Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: "General Assembly fanatically supports gun-toters Caucus opposes weapons growth"

  1. #1
    Campaign Veteran T Dubya's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Va, ,
    Posts
    892

    Post imported post

    http://www.richmondfreepress.com/news/currentPageA.pdf

    Gun-friendly Virginia is poised to return to the Wild West-type era when a person could buy dozens of guns in a single purchase without raising an eyebrow.

    Over the objections of the Legislative Black Caucus and most
    other Democrats, the Republican-dominated House of Delegates voted 61-37 to repeal the 17-year-old law that limits purchases to one gun per month.

    The repeal is part of the ambitious pro-gun legislative bundle that cleared the House on Tuesday, the constitutional deadline for
    the House to complete passage of its own bills and for the Senate to do likewise.

    The landmark monthly handgun-purchase limit was the 1993 legislative triumph of then-Gov. L. Douglas Wilder. Considered a monumental achievement at the time, the law was enacted as homicide rates soared in Virginia’s capital city and as the state gained a reputation as an East Coast armory for violent criminals.

    The fate of the repeal now depends on what happens in the
    Senate Courts of Justice Committee headed by a prominent member of the Caucus, Richmond Sen. Henry L. Marsh III.

    He’s appalled that the House passed the repeal, but he said
    Wednesday he’s not sure he has the votes to halt the wipeout of the law. Still Sen. Marsh is vowing to do all he can to stop the momentum of the bill.

    “We’ve got too many guns already,” Sen. Marsh told the Free Press. “Anyone who wants a gun can get one. Who needs more than one gun a month?” He was among the legislators who voted to pass the original restriction that was aimed at deterring firearms traffickers from making bulk purchases and reselling to convicted felons and others who cannot pass background checks.

    But arguments about the value of limiting sales failed to impress the House majority, whose push for the repeal has the backing of Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell. He promised to support the repeal during his successful run last year.

    Norfolk Delegate Kenneth C. Alexander, chairman of the Caucus, said every Caucus member, including the 13 House members and
    five senators, are adamantly opposed to the change. In the urban districts the members represent, “too many of the street crimes stem from guns being stolen from cars and homes,” said Delegate Alexander, who voted for several of the other gun laws that House Republicans have pushed.

    The Caucus’ view, he said, is that allowing multiple gun sales raises the risk of guns getting into the hands of the wrong people. “If we do not want guns used in the commission of crimes, we need to do all we can to restrict the sale,” said the delegate, who is one of several Caucus members with a concealed weapon permit.

    During debate over the bill, Henrico Delegate Joseph D. “Joe” Morrissey, who represents a sliver of North Side, was among those who argued strongly for keeping the restriction on sales in place. “Right now you can buy up to 12 guns a year — a huge arsenal. We all know that gunrunning is real,” the former Richmond prosecutor told the House. “We have been successful in the city of Richmond by reducing homicides by guns, and right now we are unraveling almost two decades of progress.”

    The bill’s sponsor, Delegate L. Scott Ligamfelter, R-Prince William County, responded that the one-gun-a-month restriction only
    benefits criminals. “Making it harder on a law-abiding citizen to acquire a handgun legally will not stop felons from acquiring a handgun illegally,” Delegate Ligamfelter said.

    Up until now, the law had easily weathered previous attacks by Republicans and some Democrats — including state Sen. R. Creigh Deeds, who lost the governor’s race last year — who have argued that the monthly sales legislation is outmoded given the technology that allows instant background checks of purchasers.

    Sen. Marsh, along with other repeal foes, calls that argument bogus. Like Delegate Alexander, he points to the gaping loophole that the legislature has refused to close that allows people to buy weapons at gun shows without any restrictions or background checks.
    "These are the shock troops (opencarry.org) of the gun lobby. And, they are not going away."
    Ceasefire NJ Director Brian Miller, NJ.com, August 20, 2009

  2. #2
    Regular Member TFred's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Most historic town in, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    7,705

    Post imported post

    I wonder how many more times the horror of "the return to the Wild West" will be thrown out there to scare us all back into our homes behind barred doors?

