11 thoughts on “Enough Is Enough”

  1. The unspoken truth of the 2nd Amendment and why it exists.
    Are “We The People” citizens of a republic or subjects of a state?

    The Heller decision, somewhat derided in the cited article did something very important which heretofore had been in serious question. That the “right to keep and bear arms” applies to the individual citizen and NOT to the State as a means to arm select citizenry. Were it not for Heller, the idea that the 2nd Amendment stood only to provide a means for the State to arm the State was an interpretation under serious contemplation.

  2. I understand what a modest proposal is, but the following is rather different from the rest of it: “Unless you are a collector, cataloguing your own collection, an insurer of that collection, or a manufacturer who requires such numbers to manufacture guns, it will be a felony to maintain registries or lists of firearms serial numbers.”

    So, if every time I, a private citizen, handle a gun, I write down its serial number in my notebook, that’s a felony? I’ll give the government my notebook when they pry it out of my cold ink-stained hands.

      1. I don’t see much connection between this overly broad proposal and the 4th Amendment. A list of guns maintained by the government would certainly facilitate the government in searching for guns in someone’s home, but you can relax – that’s why we have the 4th Amendment. Meanwhile, this crazy proposal would ban nerdy/ anorak / trainspotting behavior by private citizens who want to write down stuff about guns they come across.

      1. I suppose my stupidity is unintentional. If it is all a joke, ok, but I don’t get it.Can you explain to me how the registries part of the proposal (which is so obviously in conflict with the 1st amendment) fits in with the rest of the proposal, however “modest”?

        The idea here is that governments are not permitted to make such lists, right? Not actually specifying that this is a prohibition on government and not on private citizens is a strange omission from a someone concerned with preserving the rights of private citizens.

        The rest of the proposal is odd also, because it purports to make a felony out of passing certain laws. That’s not really how certain kinds of laws are prohibited (“Congress shall make no law…” doesn’t turn members of Congress who ignore that prohibition into felons) , but I suppose that’s the modest part.

          1. Ah. Well. Anyone who rants like that should be hoisted in the air by their neck and then charged with a felony!

  3. It wouldn’t be so modest if he dialed it back a hair.

    It will be illegal to establish “gun-free” zones, since these inevitably become “self-defense-free” zones and free-fire zones for mass-murderers.

    In WA, they want to make public parks gun free zones. At certain times of day, in certain parks, it wouldn’t be a good idea to be present without a means of defense. But that is just from humans. We also have a lot of parks where you might encounter wolves, cougars, bears, and other dangerous critters. Such encounters are rare and usually resolved without firearms but the more time you spend outdoors, the greater your chances of encountering them.

    They must have amended their database and/or changed how the sightings were displayed. A few years ago, this map was a lot busier.

Comments are closed.