[Vision2020] The Petition
Sunil Ramalingam
sunilramalingam at hotmail.com
Thu Dec 20 11:53:26 PST 2012
Andy,
Your understanding is no longer correct, given recent US Supreme Court decisions. Here is a snip from Wikipedia that I think accurately describes the current state of the Second Amendment:
In 2008 and 2010, the Supreme Court issued two landmark decisions concerning the Second Amendment. In District of Columbia v. Heller,
554 U.S. 570 (2008), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment protects
an individual's right to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a
militia[1][2] and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home. In dicta,
the Court listed many longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on
firearms possession as being consistent with the Second Amendment.[3] In McDonald v. Chicago,
561 U.S. 3025 (2010), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment limits
state and local governments to the same extent that it limits the
federal government.[4]
Sunil
From: moscowrecycling at turbonet.com
To: vision2020 at moscow.com
Date: Thu, 20 Dec 2012 10:54:30 -0800
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Petition
It’s funny, my understanding of the constitution’s second amendment is that ownership of arms was for a well-trained militia. At the time of our forefathers, they had no plan to have a standing army so making sure that citizens had arms and were trained was vital to our nation’s defense. As you know this is no longer the case. You can argue the intent of the founding fathers but what we have now is not what was ever intended, in my humble opinion. As far as the NRA is concerned, for its first 120 years of existence or so, they favored gun control legislation. After the 1970’s takeover of the organization by more ‘radical ‘ members, no gun control whatsoever became the motto. It would be better if more level heads prevailed there. Andy Boyd From: vision2020-bounces at moscow.com [mailto:vision2020-bounces at moscow.com] On Behalf Of Paul Rumelhart
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 9:21 AM
To: Sunil Ramalingam
Cc: vision 2020
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Petition There are underlying problems that cause these shootings that are being shunted aside in favor of gun control legislation. Why, exactly, did this guy do what he did? If we knew that, we might be able to answer the question of whether or not he would have done it in the absence of freely-available guns, as well as to start looking for solutions that would stop these kinds of events before they start. I doubt it was simply the availability of guns. I doubt his motivation was that he was bored, here was a nifty AR15, "might as well make use of it".
For example, the Columbine shootings appear to have been motivated, at least in part, by bullying from other students. Yet the focus on the national stage was never "stop bullying!", it was "ban guns!". I'm doubtful that if they didn't have access to guns that they wouldn't have done something.
Guns are real, physical objects for which we already have laws covering their use. Many of these laws could be tightened to some degree, which makes them an easy scapegoat. Focusing solely on them, however, will do little to solve the actual problems at hand. The real problem is that the best solutions are *hard*. For example, you mention controlling access to "folks that shouldn't have them". How, exactly, do you determine who should and who shouldn't have access to them, given that the right to have access to them is spelled out in the Constitution?
Paul From: Sunil Ramalingam <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>
To:
Cc: vision 2020 <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Thursday, December 20, 2012 6:55 AM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Petition
Paul,
Just like Roger you are building your argument on a defective premise or on assumptions. You don't know how much planning 'they' put in. You say, 'If the people that commit these atrocities didn't have guns readily available, they would have stolen them or bought them on the black market.'
How do you know? How do you know it would happen every time? Let's pretend one could not legally buy an AR15 variant (or any other high capacity semi-automatic). Would this kid's mother have gone out and bought one illegally? You don't know that. And in this world I just made, these guns are going to be a whole lot more expensive on the black market. How many of 'them' are going to be priced out of that market?
How do you know they're going to make car bombs? It's a lot easier to pick up the gun in the other room, or to take it our of the safe, than it is to build a car bomb.
Why should we accept your assumption, 'If these guys had really wanted to make their statements or whatever they thought they were doing, they could have made pipe bombs or a few molotov cocktails from common household chemicals. They could have ran their victims over with a vehicle. They could have terrorised them with a chainsaw, or set the school on fire.'
Well, maybe some of those things might happen, but I think it's more unlikely than not.
I'm not advocating banning gun ownership, but I think we need to be thinking intelligently about how to control access to them by the folks who shouldn't have them. I don't think we can absolutely prevent all such access, but we can certainly improve on what we're doing now. And I think part of thinking about it intelligently is by not accepting bad premises for arguments.
