Seattle Times OpEd on gun control and Ceasefire march on Sun Jan 13th

8ball · Jan 6, 2013

Alex Algard has an op-ed in this mornings Seattle Times, asking for "common-sense gun control". He doesn't define what controls he wants and how it would avoid the tragedies he lists.

Op-ed: It’s time for common-sense gun controls | Opinion | The Seattle Times

Also, from a link in his article, Ceasefire is planning a rally in downtown Seattle on Sunday Jan 13th.

Stand up against gun violence 1.13.13 | March from Westlake Park at 1:30 pm to Seattle Center and show your support for ending gun violence

I guess Alex never read the WA Constitution or the Bill of Rights before he moved here?

deen_ad · Jan 6, 2013

But some people consider the 2nd amend. to be "outdated" and in need of removal or changing because they writers didn't envision the weapons of today and it should only allow front stuffers.
But they figure the 1st amend. is inviolate even though there were only hand operated presses and town criers.

Double standard at it's best.

PMKN_PI · Jan 6, 2013

I think that an on-site counter protest is in order. Its time to scream in these pigs faces. Let the spit fly.

not nipsy · Jan 6, 2013

deen_ad said:
But some people consider the 2nd amend. to be "outdated" and in need of removal or changing because they writers didn't envision the weapons of today and it should only allow front stuffers.
But they figure the 1st amend. is inviolate even though there were only hand operated presses and town criers.

Double standard at it's best.

It's interesting also to note that breech loading rifles existed well before 1791, and in fact the Austrian army fielded a repeating rifle from 1780 (granted, an air rifle, but a repeating rifle nonetheless). Concepts like cartridges, magazines, and better breech loading were actively being explored. So "they could not envision a modern rifle" is a completely silly statement. It denies over 200 years of firearm development. No one gave us ARs overnight: they come at the current end of a long line of "envisioning" that reaches wayyy back. Since the beginning, shooting "faster, farther, straighter" has always pushed development.
The 2nd amendment is the only one in the Bill of Rights that starts with an explanatory clause. Even if you take the position that our founders could not possibly have envisioned "assault weapons" (whatever those are), it's plain they knew that, of all the approved amendments, this one would be the one that would have to withstand the most pressure from everyone, including and especially the government itself.