    You'd think that eventually they'd figure out it just doesn't happen. Of course, we know that they know, but they count on the low intelligence of the general population to believe them.

    TFred

  3. #3
    Regular Member 2a4all's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,586

    Post imported post

    "Norfolk Delegate Kenneth C. Alexander, chairman of the Caucus, said every Caucus member, including the 13 House members and five senators, are adamantly opposed to the change. In the urban districts the members represent, “too many of the street crimes stem from guns being stolen from cars and homes,” said Delegate Alexander, who voted for several of the other gun laws that House Republicans have pushed.

    The Caucus’ view, he said, is that allowing multiple gun sales raises the risk of guns getting into the hands of the wrong people. “If we do not want guns used in the commission of crimes, we need to do all we can to restrict the sale,” said the delegate, who is one of several Caucus members with a concealed weapon permit."

    And who is exempt from the "OGAM" rule. How many guns does he own, and how many of them did he purchase within a 30 day period? Oh, wait. He's not one "of the wrong people".

    Hypocritical Asshat
    A law-abiding citizen should be able to carry his personal protection firearm anywhere that an armed criminal might go.

    Member VCDL, NRA

  4. #4
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358

    Post imported post

    When Del. Alexander from Norfolk used that phrase "the wrong people", I think we all know what he means...

    Here's were it gets tricky. He IS one of "those people" that these gun laws have been keeping the guns away from under Jim Crow laws for over 100 years...

    Delegate Alexander is African American. You'd think he would know better than to sell out the safety, security, and liberty of his own community. And he though even holds a VA CHP, he can still say things like this with a straight face.

    I guess sociopathic hypocrisy knows no color...

    http://www.kennethalexander.com/


    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggressionand this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  5. #5
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Newport News, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    492

    Post imported post

    T Dubya wrote:

    Gun-friendly Virginia is poised to return to the Wild West-type era when a person could buy dozens of guns in a single purchase without raising an eyebrow.

    If you can fork over enough money to buy "dozens" of guns at one time, THAT would raise my eyebrows. At least in the Wild West they refered to each other as "Mister". Sounds polite to me
    Over the objections of the Legislative Black Caucus and most
    other Democrats, the Republican-dominated House of Delegates voted 61-37 to repeal the 17-year-old law that limits purchases to one gun per month.
    ie: the Legislative Black Caucus is totally in favor of usurping the constitution and rationing "rights".
    The repeal is part of the ambitious pro-gun legislative bundle that cleared the House on Tuesday, the constitutional deadline for
    the House to complete passage of its own bills and for the Senate to do likewise.
    note: OH, now they know there is constitutional precepts
    The landmark monthly handgun-purchase limit was the 1993 legislative triumph of then-Gov. L. Douglas Wilder. Considered a monumental achievement at the time, the law was enacted as homicide rates soared in Virginia’s capital city and as the state gained a reputation as an East Coast armory for violent criminals.
    ie: crime rates based on liberal policies soared as thugs, crack-heads, gangs, hoods, and other assorted neer-do-wells waged at crime spree amongst themselves. Leftists on tee vee and the radio LIED about our fair state arming thugs, crack-heads, gangs, hoods and other assorted neer-do-wells in other states.
    The fate of the repeal now depends on what happens in the
    Senate Courts of Justice Committee headed by a prominent member of the Caucus, Richmond Sen. Henry L. Marsh III.
    their hope: that Marsh III will attack freedom and offer his full support of continuing to ration/violate constitutionally enumerated rights.

