Joe The Plumber To UCSB Parents: 'Your Dead Kids Don't Trump' My Guns
Source: TPM
TOM KLUDT – MAY 27, 2014, 11:32 AM EDT
Samuel Wurzelbacher gave his condolences this week to the families of the victims of the mass shooting near the University of California, Santa Barbara. But no tragedy is going to stop "Joe The Plumber" from defending the Second Amendment.
In an open letter published Tuesday on the website Barbwire, Wurzelbacher went out of his way to explain to the victims' parents that the deaths won't undermine his "Constitutional rights."
"I am sorry you lost your child. I myself have a son and daughter and the one thing I never want to go through, is what you are going through now," wrote Wurzelbacher, who became something of a mascot for John McCain's failed 2008 presidential campaign. "But: As harsh as this sounds – your dead kids don’t trump my Constitutional rights."
Wurzelbacher singled out Richard Martinez, whose son Christopher was one of the six students killed by Elliot Rodger in Isla Vista, Calif. Since the deadly rampage, Martinez has twice railed against politicians and the National Rifle Association for the failure to pass new gun laws after the Sandy Hook Elementary School massacre.
-snip-
Read more: http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/joe-the-plumber-wurzelbacher-ucsb-shooting-dead-kids
= new reply since forum marked as read
"Klondike Kardashian"!!! DUzy!
Oh yes, they do. 
since there's nothing there. 
Joe put a marker on just about every square on Gun Nut Bingo, didn't he? Piece of filth. People like him are why I loathe and fear guns.
of the fox news cameras, again. misses the spotlight?
(Insert reference to forgotten fad from the 00s--maybe skinny jeans? Myspace?)
Fuck you, Asshole Plumber!
Which comes first in the Constitution? Life or guns?
I guess the way they see it, what is mentioned last is more important than what comes first.
this POS has opened his mouth to prove that he is the quintessential asshole. He needs to STFU.
put him in front of Mr. Martinez.
I hope the Karma you so richly deserve in this life catches you and bites with such an intensity that you seek to fall off the earth.
Epic POS
Not sure why anyone would listen to what he says. 
and is typical of the RW 2nd amendment crowd, with some democrats thrown in the mix. I feel sorry for his kids, growing up with a jerk like that sending them all the wrong messages. "Your dead kids don't trump my Constitutional(2nd amendment) rights"?? You mean murdered kids dontcha joe?geez
It's those kinds of statements that make right wingers and gun nuts so popular.
NYT opinion on Michael Waldman's just-released book, "The Second Amendment":
The Second Amendment begins, “A well-regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,” and that’s where Waldman, the president of the Brennan Center for Justice at the New York University School of Law, begins, too. He has gone back into the framers’ original arguments and made two essential discoveries, one surprising and the other not surprising at all.
The surprising discovery is that of all the amendments that comprise the Bill of Rights, the Second was probably the least debated. What we know is that the founders were deeply opposed to a standing army, which they viewed as the first step toward tyranny. Instead, their assumption was that the male citizenry would all belong to local militias. As Waldman writes, “They were not allowed to have a musket; they were required to. More than a right, being armed was a duty.”
Thus the unsurprising discovery: Virtually every reference to “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms” — the second part of the Second Amendment — was in reference to military defense. Waldman notes the House debate over the Second Amendment in the summer of 1789: “Twelve congressmen joined the debate. None mentioned a private right to bear arms for self-defense, hunting or for any purpose other than joining the militia.”
In time, of course, the militia idea died out, replaced by a professionalized armed service. Most gun regulation took place at the state and city level. The judiciary mostly stayed out of the way. In 1939, the Supreme Court upheld the nation’s first national gun law, the National Firearms Act, which put onerous limits on sawed-off shotguns and machine guns — precisely because the guns had no “reasonable relation” to “a well-regulated militia.”
http://www.nytimes.com/2014/05/27/opinion/nocera-right-to-bear-arms-means-this.html?_r=0
I feel sick!
