[Vision2020] more guns on campus

Fri Mar 28 07:24:46 PDT 2014

Paul,

This is one of those times I think you're being intentionally obtuse. Do you know how the legal system works? Do you know that courts interpret the Constitution and the US Supreme Court has the last word? You're an intelligent, college-educated person who I think would know these things, and yet you say what you did below. 

Numerous times people on this listserve have pointed out that rights are not absolute, they are capable of being limited, yet you keep trotting out your tired, wrong argument.

Here is Justice Scalia from the Heller decision. Go Google it if you don't believe I'm reproducing it accurately:

'Like most rights, the right secured by the 

Second Amendment
  is not unlimited.  From Blackstone through the 19th-century cases, 
commentators and courts routinely explained that the right was not a 
right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever 
and for whatever purpose.  See, e.g., Sheldon, in 5 Blume 346; Rawle 123; Pomeroy 152–153; Abbott333.
  For example, the majority of the 19th-century courts to consider the 
question held that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons were 
lawful under the 

Second Amendment  or state analogues.  See, e.g., State v. Chandler, 5 La. Ann., at 489–490; Nunn v. State,
 1 Ga., at 251; see generally 2  Kent *340, n. 2; The American Students’
 Blackstone 84, n. 11 (G. Chase ed. 1884).  Although we do not undertake
 an exhaustive historical analysis today of the full scope of the 

Second Amendment
 , nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding 
prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally 
ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places 
such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions 
and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms.26' (emphasis added)

UI policies did not limit the Second Amendment rights of students or others entering the campus. You are wrong when you make that argument. Allowing guns on campus does not protect Second Amendment rights. The new law is a product of the 'More guns everywhere is better' faith. If you want to argue that faith, go ahead. But don't make the Second Amendment argument, not unless you also want to argue that you have the right to yell 'Fire' in a cinema. Then you can be wrong about the first two amendments.

Sunil

Date: Fri, 28 Mar 2014 07:12:53 -0700
From: godshatter at yahoo.com
Subject: Re: [Vision2020] more guns on campus
To: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com; vision2020 at moscow.com

What else is needed?  The Constitution is the only reason the government exists, without it no other laws are valid. We can't just ignore it because the current meme is "guns are bad".
Paul

                                From:

                            Sunil <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com>;                            

                                To:

                            vision 2020 <vision2020 at moscow.com>;                                                                                                     

                                Subject:

                            Re: [Vision2020] more guns on campus                            

                                Sent:

                            Fri, Mar 28, 2014 3:22:07 AM                            

                                        I don't say it that way because I want to be accurate. What's your basis for saying the universities' policies are "unneeded restrictions on a students' Consitutionally-guaranteed right to bear arms."? I hope you're not going to just paste in the 2nd Amendment and nothing else, but I'm pretty sure that's exactly what you're going to do.SunilDate: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 16:56:22 -0700From: godshatter at yahoo.comSubject: Re: [Vision2020] more guns on campusTo: sunilramalingam at hotmail.com; vision2020 at moscow.comInstead of phrasing it as "taking away the Universities' ability to regulate guns on campus", why not phrase it "removing unneeded restrictions on a students' Consitutionally-guaranteed right to bear arms"?  That's where I was coming from.  There is no right specifically designated in the Constitution relating to cell phone usage or computer games or eating in class, unless I missed an amendment somewhere.  That's the difference.Paul        From: Sunil <sunilramalingam at hotmail.com> To: vision2020 at moscow.com  Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 2:00 PM Subject: Re: [Vision2020] more guns on campus   Paul, In all seriousness, what is your point regarding amendments and the new Idaho law taking away the universities' ability to regulate guns on campus? SunilDate: Thu, 27 Mar 2014 08:46:55 -0700From: godshatter at yahoo.comTo: rhayes at frontier.com; vision2020 at moscow.comSubject: Re: [Vision2020] more guns on campusDid they add some new amendments to the Constitution I'm unaware of?Paul        From: "rhayes at frontier.com" <rhayes at frontier.com> To: "vision2020 at moscow.com" <vision2020 at moscow.com>  Sent: Thursday, March 27, 2014 8:29 AM Subject: [Vision2020]
 more guns on campus   I was speaking with some of my professor friends yesterday. I asked, "If you are allowed to make classroom rules such as no cell phones, no computer games, no eating, how is it that you won't be able to say "no guns in my classroom?" I suggested going to the union and having a statewide walkout. Instead, two of these friends, who are extremely capable and long term professors said they are applying for posts in other states. For them, this is the straw (disrespect) that is breaking the camel's back.         ======================================================= 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/20140328/b67c88f9/attachment.html>