tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post6490822694254880712..comments2024-03-19T06:41:24.738-05:00Comments on Althouse: What effect will the Supreme Court's gun case have on the '08 election?Ann Althousehttp://www.blogger.com/profile/01630636239933008807noreply@blogger.comBlogger81125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-89315166271944574422007-11-23T14:54:00.000-06:002007-11-23T14:54:00.000-06:00I like how Cyrus mysteriously hasn't been heard fr...I like how Cyrus mysteriously hasn't been heard from since Gahrie answered his demands. Not that that wasn't entirely predictable based on his past performance, of course.Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-62533601931900297422007-11-22T23:45:00.000-06:002007-11-22T23:45:00.000-06:00The very law under review is a complete ban on han...The very law under review is a complete ban on handguns and a ban on keeping long arms in a state that is usable for self-defense.<BR/><BR/>As for effects on the election, the passion is all on the gun rights side. Gun owners organize and vote based on the issue. Gun control advocates, not so much.Ernst Stavro Blofeldhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02237453525690607370noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-86339560568223399252007-11-22T21:59:00.000-06:002007-11-22T21:59:00.000-06:00Cyrus: would you care to name... Oh, on second th...Cyrus: <I> would you care to name... Oh, on second thought, don't bother. Your best option is to stay down.</I><BR/><BR/>Easy Tiger. It only took Gahrie 30 mins to post 3 examples of Democrats wanting to ban handguns. <BR/><BR/><B>"A well-educated Congress, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the <I>people</I> to keep and read books shall not be infringed."</B><BR/><BR/>Nothing in there about public libraries or the Library of Congress; likewise, nothing in the 2nd about militia or weapon's barracks.Fenhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16734571593963330215noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-20652403097638988392007-11-22T21:09:00.000-06:002007-11-22T21:09:00.000-06:00You've taken a beating, Revenant. Stay down.What a...<I>You've taken a beating, Revenant. Stay down.</I><BR/><BR/>What a silly little man you are.<BR/><BR/>I haven't made any claims here, Grumpy McPinkerton -- so how could I have "taken a beating? Being whined at by left-wingers is hardly going to do me any damage.<BR/><BR/>Besides, Gahrie -- who unlike me prefers to actually treat your questions like they were intellectually serious attempts at conversation -- has already pimp-slapped your silly claim that all Democrats have a belief in a right to keep and bear arms. So even if I felt the urge to do so, my work's already been done for me.<BR/><BR/>And all I had to do was make fun of you a little and enjoy my Thanksgiving dinner. :)Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-75067582550255946222007-11-22T20:26:00.000-06:002007-11-22T20:26:00.000-06:001) "Banning guns is an idea whose time has come." ...1) "Banning guns is an idea whose time has come." <BR/>--U.S. Sen. Joseph Biden Associated Press 11/18/93<BR/><BR/><BR/>2)"Banning guns addresses a fundamental right of all Americans to feel safe." <BR/>--U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein Associated Press 11/18/93<BR/><BR/><BR/>3)"Mr. Speaker, I still believe that the best way to control handguns is to ban them outright." <BR/>-- Rep. Cardiss Collins (D-ILGahriehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16795449308207016641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-38185581825787114792007-11-22T19:59:00.000-06:002007-11-22T19:59:00.000-06:00Speaking of irrelevant and stupid comments, this o...Speaking of irrelevant and stupid comments, this one by Revenant is a prime example:<BR/><BR/><I>Although, as I pointed out, if you believe the government has the right to ban ownership of whichever guns it wishes to, you don't believe in a right to arms.</I><BR/><BR/>Revenant, would you care to name any national politician who believes "the government has the right to ban ownership of whichever guns it wishes to?" Why do you raise idiotic, irrelevant points like this?<BR/><BR/>Oh, on second thought, don't bother. Your best option is to stay down.Cyrus Pinkertonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09849126166866751019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-61597917167205837892007-11-22T19:54:00.000-06:002007-11-22T19:54:00.000-06:00Revenant,More mindless babbling from you and still...Revenant,<BR/><BR/>More mindless babbling from you and still no intellectually honest response. Then again, why should your posts today be any different than any other day?