Category Archives: Second Amendment

Article II. A well regulated Militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the States to maintain Armed Militias shall not be infringed." Bill of Rights, United States Constitution

I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment (hell, if you dont start a piece with that line these days, you get demands to be investigated by the defunct HUAC) , but I also dont believe that anyone I know needs to be able to arm themselves with all the trappings of a small army. So, yes, Ill tell you at the outset of this piece that I believe in gun control, even though we have a gun in our home for protection.

The shootings in Colorado, after their initial horror, have given way to the insipid debates over the Second Amendment we so often see on the Internet, though this time completely divorced from reality. The dead in the theater are an inconvenience to some who push the hard-core Second Amendment argument at all costs, no matter who is in the body bags.

Though the debates I have read - and to some degree taken part in - have been online - in truth they take place in some vast graveyard, too large and too-peopled to be tended well, and expanding all the time. We lean against mossy tombstones and make witty remarks and score political points at our opponents expense.

We have a comfortable myth in this country that gun owners are repelling invaders on a daily basis, but aside from the occasional news story, most of the stories you will read about in the news have to do with random violence.

Family members.

Strangers in restaurants.

Patrons in bars.

Church goers.

Shoppers in malls.

Follow this link:
Wallowing in the dirt: Internet debates about the Colorado/Dark Knight shootings

Americans mourn the victims of the Aurora, Colo., shooting. In Europe, too, there is grief, mingled with incomprehension. The media chorus: How many more massacres before America adopts European-style gun control?

Christoph Prantner of Austria's Der Standard bemoans American insistence on Second Amendment rights, "even when this freedom occasionally has a very high price and, in a bloody perversion, fatally impairs the freedom of others."

I can't disagree. I just wish Prantner had noted that James Holmes was allegedly wielding Austrian weaponry when he barged into that darkened theater: specifically, a .40-caliber semiautomatic Glock pistol.

For all the tut-tutting across the pond, America's gun culture exists in symbiosis with Europe's culture of precision manufacturing, of which the Glock is a notable expression.

Thirty years ago, Gaston Glock designed this lightweight, rapid-fire killing machine and sold 20,000 to Austria's army. Now his state-supported invention is one of Austria's most successful exports. The tiny alpine nation exported 431,118 handguns to the United States in 2010, according to federal data. Only giant Brazil sold more.

The majority of the Austrian guns were Glocks. And while Glocks have replaced revolvers and U.S.-model pistols in police holsters across the land, most Glock imports are destined for the civilian market, according to journalist Paul M. Barrett, author of Glock: The Rise of America's Gun.

Glock's customers have apparently included not only Holmes, but also Jared Lee Loughner, charged in the 2011 Tucson massacre that left six dead and then-Rep. Gabrielle Giffords among the severely injured, as well as the shooters in the 2007 Virginia Tech massacre (32 murdered) and the 1991 Killeen, Texas, massacre (23 murdered). You might call Glock the favorite weapon of America's Amoklaeufer, as those who run amok with guns are known in German.

But that wouldn't be fair to the makers of the Walther P22 that Virginia Tech shooter Seung Hui Cho also carried, or the Sig Sauer P232 that Steven Kazmierczak bore while killing five people at Northern Illinois University in 2008. Both are German products. With 230,447 handguns exported to the United States in 2010, Germany is the American gun junkie's No. 2 European dealer. All told, European Union members shipped just under a million handguns to the United States in 2010.

Their domestic markets may be limited by gun control, but Europe's arms makers can still get rich thanks to the Second Amendment. Who knew?

The question is what, if anything, to do about the influx of European-made semiautomatic pistols that have transformed the U.S. market while their manufacturers pay only a modest tariff.

Read more:
How Aurora and other shootings are made in Europe

By DAVID ESPO and NANCY BENAC Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) - Gun control advocates sputter at their own impotence. The National Rifle Association is politically ascendant. And Barack Obama's White House pledges to safeguard the Second Amendment in its first official response to the deaths of at least 12 people in a mass shooting at a new Batman movie screening in suburban Denver.

Once, every highly publicized outbreak of gun violence produced strong calls from Democrats and a few Republicans for tougher controls on firearms.

Now those pleas are muted, a political paradox that's grown more pronounced in an era scarred by Columbine, Virginia Tech, the wounding of a congresswoman and now the shooting in a suburban movie theater where carnage is expected on-screen only.

"We don't want sympathy. We want action," Dan Gross, president of the Brady campaign said Friday as President Barack Obama and Republican challenger Mitt Romney mourned the dead.

Ed Rendell, the former Democratic governor of Pennsylvania, was more emphatic than many in the early hours after the shooting. "Everyone is scared of the NRA," he said on MSNBC. "Number one, there are some things worth losing for in politics and to be able to prevent carnage like this is worth losing for."

Yet it's been more than a decade since gun control advocates had a realistic hope of getting the type of legislation they seek, despite predictions that each shocking outburst of violence would lead to action.

In 1994, Congress approved a 10-year ban on 19 types of military-style assault weapons. Some Democrats quickly came to believe the legislation contributed to their loss of the House a few months later.