    He’s appalled that the House passed the repeal, but he said
    Wednesday he’s not sure he has the votes to halt the wipeout of the law. Still Sen. Marsh is vowing to do all he can to stop the momentum of the bill.
    ie: Marsh just can't believe that the left is not still in full control and that these uppity gun owners are demanding their rights.
    “We’ve got too many guns already,” Sen. Marsh told the Free Press. “Anyone who wants a gun can get one. Who needs more than one gun a month?” He was among the legislators who voted to pass the original restriction that was aimed at deterring firearms traffickers from making bulk purchases and reselling to convicted felons and others who cannot pass background checks.
    ie: Marsh III sees oppresive anti-gun tactics starting to fall by the way side and he wants to keep it the way is it/was. Besides, how many rights docommoners need anyway???
    But arguments about the value of limiting sales failed to impress the House majority, whose push for the repeal has the backing of Republican Gov. Bob McDonnell. He promised to support the repeal during his successful run last year.
    Whining, lying, and bellyackin couldn't get enough legislators to commit political suicide by continuing to support gun (people) control, and, gasp!!! the new governor won't help the effort to suppress personal freedom and individual libert
    Norfolk Delegate Kenneth C. Alexander, chairman of the Caucus, said every Caucus member, including the 13 House members and
    five senators, are adamantly opposed to the change. In the urban districts the members represent, “too many of the street crimes stem from guns being stolen from cars and homes,” said Delegate Alexander, who voted for several of the other gun laws that House Republicans have pushed.
    ie: rushing to aid Marsh III and other assorted gun/freedom haters was Norfolk delegate Alexander to recited verbatim the lies that used to work very well. His pouted,and sighed as he realized that the tired old worn out lies of the past wasn't getting any traction
    The Caucus’ view, he said, is that allowing multiple gun sales raises the risk of guns getting into the hands of the wrong people. (ie: non government agents) “If we do not want guns used in the commission of crimes, we need to do all we can to restrict the sale,” said the delegate, who is one of several Caucus members with a concealed weapon permit.
    demonstrating that he either never took Logic in college, or else failed the class, he gripes that when people are breaking the law we can make them stop breaking the law by passing a new law saying that it is illegal to break the [old] law.
    During debate over the bill, Henrico Delegate Joseph D. “Joe” Morrissey, who represents a sliver of North Side, was among those who argued strongly for keeping the restriction on sales in place. “Right now you can buy up to 12 guns a year — a huge arsenal. We all know that gunrunning is real,” the former Richmond prosecutor told the House. “We have been successful in the city of Richmond by reducing homicides by guns, and right now we are unraveling almost two decades of progress.”
    ie: we used to be able to control people, er, I mean guns, so easily but now people are standing up to us and we're getting put in our place. wwwaaaaaaa wwwaaaaaa wwwaaaa, boo hoo we're losing our control over people, er, I mean guns
    The bill’s sponsor, Delegate L. Scott Ligamfelter, R-Prince William County, responded that the one-gun-a-month restriction only
    benefits criminals. “Making it harder on a law-abiding citizen to acquire a handgun legally will not stop felons from acquiring a handgun illegally,” Delegate Ligamfelter said.
    ie: Delegate Lingamfelter either passed "Logic" in college or he didn't even need to take it because he respects the constitution and has plenty good old fashioned common sense.
    Up until now, the law had easily weathered previous attacks by Republicans and some Democrats — including state Sen. R. Creigh Deeds, who lost the governor’s race last year — who have argued that the monthly sales legislation is outmoded given the technology that allows instant background checks of purchasers.
    ie: until recently nobody had the nads to stand up to the snobs in gov'mint but now these VCDLers and Open Carriers are not in the mood to take any gruff from some one who needs their vote to stay in office.
    Sen. Marsh, along with other repeal foes, calls that argument bogus. Like Delegate Alexander, he points to the gaping loophole that the legislature has refused to close that allows people to buy weapons at gun shows without any restrictions or background checks.
    ie: Marsh III is willing to be a professional liar-for-hire by intentionally misrepresenting the private sale of a gun (property) to one citizen by another as a "loophole" that facilitates criminal activity.

    my comments and rambling thoughts are in red

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Hilton Head, South Carolina, USA
    Posts
    524

    Post imported post

    One gun a month laws are racist and discriminatory. If you support 1 gun a month laws, you are a racist.

  7. #7
    Accomplished Advocate user's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Northern Piedmont of Virginia
    Posts
    2,373

    Post imported post

    T Dubya wrote:
    ...Gun-friendly Virginia is poised to return to the Wild West-type era when a person could buy dozens of guns in a single purchase without raising an eyebrow....
    Actually, it could raise an eyebrow, since the FFL's I know don't like to have to fill out the extra form the feds require for a multiple handgun purchase.

