to our next generation to try to correct it. Some of us remember when we did have a great nation, with our freedoms intact.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas I hear you.  I’m not a prepper myself but, I have a medical stash and a bug out bag for just in case. I have food and water stored but, our government advises that so, I’m not a lunatic per se.. as some have suggested. You were attacked on this site but, I do so appreciate that you’ve returned fire with your intelligence.  It sometimes is the only thing you can use to get through to some of the….ahem…....‘intellects”

John, I actually agree with much that you have said in your last post (Patriot Act, surveillance society, extra-judicial killings of “terrorists”, etc.). However, I COMPLETELY disagree with your farfetched Second Amendment interpretation.

The founders of our country never envisioned the kind if killing machines available today. 230 years ago, firearms that could be personally owned were single shot muskets and rifles which took as long as a minute to reload. That minute between shots gives others plenty of time to get the heck out of harms way of a deranged shooter. Based on the recording of one of the 911 calls received during the Aurora shooting, the shooter fired at least 30 times with his “combat rifle” shots during a single 27 second long recorded call. That modern fire rate is more than 60 bullets within the same time interval that one could fire a second shot 230 years ago. THAT is a huge and fundamental difference. To do the same carnage at the time the Second Amendment was written, it would have required 60 deranged lunatics to get together and simultaneously attack a theater or school. To say the nations’ “founding fathers” envisioned a “right” for everybody to own mass killing machines when they wrote the Second Amendment is pure illogical fantasy.

To say it is a “God given right” is even worse. You suggested I re-read the Constitution. I suggest you re-read the Bible or what ever holy book your “God” suggests. Combat rifles will not be in there, I’ll wager.

John, I don’t think you are stupid. I think you are brainwashed and a bit paranoid as are many who think like you do. For far too long, many people like me have kept silent and let you and your fellow paranoid “patriots” control the debate with reasonable sounding, but toxic platitudes and mantras (“guns don’t kill people, people kill people…“God given Right”...blah blah blah!”) that have for years misled people about the true lunacy of these Second Amendment fantasies.

I will not be silent any longer. You people need to be confronted. You need to find out what a real threat looks like. It’s not our system of government. It is the borderline mentally-ill paranoid conspiracy-theory proponents who think that a new holocaust is coming at the hands of the US Government that we should fear.

It’s ultimately up to people like me that are tired of the BS from paranoid talk radio jerks like Alex Jones and the STUPID people who drink their poison kool-aid to take combat guns away from them until they regain their mental health. When their stupidity starts killing our children as it has, we will act. Hopefully all that will be necessary can be accomplished with the ballot box. If not, I really fear for our nation.

Why don’t you take some of your obviously genuine civic concern and work to elect people who will pass laws to stop members of OUR government from making bad decisions like Gitmo, the Patriot Act, and the “War on Terror” using the ballot box instead of relying on the fantasy of resistance with a high capacity magazine attached to a “combat rifle.”

Don’t you want to live in a world where kids can go to the movies or school without having to rely on the results of a gunfight between “good guys with a gun” killing the “bad guys with a gun” in a darkened theater or a confined classroom? IF YOU think the answer to these problems is more guns, I believe you qualify as a shining example of when the Dunning-Kruger effect rubs shoulders with paranoid delusional thinking.

Bryan
May I suggest you do a real investigation into Nazi Germany and how Hitler was saying the same thing your preaching.  There are millions upon millions of gun owners who aree stable and aren’t delusional as you suggest John is.  You sir live in a make believe world where everyone is wonderful.  Well, that’s not the case.  The issue is making sure the mentally challenged do not have a weapon and NOT penalizing law abidding citizens. Your rant about muskets versus semi automatic weapons just won’t fly.  It’s the mentally disturbed who get access to weapons that need to be changed and NOT by taking away weapons or magazines or anything.  I’m quite sane and I have weapons to fend off people just like the shooters who have given themselves infamy.  My weapons also tell foreign governments that if they decide to invade that they will have more than the military and the police force to deal with.  This is one of the reasons they do not attack us besides the politics.  Don’t condemn peoples beliefs, condemn the mentally deranged who got the weapons.  THEY are the problem.  I won’t give mine up because sadly, a lunatic killed those children.  I want mine to defend myself from that lunatic and the others that are allowed to walk among us. I’m not paranoid but, I am vigilant and a realist.  I hope you understand where I’m coming from and not condemn me for wanting my right to protect myself, others and you if it came down to it.  There will always be people who do not think the way you do and have different beliefs but, that should not be held towards a person as long as they’re civil.  These shooters were mad men and they should not have had access to the weapons but, don’t take mine because of what they did.

John Henry Bicycle Lucas

Jan. 9, 2013, 9:10 a.m.

Ok, Bryan. You obviously took the blue pill. I took the red pill (Matrix) a while back and I am not thrilled about what I am finding.


More to come…

This article is part of an ongoing investigation:
Guns

Guns

We're probing the policy and politics of guns in America.

Get Updates

Stay on top of what we’re working on by subscribing to our email digest.

optional

Our Hottest Stories

  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •  
  •