EDITORIAL: No hope for gun grabbers

[shadowrider]

State legislatures push forward on right to keep and bear arms

The left has permanently lost the argument on gun control. Despite their best efforts to take advantage of the tragic shooting in Arizona to promote pointless restrictions on things like the size of handgun magazines, the propaganda campaign is unlikely to go anywhere. Instead, the right to keep and bear arms continues to gain steam as state lawmakers around the country are enacting measures that would have been unthinkable not so long ago.

On Monday, Wyoming lawmakers sent Gov. Matt Read a “castle doctrine” bill that recognizes the right of residents to use a gun to protect themselves from home invasion or carjacking without fear of civil or criminal prosecution. A spokesman for Mr. Read said the governor would review the proposal today, along with a second bill granting residents the ability to carry concealed weapons without a permit. The lawmakers also proposed a constitutional amendment recognizing the perpetual right to hunt, fish and trap.

http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2011/mar/1/no-hope-for-gun-grabbers/

Many on the right have also lost (Brady, Bloomy among others). For all the hair-pulling diatribes by many, gun rights are expanding which is good news.

[rfranklin]

1. A Moonie editorial?

That newspaper has no credibility.

[shadowrider]

2. Care to address the info in the article rather than slam the source? n/t

[jpak]

6. The source sucks - Wyoming republicans suck

yup

[rl6214]

41. Ah yes, attack the source and the party

instead of offering a logical arguement. You've already lost.

YUP

YUP

YUP

[marmar]

3. 'Gun Grabbers'?

What infantile editorial writers they must have at that publication. (which, BTW, is not fit to line a bird cage)

[Name removed]

42. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[geckosfeet]

4. 'the perpetual right to hunt, fish and trap' makes no sense in suburban and urban areas.

The gun rights issues are quite different between rural Wyoming and most metropolitan areas.

States need to be able to tailor "own and bear" regulations to their specific needs. One size fits all simply does not work. The black market interstate commerce of guns must also be managed somehow.

[benEzra]

9. If hunting had much to do with gun ownership, that would be more relevant than it is.

Only about 1 in 5 gun owners hunts, and of those, many/most also own nonhunting guns. The primary raison d'etre of civilian gun ownership in this country isn't hunting.

[geckosfeet]

11. Which makes states rights to regulate even more important. eom

[Tuesday Afternoon]

13. Yay for State's Rights!!

:bounce:

[slackmaster]

18. STATES HAVE NO RIGHTS!!! States have powers.

Only people have rights.

[geckosfeet]

56. Thanks for the reminder. eom

[MicaelS]

46. Fertilizer.....

By your logic, it's acceptable for the states to regulate contraception and abortion.

[geckosfeet]

55. Fertilizer. I like that - at a certain knuckle dragging level. But yes - it is acceptable

for states to legislate and regulate.

As far as contraception and abortion, yes, there must be 'safe for the public' levels of medical practice established.

[Atypical Liberal]

17. Why?

Why should Constitutional rights be subject to the whims of different states?

Why should a person living in New York have any less recourse to firearms to defend himself than a person living in Arizona?

The nail is all but in the coffin on this one. DC vs. Heller established that the right to keep and bear arms is an individual right, and MacDonald vs. Chicago incorporated it under the 14th amendment under the Due Process clause, meaning the States cannot abrogate it.

[cleanhippie]

24. Actually, Constitutional rights are quite the same

no matter WHERE you are in this country.

[WatsonT]

26. Find the words "hunt, fish, or trap" in the 2nd amendment.

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[jpak]

5. Washington Times Right Wing GOP Moonie Rag - WY republican legislation

Fail

yup

[armueller2001]

7. Brady campaign right wing GOP Paul Helmke

Fail. Over and over again.

yup

[onehandle]

8. Washington Times? What's next, Newsmax or WorldNetDaily? nt

[Name removed]

10. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[TheCowsCameHome]

12. The Washington Times, a beacon of journalistic integrity.

Seriously, how can anyone but a right-winger read or quote that rag?

[lawodevolution]

14. Gun freedom is bipartisan. Get used to it because that is the future.

[DWC]

51. Couldn't have said it better myself n/t

[shadowrider]

15. Care to comment on content? n/t

[TheCowsCameHome]

16. Not just now.

I have to order a cake to celebrate this news from such an unbiased source.

[PavePusher]

19. Or perhaps you could examine the actual article for bias.

Just sayin'...

[shadowrider]

20. I find it surprising (not really)

A pro-gun article from what is considered a RW site is slammed, yet the Brady Bunch (RW organization) is lovingly embraced.

[TheCowsCameHome]

22. "considered" a RW site?

Understatement of the week.