<BR/><BR/>It would be nice, for a change, to read a thoughtful and relevant comment from you. Since you cannot answer either of my questions, it's clear that you have nothing more to offer on the subject I raised. All of which makes me wonder why you are still babbling. Why not give your fingers the same rest that you give your brain?<BR/><BR/>You've taken a beating, Revenant. Stay down.Cyrus Pinkertonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09849126166866751019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-19122305795895232122007-11-22T18:09:00.000-06:002007-11-22T18:09:00.000-06:00I asked two questions; you were unable to answer e...<I>I asked two questions; you were unable to answer either.</I><BR/><BR/>Cyrus,<BR/><BR/>I didn't claim that there were Democrats who lack a belief in a right to keep and bear arms. So why should I trouble myself to name one who does? Maybe they all have such a belief. Maybe none of them do. You've offered no evidence for either position; you've simply stated that you don't know of any who lack such a belief. Like I said, I completely accept your claim that you lack awareness on a subject. You usually do. But your lack of awareness doesn't really mean anything, of course.<BR/><BR/>Now, you appear to be claiming that all national-level Democratic politicians believe in some sort of right to keep and bear arms. If you are in fact claiming that, you'll need to provide proof as to the positions of each of the 300 or so national-level Democratic politicians. I'll be waiting patiently for that.<BR/><BR/>If, on the other hand, you're not really claiming that... then what exactly are you babbling about? :)<BR/><BR/><I>I'll remind you that the quote from Reynolds that I challenged refers to "some sort of right to arms under the Constitution." </I><BR/><BR/>Of course. Although, as I pointed out, if you believe the government has the right to ban ownership of whichever guns it wishes to, you don't believe in a right to arms.<BR/><BR/><I>Acceptable, direct answers to these questions include these two options:</I><BR/><BR/>You missed option three, which is to grin and continue stringing you along.<BR/><BR/><I>I'm hoping for the surprise of an intellectually honest answer from you.</I><BR/><BR/>Cyrus "Mr Grumpy" Pinkerton, insisting on intellectual honesty? I'm sure we all got a nice chuckle out of that one. :)Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-4600028268893979372007-11-22T14:02:00.000-06:002007-11-22T14:02:00.000-06:00Gahrie wrote:You're the first person I've ever enc...Gahrie wrote:<BR/><BR/><I>You're the first person I've ever encountered who has tried to argue that the left is pro-gun ownership, and against strict gun control laws.</I><BR/><BR/>That isn't my claim, of course. <BR/><BR/>My claim is that Democrats support gun ownership and, as Reynolds puts it, "some sort of right to arms under the Constitution."<BR/><BR/>I also claim that Republicans support some sort of regulation of the right to arms under the Constitution.<BR/><BR/>Lastly, I claim Reynolds' statement is idiotic, which was really the point of my original post.Cyrus Pinkertonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09849126166866751019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-82369412370643285722007-11-22T13:39:00.000-06:002007-11-22T13:39:00.000-06:00Cyrus:I will say this. I have to give you points f...Cyrus:<BR/><BR/>I will say this. I have to give you points for originality.<BR/><BR/>You're the first person I've ever encountered who has tried to argue that the left is pro-gun ownership, and against strict gun control laws.Gahriehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16795449308207016641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-33346064762867452512007-11-22T11:55:00.000-06:002007-11-22T11:55:00.000-06:00Gahrie,1. In fact, I did not "set up absolutes." I...Gahrie,<BR/><BR/>1. In fact, I did not "set up absolutes." I addressed very specifically the following claim by Reynolds:<BR/><BR/><I>This is probably bad for Democrats, given that most Americans believe they have some sort of right to arms under the Constitution.</I><BR/><BR/>The clear implication of Reynolds' claim is that Democrats don't support "<B>some sort of right</B> to arms under the Constitution." <BR/>This is why, in my original post, I wrote:<BR/><BR/><I>I know of no national Democratic politician who does not believe that Americans have some sort of right to arms under the Constitution.</I><BR/><BR/>This is why, after getting a typically daft reply from Revenant, I challenged him with this remark:<BR/><BR/><I>If you think I'm wrong in what I've written, name a single national Democratic politician who does not believe in some sort of right to arms under the Constitution.</I><BR/><BR/>Of course, as is to be expected, I have yet to see a relevant response.