READ THE COMMENTS!

Quote of the day—Cody Fenwick. | The View From North Central Idaho: It’s time we start thinking a little more boldly and demanding much more. We should consider abolishing private gun ownership. …

For those who appreciate Joe's efforts to high-light the Idiocy of the Left (which needs no introduction), I do encourage you to go to the original post AND READ THE COMMENTS!

You have to work your way through a couple pages of The Usual Idiots, but when you notice that there ARE comments of more than 5 lines, you may want to pay attention.

There are a couple of threads which are not typical of the Usual Suspects (Gun Control Comments).

Commentators of opposing opinions demonstrate there show to have a civil, reasoned dialogue.  Who knew THIS could happen?   What's more, they find a few points on which they might agree ... albeit with certain reservations.    Nobody was asking for a quid pro quo negotiation (eg: "I'll give up a flash-hider and a bayonet lug for pistol grips").

None of the petty, irritating, divisive rot.

Its all about the real meaning of the Second Amendment, how it came to be in its present form, and what a Constitutional Convention might consider to clarify the meaning as assumed from either side of the issue.

Some people express themselves better when they have time to think it through.  And in that comfort zone, they're not on the defensive,

I love it when educated citizens of sensibility and good will actually find and accept the opportunity to communicate.

Which goes to prove that the wise man can still learn from the Village Idiot.

(Are you listening, Cody?   No?  I didn't expect you were.)

Shakespeare's mandate about lawyers

Of Arms and the Law: Jackson v. San Fran: cert denied, with dissent:

Jackson v. San Fran: cert denied, with dissent POSTED BY DAVID HARDY  8 JUNE 2015 09:53 AM Order here. The Court denies cert., not a big surprise, but Thomas and Scalia dissent and say the Court should have accepted the case, even though there is no split in the circuits.

The referenced information in the ARMS&LAW page provide plenty of background, and I would have posted a comment to the effect of  "What the HELL were these people thinking?"

But when I got into reading the dominant opinions ... and some of the rationale ... I realized that rationality was not necessarily a determining factor.

For example: the law requires that all firearms kept in the home be rendered unusable by virtue of being kept in a safe or having a trigger lock.  This was presumably to prevent children or other persons from unauthorized access.  Failure to observe this rule is punishable ....

Where Guns Are Outlawed, Only Criminals Will Have Guns

NRA version of 2nd Amendment lacks common sense - Daily Southtown:
June 05, 2015:  by David McGrath (a Chicago Tribune subsection)

So the wording and structure of the Second Amendment protects the people's right to bear arms only if they belong to a state militia.

So David McGrath has decided that 70% of Americans, along with the Supreme Court of the United States (SCOTUS)  and enough Federal District Courts, State Supreme Courts, and enough individual case studies to sink the Bismarck are wrong.

And he is right.

Because of ... Grammar.

You've seen the Money Quote, now here's his embarrassing explanation:

ALERTS TO THREATS IN EUROPE:

by John Cleese - British writer, actor and quite tall person

The English are feeling the pinch in relation to recent events in Syria and have therefore raised their security level from "Miffed" to "Peeved." Soon, though, security levels may be raised yet again to "Irritated" or even "A Bit Cross." The English have not been "A Bit Cross" since the blitz in 1940 when tea supplies nearly ran out.
Terrorists have been re-categorized from "Tiresome" to "A Bloody Nuisance." The last time the British issued a "Bloody Nuisance" warning level was in 1588, when threatened by the Spanish Armada.

The Scots have raised their threat level from "Pissed Off" to "Let's Get the Bastards." They don't have any other levels. This is the reason they have been used on the front line of the British army for the last 300 years.

The French government announced yesterday that it has raised its terror alert level from "Run" to "Hide." The only two higher levels in France are "Collaborate" and "Surrender." The rise was precipitated by a recent fire that destroyed France 's white flag factory, effectively paralyzing the country's military capability.

Italy has increased the alert level from "Shout Loudly and Excitedly" to "Elaborate Military Posturing." Two more levels remain:
"Ineffective Combat Operations" and "Change Sides."

The Germans have increased their alert state from "Disdainful Arrogance" to "Dress in Uniform and Sing Marching Songs." They also have two higher levels: "Invade a Neighbour" and "Lose."

Belgians, on the other hand, are all on holiday as usual; the only threat they are worried about is NATO pulling out of Brussels .

The Spanish are all excited to see their new submarines ready to deploy. These beautifully designed subs have glass bottoms so the new Spanish navy can get a really good look at the old Spanish navy.

Australia, meanwhile, has raised its security level from "No worries" to "She'll be alright, Mate." Two more escalation levels remain: "Crikey! I think we'll need to cancel the barbie this weekend!" and "The barbie is cancelled." So far no situation has ever warranted use of the last final escalation level.

(from The Hobo Brasser, via Email)