Enjoy your subscription.

[TheCowsCameHome]

21. The first five words - "The left has permanantly lost..."

That fucking dirty rotten Moonie rag just can't resist taking a jab at the left. It's all they know.

I am a left winger a will not encourge anyone to read anything they print, unlike some others on this forum.

[PavePusher]

23. Then get the "left" to drop their institutional objection to a Constitutional Right.

That was easy, wasn't it?

[TheCowsCameHome]

25. You do it.

Should be a piece of cake, if it's so popular of an idea.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

27. why is OK for you to call something fucking dirty rotten

but, you take umbrage when it is the other way around. and to encourage someone to NOT READ ??? how very liberal and unbiased of you.

[shadowrider]

28. And they have yet to comment on the content n/t

[Tuesday Afternoon]

29. I guess the cows have not yet come home n/t

[TheCowsCameHome]

31. What are you talking about?

I despise the Times. It's not my favorite news source.

I hope you continue to enjoy it.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

35. you assume too much. n/t

[ileus]

30. Excellent Article...thanks for sharing.

[SecularMotion]

32. Gun Grabbers???

If I want to read right wing smears I'll join Free Republic. Please keep this shit off DU.

[Upton]

33. On numerous occasions

here at DU, I have seen calls for the banning of gun ownership and for a repeal of the 2nd Amendment. If folks like that aren't "gun grabbers" what else would you call them?

[SecularMotion]

36. Name-calling disrupts honest discussion

Banning of gun ownership and repeal of the 2nd amendment is an extreme view, as well as the opposite extreme position of totally unregulated gun ownership held by "gun nuts"

Anyone who pushes these positions is not contributing to honest discussion. They are disruptive and should be alerted to the moderators.

[PavePusher]

39. I think Civil Rights should be "regulated" as little as possible....

and only to the extent of punishment if someone uses/abuses their Right in order to cause unjustifiable harm.

Either way, we still need labels for various loosely defined groups, if only to be able to convey some approximation of information/communication.

[rl6214]

44. Aaaaahahahahahahaha

If you spend any time here at all you will see that it is not the gun rights advocates that are the name callers, it is the anti guns activists. Some of the names called on a regular basis:

Gun lovers
Gun fetishists
Gun nuts


Come on everyone, jump right in, I know there are tons more but I just woke up and need a diet coke to get going.

[lawodevolution]

57. Those are the ones open and honest about their intentions, most are the "I own guns and

Support the 2A but also support this 'common sense' gun law" that happens to be the next step in the handgun controls overall plan to ban all firearms.

[Dead_Parrot]

37. re "Gun grabbers":

For those hitting alert: We're letting this stand (so far) as it's a quote from the article, but we still expect DUers to refrain from using the term themselves.

And before anyone gets any ideas, future posts going out of the way to quote this article just to include the phrase will be met with dissaproval and a big mallet.

[AtheistCrusader]

38. You should probably just nuke it.

Sets a confusing precedent, and it's just a damn fluff piece anyway, no in-depth analysis.

[X_Digger]

40. Agreed.

Too much trouble for the value.

[Dead_Parrot]

45. It shouldn't be that confusing

If it's used in an relevant article you can quote it, otherwise we don't want to see it. Same goes for "Gun nuts" "Pink tutus" and a bunch of other loaded phrases.

[AtheistCrusader]

47. I guess I'm stuck worrying about how this will be used against us.

Tired of the old 'gun nuts' 'gun grabber' hyperbole, and now there's a vector to get it back into the forum... Ugh.

[Dead_Parrot]

48. Just hit alert if you think someone's out of order

This is enough of an exception to warrent me coming out to explain why we're leaving it: Normally we'd just zap it, and anyone playing games with the rules to try and squeeze it in will end up on our naughty list. :)

[GreenStormCloud]

52. See post # 37 N/T

[Tuesday Afternoon]

43. a just decision both now and for in the future.

well done, mods. bravo.

[jpak]

59. Thank you DP!

:toast:

[flamin lib]

49. Hey! I find the use of "gun grabbers" a personal attack! Should I alert? nt

[X_Digger]

50. See response #37. n/t

[Dead_Parrot]

53. If it's written by a DUer, absolutely.

But if it's a quote from an outside source, don't expect too much. Even the DU mods can't delete articles from the Washington Times.

[Name removed]

54. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[lawodevolution]

58. I agree on the overall idea of the article but I think they should substitute "anti gun groups"

for "the left" because this should not be a one sided issue. The fact that the anti gun groups lost is highlighted when one realizes the gun control debate is active here on a very liberal forum while the moderate to conservative forums do not have debate on the issue as everyone there supports the 2A and gun freedom.

How's that comment on content?