[Vision2020] Gun regulations

Joe Campbell philosopher.joe at gmail.com
Thu Nov 4 08:01:30 PDT 2010


Scott,

The other issue is gun theft. How can you ensure that your guns won't
be stolen by others and used to harm? If we can restrict other rights,
say, in the first amendment on the basis that they might lead to the
harm of others (restrictions of speech in the case of libel, for
instance) I don't see why the second amendment can't be restricted.
Again, I'm just looking for a consistent view about rights. Are you
really going to try to suggest that speech has led to more harm than
guns?

On Thu, Nov 4, 2010 at 7:37 AM, Robert Dickow <dickow at turbonet.com> wrote:
> Scott, I’m not sure the analogy holds though. In the case of guns, I might
> more rightfully restrict someone else’s rights because the guns owned by
> them have the potential to kill  ME. However, in the case of abortion, I
> don’t have quite the same bargaining position, because it is difficult for
> someone to abort ME now that I am born. (Indeed, I’ve been an adult for eons
> it seems.)
>
>
>
> Bob Dickow, troublemaker
>
> ---------------------------------------
>
> <Conservatives are all for constitutionality of laws . . .until they aren't
> for constitutionality for laws...?> True enough, but so are the Democrats.
> All you need to look at are those trying to restrict 2nd Amendment
> constitutional rights of gun ownership on the grounds that guns can be used
> as tools to kill people and compare them to those trying to restrict 14
> Amendment constitutional rights of abortion on grounds that it kills people.
> It's the identical mode of operation where folks feign to give up rights
> that they never plan to exercise in order to take away those same rights
> from others.
>
> -Scott
>
> ________________________________
>
> From: reggieholmquist at u.boisestate.edu
> Date: Sun, 31 Oct 2010 23:21:55 -0700
> Subject: Re: [Vision2020] Gun regulations
>
> Conservatives are all for constitutionality of laws . . .until they aren't
> for constitutionality for laws...?
>
> -Reggie
>
> On Sun, Oct 31, 2010 at 11:01 PM, Robert Dickow <dickow at uidaho.edu> wrote:
>
>>Shirley Ringo writes:
>
>>“Gun safety is very important to me.  In the most recent session,
>>the majority passed legislation stipulating that firearms manufactured
>>exclusively in Idaho would be exempt from federal regulations.  I think
>> that
>> is dangerous and irresponsible.  Our Attorney General said it was likely
>> unconstitutional.  My vote was one of the few against that legislation.”
>
> Bravo Shirley!
>
> So, does this mean that when I rush out to buy that lusted-after
> Idaho-manufactured Uzi clone (just.. you know… for some fun shooting
> squirrels around the house), that it might misfire in my face due to a lack
> of its compliance with federal regs??!!
>
> Bob Dickow, troublemaker
>
>
>
> =======================================================
>  List services made available by First Step Internet,
>  serving the communities of the Palouse since 1994.
>               http://www.fsr.net
>          mailto:Vision2020 at moscow.com
> =======================================================
>



More information about the Vision2020 mailing list