Sunil Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 23:04:42 -0800
From: godshatter at yahoo.com
To: philosopher.joe at gmail.com
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Petition
These shootings don't just happen spur of the moment. They are planned and prepared for for a long time beforehand. If the people that commit these atrocities didn't have guns readily available, they would have stolen them or bought them on the black market. If these guys had really wanted to make their statements or whatever they thought they were doing, they could have made pipe bombs or a few molotov cocktails from common household chemicals. They could have ran their victims over with a vehicle. They could have terrorised them with a chainsaw, or set the school on fire.
The sad fact is that the price we would have to pay to truly protect ourselves from these kinds of incidents is just too damned big. We would have to give up too many of our liberties for too little gain. Meanwhile, orders of magnitudes more people will die from cancer, heart attacks, traffic accidents, and other common causes.
The same thing goes for protecting ourselves from terrorists. It's too costly, both in money and in civil liberties, and all we've done is made it worse.
I don't know what the answer is. I just have an ugly feeling that whatever gestates from this current climate of fear and outrage will be worse than the current situation. The Law of Unintended Consequences is real and should be given due respect. We shouldn't just jump at the nearest boogie man, whether it's assault weapons or large magazines, without giving it the careful thought it requires. I doubt we are in a position to have that conversation on a national stage right now.
In both cases (school shootings and terrorist attacks) the root causes are complex and are for the most part being ignored. Another sad fact is that in this world of sound bites and instant Internet memes no politician is going to look at the real causes. They will look for the low-hanging fruit, and pretend it's more than just putting a bandaid on a gaping wound.
Paul
On 12/18/2012 09:20 PM, Joe Campbell wrote:Matt,
This sounds sensible. Again, I don't have a "plan" about what to do. More interested in exploring solutions -- and this does just that. I like the idea of stronger background checks.
Note too that if you think of the latest episodes of gun violence -- the ones we've all heard about at least -- gun theft did not play a role. Most of the shooters were young, as well. In general, the school shooters were young and required their guns from family members, or purchased them themselves. These are not folks who are stealing guns.
JoeOn Tue, Dec 18, 2012 at 9:06 PM, Matt Decker <mattd2107 at hotmail.com> wrote:Joe,
I believe some want to ban these guns but allow current owners to be grandfathered in. This could allow these guns to be on the streets for years to come. I agree with stronger regulation into the future owners of guns. Maybe a longer waiting period along with stronger background checks. Classes or prior military would help as well.
Matt
From: philosopher.joe at gmail.com
Date: Tue, 18 Dec 2012 20:06:10 -0800
To: donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com
CC: vision2020 at moscow.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The PetitionThis makes no sense. Just to use an example, if you banned assault rifles, no one could steal them. I'm not saying that's what we should do. But we should look at ALL possible solutions. Again, research Australia and gun control. Best, Joe
On Dec 18, 2012, at 7:58 PM, Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com> wrote:They steal the guns. So I don't think the laws would change the situation, unless you ban their production. Donovan J. Arnold From: Joe Campbell <philosopher.joe at gmail.com>
To: Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com>
Cc: Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com>; Moscow Vision 2020 <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 7:49 PM
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] The Petition Some form of gun control has got to be part of the solution. And I believe all the guns used in recent shootings were legally purchased. That's why some form of gun control has got to be part of the solution. Australia did it, so can we
On Dec 18, 2012, at 7:11 PM, Donovan Arnold <donovanjarnold2005 at yahoo.com> wrote:Gun laws are not the answer to this problem. Not allowing for the public release of the gunman's name would go further then gun laws, as they usually do it for fame. Education of staff, students, and community members, and better protection of schools would also help. This kid did not get the guns legally, and no reasonable restrictive gun law would have prevented it. There are a host of other things that would have helped though. Donovan J. Arnold From: Tom Hansen <thansen at moscow.com>
To: Moscow Vision 2020 <vision2020 at moscow.com>
Sent: Tuesday, December 18, 2012 6:54 PM
Subject: [Vision2020] The Petition
<image.jpeg>
Seeya round town, Moscow, because . . .
"Moscow Cares"
http://www.MoscowCares.com
Tom Hansen
Moscow, Idaho
=======================================================
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
==============================================================================================================
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
=======================================================
======================================================= 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 =======================================================
======================================================= 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=======================================================
======================================================= 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 =======================================================
=======================================================
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
=======================================================
=======================================================
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
=======================================================
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.fsr.com/pipermail/vision2020/attachments/20121220/3f17e3e2/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the Vision2020
mailing list