Comments on: Latest Second Amendment Polling

By: VPC Admin

VPC Admin — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 20:50:14 +0000

Bob Ricker, we at the VPC Blog congratulate you on all your hard work. It’s great to know that you spend a lot of time and money fighting the Gun Blobbers right here on their very own Blogs.

The effort of all gun safety activists is needed to stop .50 Caliber Terror in our homes and streets.

By: Sebastian

Sebastian — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:48:10 +0000

cbrtxus:

If you had asked “Do you believe in a ban on handguns, along with a law that allows rifles and shotguns, but forces them to be stored in a manner than renders them unusable to self-defense?” you’d have far different results.

Most people, including myself, believe that guns that aren’t under your direct control ought to be secured. That’s relatively non-controversial even among gun owners. When I’m not carrying my firearm, it’s on the bedside table safely in it’s holster. I don’t have children, but if I did I’d invest in a quick-open safe for storage. If I’m not actively using the gun, it goes in the main safe.

The problem with the DC law is that under the guise of mandating “safe storage” it effectively makes it impossible to use a firearm in self-defense without risking criminal charges. I think most Americans would agree that was wrong.

By: Sebastian

Sebastian — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 06:27:24 +0000

Bob,

I can’t speak for Dave, but doubt he thinks that. I certainly don’t believe the courts are going to suddenly find second amendment rights for convicted felons. As I’ve stated previously on this blog, I think criminals can have their second amendment rights denied through due process of law. It’s not different than other fundamental rights in that respect. In the founder’s time, we used to hang felons, so it seem to me that it would be permissible to deny many fundamental liberties to them.

I do take objection to barring non-violent criminals the right to arms. Should someone found guilty of tax evasion forever be barred from having the means to defend himself? What about someone who imported lobsters in the wrong type of bag? There are many ridiculous things today which are considered felonies that probably ought not to be.

But I think that’s a bigger issue that is only tangentially associated with the right to bear arms. You won’t find any objection here for violent felons being denied their right to bear arms.

By: Bob Ricker

Bob Ricker — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 05:54:17 +0000

Dave is like many gun lawyers, they can’t see the forest for the trees. Most Americans view the 2nd amendment like all others, there is a balance that must be met. We want our guns for hunting and self protection, but along with gunownership comes a civic responsibility to keep gus out of the wrong hands- terrorists and criminals. If a criminal or terrorist is convicted of a felony, he does not lose his right to a jury trial, right against self incrimination or right against unreasonable search and seizure. He does lose his 2nd Amendment rights. Does Dave really think SCOTUS is going to reverse that prohibition.?That’s the real question.

By: guy

guy — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 03:15:56 +0000

“Would you support or oppose … 59% said yes.”

Yes to what? Both?

By: cbrtxus

cbrtxus — Mon, 17 Mar 2008 00:24:23 +0000

I wonder how most folks would respond to these poll question?

Do you believe that the best way to defend your home and loved ones is to be utterly defenseless?

Do you believe that the police can keep a criminal from perpetrating a crime against you? Always? Most of the time? Occasionally?

Do you believe that if you owned a firearm, you would be a threat to anyone other than a criminal?