Five years later, Vice President Al Gore cast a tie-breaking Senate vote on legislation to restrict sales at gun shows.

The two events turned out to be the high-water mark of recent Democratic drives to enact federal legislation aimed at reducing gun violence, and some Republicans said they could see the shift coming.

Here is the original post:
Calls for gun control stir little support

CHURCHTOWN The first annual Womens Concealed Carry Holster Fashion Show in Churchtown Saturday was a well-received celebration of the Second Amendment and a showcase for women who carry guns.

Around 250 people packed the Churchtown Firehouse to eat dinner, listen to speakers and watch about a dozen models walk up to a small stage in various clothing before revealing rubber guns they were concealing. Among the models was County Clerk Holly Tanner.

Trish Cutler, who works as the pistol permit clerk in the Columbia County Clerks Office, organized the sold-out event. Were here to educate women, she said, adding that she had at first wanted to simply start a group showing women how they could conceal handguns which grew into the event.

Cutler said she had to turn away more than 40 people before the day of the event, since there was no more room in the firehouse.

Among the speakers were a few contestants of the History Channel show Top Shot, including Frank Melloni from Suffolk County.

When I look around this room, Melloni said, I dont see criminals. I dont see drug dealers. I see responsible gun owners.

Another Top Shot contestant, Gabby Franco, a Venezuela native who also modeled Saturday, said she was introduced to shooting at age 11 by her father. Franco said its important for Americans to spread support for the Second Amendment, in part because she saw how quickly gun control laws came into effect in her country.

Believe me, she said, once its gone, you wont get it back ... I feel obligated to help protect a value that needs to be preserved.

Jackie Emslie, an NRA representative started her speech by saying, Good evening, brothers and sisters of the Second Amendment.

She stressed the importance of getting trained in firearms before carrying, getting a gun that feels right for each individual and practicing skills often. We ladies, we need to join with our brothers, Emslie said.

Read the original here:
Women’s gun show a big bang

While one of the cofounders of the Alamogordo Second Amendment Task Force believes Friday's movie theater shooting is a tragedy, he says it's not a time for more gun control laws.

Alamogordo Second Amendment Task Force cofounder Matthew A. St. John said he believes gun control has no effect on criminals.

"It's point blank period," St. John said. "It's what makes them criminals because they don't pay attention to the law. I still carry every day. I went to go see 'The Dark Knight Rises' last night at the opening at the theater and I was carrying it at that time."

The city of Alamogordo settled a civil case in 2009 with St. John for $21,000 over a violation of his Fourth Amendment right "against unreasonable searches and seizures."

According to U.S. District Court for the District of New Mexico records, St. John entered the Aviator 10 movie theater in Alamogordo to watch a film on June 27, 2008.

According to U.S. District Court records obtained by the Daily News, St. John was wearing, in plain view, a handgun that was holstered on his belt.

After the firearm was seen by other customers, a complaint was made to theater management about the presence of the firearm. The manager then contacted the Alamogordo Department of Public Safety and said that a customer was in possession of a firearm on the premises, according to records.

Officer David McColley and six other officers made contact with St. John and a friend, who were watching a movie, and confirmed St. John had a firearm. St. John's friend was not carrying a gun.

Officers ordered St. John to stand up with his hands in sight, then seized St. John by his arms and physically removed him from the theater, according to records.

Once St. John was outside the building, officers conducted an invasive pat-down search and repeatedly asked him why he was in possession of a firearm.

Read the original here:
St. John: Now's not the time for more gun control

Jack Kingston, R-Ga., and Betty McCollum, D-Minn., plan to present a second amendment today in the House of Representatives banning military sports sponsorships to ensure a vote.

The second amendment would be presented when H.R. 5856, the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2013, is heard in the House. It is scheduled for Wednesday, according to a legislative schedule kept by the Majority Leader, Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va.

If either amendment survives and the bill eventually becomes law, it would bar the National Guard from sponsoring Dale Earnhardt Jr. in NASCAR and J.R. Hildebrand in IndyCar, the Army from sponsoring Tony Schumacher in NHRA and the Marine Corps from sponsoring the Ultimate Fighting Championship.

A similar amendment by McCollum twice failed in the House last year.

The main difference with the new amendment and the one in H.R. 5856 is that the new one specifically targets the $72.3 million the military branches have budgeted for sports sponsorships in fiscal year 2013 and that the savings would go toward deficit reduction.

The new amendment set to be presented Wednesday seeks to strip the National Guard of $53.9 million budgeted toward sports sponsorships. The amendment also would strip the Navy of $4.2 million, Army of $4.1 million and Marine Corps of $2.3 million.

Seventy-two million bucks is a lot of money, said Bill Harper, chief of staff for Rep. McCollum. Were fine with the military advertising, were fine with the military recruiting at these professional sports events, absolutely. Thats not the intention of this amendment at all. The sponsorships are something completely different.

With regards to sponsorship, the numbers dont demonstrate that its effective. The Armys decision only validates that.