<BR/><BR/>It seems to me that your problem in terms of "absolutes" is with Reynolds, not with me. I suspect you agree with me that his statement is idiotic. At least to this point, your comments suggest that you agree with my position that Democrats support "<B>some sort of right</B> to arms under the Constitution." However, if you don't agree with me, please give specific, relevant examples.<BR/><BR/>In the meantime, I'm going to assume that you agree that Reynolds' statement is simply not consistent with the position of national Democratic politicians on this issue.<BR/><BR/>2. If I claim the sky is blue and someone challenges it, I am prepared to explain the scientific basis for a blue sky. It's completely straightforward.<BR/><BR/>On the other hand, you make an assertion that you cannot (or will not) support by directly citing relevant data or an objective finding. When challenged, you dodge. You certainly can (and should) do a lot better.<BR/><BR/>If you can't provide evidence, tell me why you can't provide the evidence. If the evidence doesn't exist, tell me on what basis you've come to know what you assert is true. If you claim your "knowledge" is based on "observation," tell me how you establish that your "observation" sample is representative and clear of bias. In other words, show good faith in supporting your claim. Otherwise, why not just downgrade your claim from "fact" to personal "observation" or "belief?" Then you wouldn't have to deal with the problem of having to establish the factual basis for your assertions.Cyrus Pinkertonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09849126166866751019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-23325254892478928242007-11-22T10:46:00.000-06:002007-11-22T10:46:00.000-06:00Cyrus:1) Your strawman were in the fact that you s...Cyrus:<BR/><BR/>1) Your strawman were in the fact that you set up absolutes. The issue isn't about absolutes. No one has said that the Right wants <B>no</B> regulations on guns, and generally Democrats are smart enough not to say they want to take away <B>all</B> guns.<BR/><BR/>Do you seriously think the NRA has supported the Republicans and opposed the Democrats for no reason? <BR/><BR/>Who do you think supported Michael Moore's "Bowling for Columbine?...the right or the left?<BR/><BR/>2) As to your charge of not supplying citations to support my assertions. If I claim the sky is blue and that water is wet, don't expect me to suply citations for those assertions either.Gahriehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16795449308207016641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-9047702055075855102007-11-22T09:51:00.000-06:002007-11-22T09:51:00.000-06:00Gahrie wrote:There have long been differences in t...Gahrie wrote:<BR/><BR/><I>There have long been differences in the positions that the two parties have taken on gun ownership and gun control, and any attempt to deny this is ludicrous.</I><BR/><BR/>In other words, you have no source. <BR/><BR/>Thank you for at least being honest about the fact that your claims are not based on data or objective findings.<BR/><BR/>Also, your nonresponse to my other challenge to you is noted.Cyrus Pinkertonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09849126166866751019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-91207133932783735302007-11-22T09:48:00.000-06:002007-11-22T09:48:00.000-06:00Revenant,I asked two questions; you were unable to...Revenant,<BR/><BR/>I asked two questions; you were unable to answer either. Another typically poor performance by you.<BR/><BR/>Because you are a poor reader and seemingly incapable of critical thinking, I'll remind you that the quote from Reynolds that I challenged refers to "<B>some sort of right</B> to arms under the Constitution." <BR/><BR/>Now, I'll rephrase my questions so the dim-witted will have a better chance of responding.<BR/><BR/>1. Do you know of any national Democratic politician who believes there is no right to arms under the Constitution? If so, who?<BR/><BR/>2. Do you know of a national politician who believes the right to arms is not subject to any regulation whatsoever? If so, who?<BR/><BR/>Acceptable, direct answers to these questions include these two options:<BR/><BR/>- No<BR/>- Yes, followed by the name of at least one national politician.<BR/><BR/>Please note that if your answer to the first question is "no," then it follows logically that, based on what you know, national Democratic politicians believe in "<B>some sort of right</B> to arms under the Constitution." It also follows then that Reynolds statement is idiotic.<BR/><BR/>Based on your previous performances (and I'm being generous by calling them "performances"), I predict you will not give a clear, direct answer to either question. Instead I suspect you'll weasel and try to insult as you so generally do. <BR/><BR/>I'm hoping for the surprise of an intellectually honest answer from you. Will today be the day when you cross that bridge?Cyrus Pinkertonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09849126166866751019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-48111117450924499322007-11-22T09:39:00.000-06:002007-11-22T09:39:00.000-06:00Finally, I'm curious what your source is for how D...