I seem to remember that there was a time when the Police in Great Britain,
did not carry guns. Does anyone remember that? At any rate, I do remember
the Panthers carrying guns for self protection in California. They were
making a political point. But resorting to violence doesn't solve problems,
as we see demonstrated every day. In the end, the people with the most
power, and with the most powerful weapons, dominate the less powerful and
the people with less powerful weapons. We have a country that is using
incredible violence all over the world, supposedly to spread democracy and
to keep us safe. But instead, it is spreading hatred of America, and is
making us less safe because individuals want payback. But we keep holding on
to the fantasy that if we use more military power, we will somehow prevail.
And that is the same fantasy that people hold onto in regard to self defense
with handguns. The actuality is that huge numbers are killed every day in
domestic violence incidetns, in accidents with guns, and when mentally ill
people get their hands on guns. But the reality doesn't influence anyone,
just the fantasy of self defense. We live in a country of myths.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of joe harcz Comcast
Sent: Friday, June 24, 2016 8:05 AM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Antonin Scalia and the Clear and Present
Danger of Second Amendment Fundamentalism
Actually the history and context for the Heller decision is more profound
and deeper than the reading of the Second Amendment. It also goes in to
historical decisions and the right to be secure in our homes under the
Fourth Amendment.
This said, even the Supremes said certain limitations are totally kosher and
they've upheld most state and local regulations since Heller.
The right by the way to self defense in this case applied to handguns for
example and not to assault style weapons.. Moreover, there are exclusions
for carrying in public, not in the home that can be restricted.
I know this is not popular to some, but I agree with the principle of self
defense and that that is in the Heller decision.
But, again I also agree with the right to limit types of weapons, sizes of
clips, background checks, closing the gun show loopholes, and a plethora of
other reforms that are simple and logical and that protect the Second
Amendment rights as well as limit, but nottototally end gun violence for
sure.
Let us remember by the way that in the late sixties some gun control
measures were established by Reagan in response to the Black Panthers who
openly carried shotguns in Oakland to prevent or deter police violence
against blacks in that city.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Miriam Vieni" <miriamvieni@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
To: <blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 10:08 PM
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Antonin Scalia and the Clear and Present
Danger of Second Amendment Fundamentalism
Yes, I heard Alan Grayson do it again on Democracy Now. Actually, even
if he's supposed to be a Progressive, I don't like Grayson. I haven't
agreed with him each time I've heard him talk plus, I think he has a
snotty attitude. But anyway, he talked as if the second amendmant
gives every individual a right to protect himself with a gun. Tom
hartman wrote about the second amendment several years ago and pointed
out that, that's an interpretation, and is not what the words say. But
when the Supreme Court rules on something, everyone acts like the
ruling is the last word. The law is manipulatable.
Miriam
-----Original Message-----
From: blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
[mailto:blind-democracy-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of ;
Martian.Lady
Sent: Thursday, June 23, 2016 7:05 PM
To: blind-democracy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [blind-democracy] Re: Antonin Scalia and the Clear and
Present Danger of Second Amendment Fundamentalism
HI
I really can't imagine how the Supreme court jumped from the second
amendment's actual reading to saying that anyone should be able to
have a gun. That isn't what it says. When Steven Colbert tried to
read the actual Second Amendment, his guest said "whatever" to the
reading.
Marsha
