What do you do when the media is anti-firearm?

Apr 18, 2007 17:05

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/18152668/from/ET/

I'll quote something out of this (it's an opinion-editorial from MSNBC):

And we have already read foolish calls from conservative law professors and others who insist that deregulating a particularly deadly technology - firearms - would make our campuses safer. After all, they argue, if someone had ( Read more... )

va tech, second amendment

Leave a comment

(The comment has been removed)

wyrdsatyr April 19 2007, 01:42:00 UTC
while that may be true, the fact that a gun was used in the incident, prompts the press to go on their usual gun-control tirades, which in turn forces freedomists and neocons alike, to speak up in defense of the 4th amendment. The fact that the 4th amendment is more about the right to form a revolution, to protect the people's right and duty to change or abolish a government that has become detrimental to their rights, completely goes over the heads of leaders on both sides, and the fact that mental health contributed more to the situation than the presence or lack thereof of guns tends to get ignored.

Reply

wyrdsatyr April 19 2007, 02:09:00 UTC
oops, I meant 2nd...

Reply

aerowolf April 19 2007, 02:10:31 UTC
That's the Second Amendment.

But regardless. We now find that he had previously been committed to a mental institution in 1995, and later purchased the guns from a dealer. He left blank the question "have you ever been evaluated or treated for mental illness?". The problem with the question is that the law doesn't state that is a disqualification.

The law states that being ajudicated mentally ill (by a court of competent jurisdiction) disqualifies you from purchasing a firearm from a licensed dealer.

This is known by most dealers, so they usually silently accept it. There's going to be a lot of lawsuits over this, I think.

Reply

sianmink April 19 2007, 04:34:22 UTC
The fact that Cho was declared mentally ill and he managed to pass the check anyway speaks of a failing that will hopefully be soon addressed. He was declared a danger to himself and others, and someone WILL be liable for him getting two guns he shouldn't legally have been able to acquire.

Reply

techkitsune April 19 2007, 14:33:43 UTC
By law, Legally naturalized aliens are only allowed to purchase long weapons (shotguns or rifles) not handguns that can be easily concealed.

Someone's gonna be in DEEP shit for breaking a federal law.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up