<I>Finally, I'm curious what your source is for how Democrats and "the left" think about gun rights issues. Would you care to name to polling source on which you base your claims?</I><BR/><BR/>I repeat:<BR/>There have long been differences in the positions that the two parties have taken on gun ownership and gun control, and any attempt to deny this is ludicrous.Gahriehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16795449308207016641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-51769276849572409582007-11-22T09:24:00.000-06:002007-11-22T09:24:00.000-06:00Gahrie,Although it is interesting to read your tho...Gahrie,<BR/><BR/>Although it is interesting to read your thoughts, your post is entirely unresponsive to mine. <BR/><BR/>Also, I've presented no strawman arguments. If you believe otherwise, identify them.<BR/><BR/>Finally, I'm curious what your source is for how Democrats and "the left" think about gun rights issues. Would you care to name to polling source on which you base your claims?Cyrus Pinkertonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09849126166866751019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-33693622748842717912007-11-21T23:40:00.000-06:002007-11-21T23:40:00.000-06:00Oh, one more thing:Also, while you're at it, why d...Oh, one more thing:<BR/><BR/><I>Also, while you're at it, why don't you try to name any national politician who believes the right to bear arms is absolute (i.e., not subject to any regulation whatsoever).</I><BR/><BR/>No right, including the right to life, is absolute. But anyone who wishes to limit a right must first prove that the limitation is absolutely necessary and that no practical alternatives exist. That is why the government can't pursue "sensible restrictions" on free speech like, say, fighting terrorism by banning Islam from the United States, or forbidding people from criticizing the war in Iraq.Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-26933738798827702452007-11-21T23:35:00.000-06:002007-11-21T23:35:00.000-06:00If you think I'm wrong in what I've written, name ...<I>If you think I'm wrong in what I've written, name a single national Democratic politician who does not believe in some sort of right to arms under the Constitution. </I><BR/><BR/>All you said was "I know of no national Democratic politician who does not believe that Americans have some sort of right to arms under the Constitution."<BR/><BR/>I fully accept your claim that you are unaware of something. You usually are. <BR/><BR/>Now, if you want to go beyond that, and make a positive claim that there are no Democratic politicians who lack belief in a right to arms beyond those the government wishes them to own -- then, as the person making a positive claim, it is up to you to provide the proof. I eagerly await the evidence that, say, Nancy Pelosi, Chris Dodd, and Joe Biden believe in a right to keep and bear arms.<BR/><BR/>But if you'd rather just stick to your usual passive-aggressive "I am unaware of X" strategy, then by all means feel free to remain unaware. Your ignorance is, after all, not my problem. :)Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-33639711145386938182007-11-21T23:20:00.000-06:002007-11-21T23:20:00.000-06:00Cyrus Pinkerton:Wow..two strawman arguments in one...Cyrus Pinkerton:<BR/><BR/>Wow..two strawman arguments in one post, that might be a record.<BR/><BR/>The issues are:<BR/><BR/>1) Is the right to own a gun an individual right, or a collective right?<BR/><BR/>Most Democrats and leftists have insisted that the right is a collective one. Most Republicans and those on the right believe it to be an individual one. This fundamental difference in ideology goes back decades.<BR/><BR/>2) Is the Second Amendment incorporated by the Fourteenth Amendment with our other rights?<BR/><BR/>The left has traditionally said no, the right has traditionally said yes.<BR/><BR/>3) What level of judicial review should gun regulations endure?<BR/><BR/>The left has come down on the side of rational basis, the right thinks it should be strict scrutiny. <BR/><BR/>There have long been differences in the positions that the two parties have taken on gun ownership and gun control, and any attempt to deny this is ludicrous.Gahriehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16795449308207016641noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-2130429248755392392007-11-21T22:55:00.000-06:002007-11-21T22:55:00.000-06:00Revenant,Your comment is simply not responsive to ...Revenant,<BR/><BR/>Your comment is simply not responsive to mine.