    When I saw the headline cited in the subject line of the thread, I thought, "well, good!".

    After all, I oppose weapons growth. I hate it when my handguns start swelling up like toads.
    Daniel L. Hawes - 540 347 2430 - HTTP://www.VirginiaLegalDefense.com

    By the way, nothing I say on this website as "user" should be taken as either advertising for attorney services or legal advice, merely personal opinion. Everyone having a question regarding the application of law to the facts of their situation should seek the advice of an attorney competent in the subject matter of the issues presented and licensed to practice in the relevant state.

  8. #8
    Regular Member AtackDuck's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    King George, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    214

    Post imported post

    T Dubya wrote:
    Gun-friendly Virginia is poised to return to the Wild West-type era when a person could buy dozens of guns in a single purchase without raising an eyebrow.
    About that "Wild West"....

    In his book, Frontier Violence: Another Look, author W. Eugene Hollon, provides us with these astonishing facts:

    In Abilene, Ellsworth, Wichita, Dodge City, and Caldwell, for the years from 1870 to 1885, there were only 45 total homicides. This equates to a rate of approximately 1 murder per 100,000 residents per year.

    In Abilene, supposedly one of the wildest of the cow towns, not a single person was killed in 1869 or 1870.

    Zooming forward over a century to 2007, a quick look at Uniform Crime Report statistics shows us the following regarding the aforementioned gun control “paradise” cities of the east:

    DC – 183 Murders (31 per 100,000 residents)

    New York – 494 Murders (6 per 100,000 residents)

    Baltimore – 281 Murders (45 per 100,000 residents)

    Newark – 104 Murders (37 per 100,000 residents)

    It doesn’t take an advanced degree in statistics to see that a return to “wild west” levels of violent crime would be a huge improvement for the residents of these cities.


    The truth of the matter is that the “wild west” wasn’t wild at all … not compared to a Saturday night in Richmond.

  9. #9
    Regular Member 2a4all's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Location
    Newport News, VA, ,
    Posts
    1,586

    Post imported post

    AtackDuck wrote:
    T Dubya wrote:
    Gun-friendly Virginia is poised to return to the Wild West-type era when a person could buy dozens of guns in a single purchase without raising an eyebrow.
    About that "Wild West"....

    In his book, Frontier Violence: Another Look, author W. Eugene Hollon, provides us with these astonishing facts:

    In Abilene, Ellsworth, Wichita, Dodge City, and Caldwell, for the years from 1870 to 1885, there were only 45 total homicides. This equates to a rate of approximately 1 murder per 100,000 residents per year.

    In Abilene, supposedly one of the wildest of the cow towns, not a single person was killed in 1869 or 1870.

    Zooming forward over a century to 2007, a quick look at Uniform Crime Report statistics shows us the following regarding the aforementioned gun control “paradise” cities of the east:

    DC – 183 Murders (31 per 100,000 residents)

    New York – 494 Murders (6 per 100,000 residents)

    Baltimore – 281 Murders (45 per 100,000 residents)

    Newark – 104 Murders (37 per 100,000 residents)

    It doesn’t take an advanced degree in statistics to see that a return to “wild west” levels of violent crime would be a huge improvement for the residents of these cities.


    The truth of the matter is that the “wild west” wasn’t wild at all … not compared to a Saturday night in Richmond.
    Hmmm.. New York looks like a relatively safe place. Do you have stats for Richmond?
    A law-abiding citizen should be able to carry his personal protection firearm anywhere that an armed criminal might go.