The Army announced last week that it would not sponsor a car and not return to NASCAR after this season.

The Army spent $8.4 million on its NASCAR program this year and will discontinue the decade-long program because the bottom line is the return has to make enough sense and the decision was made in the case of NASCAR that we could invest those resources into other things that would have a higher marketing payoff for us, said John Myers of the Army Marketing and Research Group.

Read the original post:
Two Congressmen trying to get rid of military sponsorships in sports

By Dustin Long, Special to USA TODAY

Updated

Jack Kingston, R-Ga., and Betty McCollum, D-Minn., plan to present a second amendment Wednesday in the House of Representatives banning military sports sponsorships to ensure a vote.

By Jeff Zelevansky, Getty Images

The National Guard is one of the sponsors for Dale Earnhardt Jr., the most popular driver on the Sprint Cup Series.

By Jeff Zelevansky, Getty Images

The National Guard is one of the sponsors for Dale Earnhardt Jr., the most popular driver on the Sprint Cup Series.

The second amendment would be presented when H.R. 5856, the Department of Defense Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2013, is heard in the House. It is scheduled for Wednesday, according to a legislative schedule kept by the Majority Leader, Rep. Eric Cantor, R-Va.

If either amendment survives and the bill eventually becomes law, it would bar the National Guard from sponsoring Dale Earnhardt Jr. in NASCAR and J.R. Hildebrand in IndyCar, the Army from sponsoring Tony Schumacher in NHRA and the Marine Corps from sponsoring the Ultimate Fighting Championship.

Go here to see the original:
NASCAR military sponsorships facing fight

11-07-2012 19:00 You guys have weird questions. Not being able to answer all your questions, I do apologize for that. Another fan mail video can be released as soon as Nexon releases another weapon. I do appreciate all the questions, though, and I look forward to communicating more with my viewers. Cats... I like cats. -Kagaen

Read the rest here:
Combat Arms Gameplay - Fan Mail #1 (The Second Amendment) - Video

ST. PAUL - Republicans took Minnesota Secretary of State Mark Ritchie to court this morning for changing the title of a proposed constitutional amendment, then he changed the title of the second amendment going in front of voters on Nov. 6.

Just after noon, the secretary announced he would require ballots to list Changes to in-person and absentee voting and voter registration; provisional ballots" as the title to a proposed amendment to require Minnesotans to produce a photographic identification before voting. The Legislature-passed title is: "Photo identification required for voting.

Supporters of the photo ID amendment are considering suing Ritchie, like those who back a constitutional amendment proposal to ban gay marriage. This morning, marriage amendment backers asked the Minnesota Supreme Court to reject a rewritten title.

Ritchie claims that state law gives him the duty to write a title for proposed constitutional amendments. Republicans who pushed both amendment proposals say Ritchie is overstepping his authority.

Republican legislators and Minnesota for Marriage, an umbrella group supporting the marriage amendment, today asked the high court to return the title to how it passed the Legislature: Recognition of marriage solely between one man and one woman.

Ritchie rewrote the title last month to be: Limiting the status of marriage to opposite sex couples.

GOP amendment supporters said Richie, supported by the attorney generals office, exceeded his legal authority to change the title. The title was approved by 49 of 67 state senators last year, including some Democrats who eventually voted against the amendment.

When the bills Republican legislators passed reached Democratic Gov. Mark Daytons desk, he vetoed them, even though he has no say in constitutional amendments. Ritchie said the veto stripped the amendment of its title and it is his job to make sure each constitutional amendment proposal has a title.

Im rather saddened to see a secretary of state get involved in a partisan issue like the proposal, said Sen. Warren Limmer, R-Maple Grove, the chief Senate author of the proposal.

Rep. Steve Drazkowski, R-Mazeppa, said that changing the title violates the state Constitution because that decision belongs to legislators. Secretary of State Mark Ritchie is attempting to subvert the will of the people of Minnesota.

See the article here:
UPDATED: Ritchie sued over Minn. ballot title change, then alters another title

05-07-2012 15:30 CLICK SHOW MORE MEN This is probably the 50th time I've tried to upload this due to issues with Youtube -_- guess duh employees were setting off fireworks in the room with the servers... jajajaj Anyways, great gun guise, not trying to be Jewish or anything but I'd say go for the Uncle Sam Package if you plan on getting the 2nd Amendment. Why? You get a permanent PATRIOT mask which is THE best NX standard mask(great if you don't already have the perm Prankster Bandana) American Eagle is just a reskin of the regular Desert Eagle and the Desert Eagle SE but it has a really nice draw out animation. USA Hat +2% speed sucks =3 The standard M6A2 was good enough already but this buffed up The Second Amendment with 43 damage is just brutal. 3hko in the chest of light vesters/no vesters/recon vesters and a potential 2hko to the backs is just ffffffffffffreaking amazing. Great alone with Itech/ACOG but with an HDS4 Reflex sight... ITS DUH SO GUD

Go here to read the rest:
Combat Arms | The Second Amendment Review | imhiLARRYous - Video