<BR/><BR/>If you think I'm wrong in what I've written, name a single national Democratic politician who does not believe in <B>some sort of right to arms</B> under the Constitution. <BR/><BR/>Also, while you're at it, why don't you try to name <B>any</B> national politician who believes the right to bear arms is <B>absolute</B> (i.e., not subject to any regulation whatsoever).Cyrus Pinkertonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09849126166866751019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-28418254450483144002007-11-21T20:31:00.000-06:002007-11-21T20:31:00.000-06:00In all this commentary, Fred Thompson was left out...In all this commentary, Fred Thompson was left out. I'll wager he is the only Presidential candidate who mentioned Blackstone in his response the SCOTUS granting certiorari to the Heller case.<BR/><BR/>http://fredfile.fred08.com/blog/2007/second-amendment-a-citizens-right/John Richardsonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/03151468462458613615noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-16983752501702323322007-11-21T18:47:00.000-06:002007-11-21T18:47:00.000-06:00I know of no national Democratic politician who do...<I>I know of no national Democratic politician who does not believe that Americans have some sort of right to arms under the Constitution.</I><BR/><BR/>A clue for the clueless: "you should be able to have any guns the government wants you to be able to have" is not "a right to arms", Cyrus. A right to arms means you get to have them even when the government would prefer you didn't.Revenanthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/11374515200055384226noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-47521028080347951582007-11-21T18:42:00.000-06:002007-11-21T18:42:00.000-06:00Glenn Reynolds writes: [T]he court has ensured tha...Glenn Reynolds writes: <I>[T]he court has ensured that the gun-rights issue will move to the forefront this election season, at both the presidential and congressional levels. This is probably bad for Democrats, given that most Americans believe they have some sort of right to arms under the Constitution.</I><BR/><BR/>I can only conclude from this that Glenn Reynolds is an idiot. I know of no national Democratic politician who does not believe that Americans have some sort of right to arms under the Constitution.Cyrus Pinkertonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09849126166866751019noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-62148802395959445142007-11-21T15:36:00.000-06:002007-11-21T15:36:00.000-06:00I know the Korean grocery store owners in LA were ...I know the Korean grocery store owners in LA were pretty happy to have guns a few years ago, and everyone else who lived there found out exactly what sort of hardship that waiting limit was. Someone refresh my memory of how helpful the police were during that point in time.jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01892213227811281098noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6329595.post-34529633172005692492007-11-21T15:04:00.000-06:002007-11-21T15:04:00.000-06:00The Court decision will not be out until the nomin...The Court decision will not be out until the nominees are set, as another poster noted. <BR/><BR/>In the meantime, Romney&Huckabee should have a good time going over Rudy's antigun, anti-2nd Amendment amicus briefs and Hillary's (as an executive running the White House) good friends Reno and Gorelick asserting through DOJ that the 2nd is a right that only applies to government ownership of guns.<BR/><BR/>And while Hillary may say that she is pro-individual 2nd Amendment rights - that does leave an opening for Obambi and the lesser lights in the Dem race to then ask:<BR/><BR/>If you are for invidual rights, why when you were Co-President were all yout DOJ picks attempting to wipe out private gun ownership and assert that firearms would only be allowed to law abiding people if a police high mucky-muck or state bureaucrat consented there was a need and large amounts of time and money were spent to give the gunowner the permit showing government "allowed" them to own a gun.<BR/><BR/>Who knows what Hillary might say in return? <BR/><BR/>1. It could have been all Bill's fault...since gun rights were one of the rare areas where she didn't exert "hands-on" executive leadership as Co-President...<BR/><BR/>2. That she has always secretly loved responsible firearm use and ownership..in fact, her Dad took her out shooting because she could not go and watch her beloved NY Yankees play while living outside Chicago.<BR/><BR/>3. That she always believed in gun rights, but that they have to be responsive to concerned local leaders and local ordinances meant to keep "helpless minority children" and her wonderful friends - the police - safe from killer bullets.Cedarfordhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00602418702398818596noreply@blogger.com