[CLUE-Talk] Bowling for Columbine

[Randy Arabie]

On Monday,  2 December 2002 at 15:05:37 -0700, Joe 'Zonker' Brockmeier <clue at dissociatedpress.net> wrote:
> On Mon, 2 Dec 2002, Randy Arabie wrote:
> > On Monday,  2 December 2002 at 14:40:14 -0700, grant <grant at amadensor.com> wrote:
> >
> > <--SNIP-->
> >
> > > I look at it like a car.  Check their background (you can't get a license
> > > with too many tickets).  Make them take a proficiency test, and let things
> > > go from there.  Safest possible solution.
> >
> > But one must remember that we have a 2nd Amendment right to own firearms.
> > There is no corresponding right to own or operate a vehicle.  A vehicle
> > operators license is a privledge granted by the issuing state.  The
> > firearm <--> car analogy is used often, but isn't really applicable.
> > Background checks or proficiency exams are not required before one can
> > exercise thier right to free speech or to practice religion.
> 
> Yes, but you need to remember that we have limits on other rights.
> 
> The 1st Amendment rights, for example, are not absolute. You cannot
> yell "fire" in a crowded theatre without fear of prosecution. You cannot
> publish child pornography and call it "free speech." Well, you can but
> you'll find yourself in jail pretty quickly.
> 
> There are already restrictions on owning "arms." I don't believe that
> you or I can legally own a rocket launcher, nor rapid-fire machine guns
> or a fully-equipped Harrier Jet. A background check would not interfere
> with one's legal right to bear arms because the 2nd Amendment says
> nothing about a right to immediate access to purchasing a specific
> type of firearm.
> 
> Insistence on this absolute right to own any kind of weapon without
> any regulation is one of the reasons why there's a negative stereotype
> for gun owners. It's just as unreasonable a position as the position
> that guns should be outlawed, regardless of your interpretation of
> the 2nd Amendment.

Yes, there are reasonable restrictions imposed on the rights granted in 
the Bill of Rights.  I never suggested that the 2nd Amendment was "absolute 
right to own any kind of weapon without any regulation." 

What I did say was that comparing gun ownership to owning a car and 
requiring a license to operate a vehicle isn't appropriate because there 
is no "Right to Own or Operate a Vehicle" granted in the Bill of Rights.

Subsquent to my post, Grant has clarified his opinion.  He stated that 
a proficiency exam should be required for gunowners seeking a concealed
carry permit.  I agree.  That is a reasonable restriction.  He also 
stated that an instant background check is resonable.  I would agree 
there as well, assuming that "instant" is less than 4 or 5 hours.
-- 
Allons Rouler!
        
Randy
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 232 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://cluedenver.org/pipermail/clue-talk/attachments/20021202/e0304518/attachment.bin