    Member VCDL, NRA

  10. #10
    Regular Member wylde007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Va Beach, Occupied VA
    Posts
    3,037

    Post imported post

    2a4all wrote:
    Hmmm.. New York looks like a relatively safe place. Do you have stats for Richmond?
    Or Portsmouth? Weren't they Virginia's murder capital a few years running?
    The quiet war has begun, with silent weapons
    And the newest slavery is to keep the people poor, and stupid
    Novos ordo seclorum ~ Mustaine

    Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Augusta/Rockingham County, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    67

    Post imported post

    City Portsmouth
    Population 101,782
    Violent crime 719
    Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter 15 (15 /100K)
    Forcible rape 59
    Robbery 348
    Aggravated assault 297

    City Richmond
    Population 199,674
    Violent crime 1588
    Murder and nonnegligent manslaughter 31 (15.5 p/100K)
    Forcible rape 53
    Robbery 779
    Aggravated assault 725

    Source: FBI - 2008 Crime in the United States
    http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/data/table_08_va.html
    2007 statistics can be found here
    http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/data/table_08_va.html

    The calculations per 100,00 are mine, but I think I did them right
    (Muder / Population) X 100,000 = Rate p/100K


    Edited to add omitted word(s) manslaughter

  12. #12
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Gloucester, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    629

    Post imported post

    Why is this newspaper making this a race issue? It seems like they bring up the "Black Caucus" to try and motivate Black Americans to stand against these changes in Va. law. I guess they think blacks can't control themselves or something, or that only mostly black neighborhoods should be disarmed for some reason,WTF?

  13. #13
    Regular Member wylde007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Va Beach, Occupied VA
    Posts
    3,037

    Post imported post

    Pagan wrote:
    It seems like they bring up the "Black Caucus" to try and motivate Black Americans to stand against these changes in Va. law.
    Reminds me of the Sam Kinison bit "Rock against drugs": Rock against drugs? Rock CREATED drugs. You might as well form a group called Christians against Christ and see how far you get. [para]
    The quiet war has begun, with silent weapons
    And the newest slavery is to keep the people poor, and stupid
    Novos ordo seclorum ~ Mustaine

    Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

  14. #14
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Location
    Gloucester, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    629

    Post imported post

    wylde007 wrote:
    Pagan wrote:
    It seems like they bring up the "Black Caucus" to try and motivate Black Americans to stand against these changes in Va. law.
    Reminds me of the Sam Kinison bit "Rock against drugs": Rock against drugs? Rock CREATED drugs. You might as well form a group called Christians against Christ and see how far you get. [para]
    I'm missing the analogy I think; Are you suggesting that blacks created gun violence or gun control?:?

    I like to assume the best about my fellow man, andI assume that is not what you mean.

    Perhaps I'm just having a Polish moment, and don't get it.:shock:

  15. #15
    Regular Member wylde007's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Va Beach, Occupied VA
    Posts
    3,037

    Post imported post

    Pagan wrote:
    I like to assume the best about my fellow man, andI assume that is not what you mean.
    The RKBA is a RIGHT that is to be enjoyed by ALL FREE MEN.

    If the Black Caucus wants to promulgate and propagate gun control which was, much like the "war on [some] drugs" brought about by tendencies of racism against blacks, then they are essentially siphoning off their own liberties.

    To me it's like saying "Free men against freedom".

    I hope that enlightens you to the paradox I was trying to illustrate.
    The quiet war has begun, with silent weapons
    And the newest slavery is to keep the people poor, and stupid
    Novos ordo seclorum ~ Mustaine

    Never argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and beat you with experience.

  16. #16
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    418

    Post imported post

    T Dubya wrote:
    Gun-friendly Virginia is poised to return to the Wild West-type era ...
    Just let me know when the shootin' starts, so I can grab my hat and spurs. Wouldn't want to be out of uniform...

  17. #17
    Regular Member Dreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    Grennsboro NC
    Posts
    5,358

    Post imported post

    Pagan wrote:
    Why is this newspaper making this a race issue? It seems like they bring up the "Black Caucus" to try and motivate Black Americans to stand against these changes in Va. law. I guess they think blacks can't control themselves or something, or that only mostly black neighborhoods should be disarmed for some reason,WTF?
    The media and political special interest groups make this a racial issue because, you see, deep in their heart of hearts, it IS a racial issue. It's REALLY a matter of these elites keeping the "wrong kinds of people" in their place. The only "safety" they are concerned with is the safety of their corrupt, morally bancrupt bureaucracy...

    Time and time again, people like Paul Helmke, Josh Sugarmann, Bill Clinton, George Bush, Barack Obama, etc, etc, etc, say "we don't want to take away everyone's guns--we just want to keep guns out of the hands of the "wrong types of people".

    And if you know what these people are REALLY all about, the "wrong kinds of people" they are talking about are EXACTLY the same "wrong kinds of people" they were talking about when all the Jim Crow gun control laws were passed in the late 1800's and early 1900s, and during the Civil Rights movement in the 1950's, and during the race riots of the late 1960's.

    You are correct in your assessment--these politicians and special interest groups REALLY do believe that minorities and the poor CANNOT handle themselves with civility, and they honestly believe that anyone not in their elite little club is fundamentally incapable of voluntary lawful behaviour. These folks (the ruling elite) are sick, racist, classist sociopaths, and their ONLY concern is keeping their own positions of power over others. The can't let little things like the Constitution, and Natural Rights of Man get their way...

    Any time ANYONE uses that phrase--"the wrong kinds of people", it REALLY means the same thing. What it means is anyone who isn't one of the "Three W's": Wealthy, White, or Well-connected...

    The formally organized gun rights organizations need to get hip to this REALLY quick. If they did, and started showing these gun-grabbers for the racist, classist elitists they were, and started showing that these laws are enacted with the deliberate intention of maintaining fear, terror, and helplessness in the poor and minority communities, maybe groups like the Black Caucus the SPLC, and the NAACP would come around and remember their history--that it was GUNS that enabled them to be where they are today. It was the rifles of the National Guard and the shotguns of the African-American Veterans of WWII that safely escorted black children to newly integrated school in the '50's. It was the rifles and shotguns and pistols of black fathers and grandfathers in the 1940's that kept the Klan from harassing their families. It was the firearms of law-abiding business owners that kept looters from ransacking their stores during the LA Riots. It was black men marching with firearms that attempted to bring Baltimore, Chicago, DC, and Detroit into the 20th century with regards to government-sanctioned racial discrimination in the '60s...

    In fact, we can go ALL the way back to the American Revolution--the first American to die in the Revolutionary War was a black freeman named Crispus Attox, who was killed in the Boston Massacre. He was mowed down by British soldiers for throwing snowballs. Had he and his party been armed, perhaps that "battle" would have ended MUCH differently...

    All gun control laws are racist and classist. They are ALL designed to keep poor people and non-whites from owning the means to defend their own freedom, liberty, and safety.

    Just because a person can't afford their own private bodyguard detail does NOT make their life any less valuable. Gun control laws are the ruling elite's way of telling you that your life is worth less than theirs because of your economic, racial, or educational status, and is therefore not worth defending.

    Any time you hear that phrase, a red flag should go up, and the person that says it should be PUBLICLY CALLED OUT for the racist, classist elitist scum they are.

    It is our cause to dispel the foggy thinking which avoids hard decisions in the delusion that a world of conflict will somehow mysteriously resolve itself into a world of harmony, if we just don't rock the boat or irritate the forces of aggressionand this is hogwash."
    --Barry Goldwater, 1964

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Williamsburg, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    74

    Post imported post

    I find there is an interesting direct connection between weapons suppression and civil rights which many in the 'civil rights movement' have missed. The complaint in McDonald v. Chicago, now before the Supreme Court, is that the near total ban on firearms in Chicago violates the 2nd Amendment and the 2nd Amendment extends to the states through at least the privileges and immunities clause of the 14th amendment. The previous case law against this extension to the states goes back to Slaughterhouse and Cruickshank and their predecessor Plessy v. Ferguson. Plessy established separate but equal and formed the legal basis for the entire panoply of Jim Crow laws. This connection is a reminder that gun rights/self defense rights are inseparable from other rights. The infringement of one is truly an infringement on all others.

  19. #19
    Regular Member Repeater's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Richmond, Virginia, USA
    Posts
    2,519

    Post imported post

    David Codrea has this to say.

    Refers to this:





Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •