A response to a Public Pulse moonbat ....

[JimP]

The following was in the Public Pulse section of the local  fishwrap/stove starter today:


"Let Locals Regulate Guns"

The Jan. 7 World herald Article "Nebraska Lawmaker hopes to broker compromises in his effort to end local gun regulations" should have had another headline .... It would have been more accurate if it had read, "NRA and others hope to force their extreme version of 'gun rights' legislation on Nebraska cities and citizens."
  The intent of LB 68 is to end the ability of local governments to pass and enforce local gun regulations.
   How is any bill that purposefully restricts the rights of Nebraskans to regulate what they wish to regulate a good thing?  Answer: It is not.
   Don't forget the most important part of the Second Amendment: "Well Regulated."

Kim Moss-Allen, Bellevue

.....

There is SO much wrong with this, I don't know where to begin .....

How does a bird eat an elephant?  One bite at a time.....

"Let Locals Regulate Guns?"

  No.   The right to keep and bear arms is enshrined in both our Nebraska State Constitution and the United States Constitution's Bill of Rights.  Are we to let a handful of people in any village or HOA that doesn't like guns deprive any citizens that happen to wander through their environs of those rights (possibly permanently, if convicted!)  ..... Let's put the shoe on the other foot:  I note that Ms. Moss-Allen is helping to run the local La Leche League (good for her- "Breast is Best" ....at least we can agree on something!) .... how would she feel if any local town would enact laws that called for the arrest of any mother breastfeeding an infant in public, with penalties that could cause the loss of parental rights for the mother?   How's that shoe feel?

"NRA and others hope to force their extreme version of 'gun rights' legislation on Nebraska cities and citizens."

  What is extreme about exercising rights we were all born with as Americans?.... and nobody is forcing any citizens to do anything: if you don't want to carry a gun, well then, don't.  No skin off my nose ..... here's a little secret, Ms. Moss-Allen: There are THOUSANDS of Nebraskans that carry a concealed handgun daily .... and you probably pass within feet of a few of them every day .... no skin off your nose, either.

     "The intent of LB 68 is to end the ability of local governments to pass and enforce local gun regulations."

True.

   "How is any bill that purposefully restricts the rights of Nebraskans to regulate what they wish to regulate a good thing?"

   I think I made the case for that already.  See above.


"Don't forget the most important part of the Second Amendment: "Well Regulated.""

That's ridiculous.  Everyone from a 7th Grade English teacher to Penn and Teller to the SCOTUS can and has made that plain..... if you take out "Well Regulated" from the 2nd Amendment, it still says roughly the same thing .....  Take out anything else, and it doesn't say anything:

"A militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."  still has meaning.

"A well regulated being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." 

Your 7th grade English teacher will tell you this is not right.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

Gobbledegook.

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms"

....what?


"A well regulated militia being necessary the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."

See what I mean?

I suggest you read and study both the Constitutions of the United States (and the Federalist Papers, for background on why the Founders framed it as they did) and the Nebraska State Constitution..... before you go write dumb stuff in public again, Ms. Moss-Allen. 

[Les]

Just an idea, but why don't you clean that up a bit and send it to the weird harold in the same section as a concerned citizen.  Seems like it'd be easy to copy and paste.  They would probably print it as it's a response to a previous opinion piece.  We do need all the help we can get.  You can reach a larger target audience through the newspaper, here you're preaching to the choir, nothing wrong with that either. 

[JimP]

Clean it up?

I did clean it up ....took all the curse words out ....

it's half as long as it was  to start with ...

Anybody want to help critique/edit it?

[depserv]

It gets tiring deconstructing the idiot rants of liberal cattle, but since you asked for critique, here's my response to the bigot...

Let me point out to you first that the NE state Constitution puts the right to be armed in its preamble, not in a bill of rights (unless maybe it's there too).  It was put there by voter initiative, which is a big deal.  And what is more important is that every member of our state legislature swore an oath to support both Constitutions.


"NRA and others hope to force their extreme version of 'gun rights' legislation on Nebraska cities and citizens."

Upholding the law is not extreme.  Basing laws in truth is not extreme.  Demagogues basing law in lies is extreme.  And destructive.  And that's why our founders gave us a body of written law in the first place. 

   "How is any bill that purposefully restricts the rights of Nebraskans to regulate what they wish to regulate a good thing?"

America is not a democracy; if it was, fools would have been duped into voting away every bit of our freedom a long time ago.  America is a Constitutional Republic.  Do you know what the difference is?  Since America is a Constitutional republic instead of a democracy, it is irrelevant what you claim Nebraskans want, but for the sake of accuracy it should be pointed out that it is a lie that Nebraskans want to restrict the keeping and bearing of arms.  It is common for legislators to get elected by claiming to be pro-gun and then turn around and vote anti-gun, but the opposite of that never happens.  Never ever.
 And do you know why?  It's because a majority of the citizens of the state do not want gun control, not once they are made aware of the truth about it.  If they did want gun control, it would not take big lie campaigns to convince them to accept it.


"Don't forget the most important part of the Second Amendment: "Well Regulated.""

This is a common lie of anti-gun bigots that has been exposed long ago.  One still using the lie shows herself to be an ignorant fool who just hasn't been paying attention.  Here is a good explanation of what the term well regulated meant when the law was written:
http://www.constitution.org/cons/wellregu.htm

But no special knowledge of the times is even necessary to understand that the phrase does not negate the meaning of the operative clause in any way.  The argument being made by these liars is that the Second Amendment really says this: government shall control who gets to keep and bear arms and how they get to do it, therefore the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.  This of course is self-contradictory, making it an absurd statement: A, therefore not A; this is a logical impossibility, which puts it in with the most absurd statements ever made throughout human history; there is not a word that expresses just how utterly stupid that argument is.  Nothing the militia clause says can erase the meaning of the clause that actually defines what the right is, without making the statement meaningless.  No doubt that's what anti-gun bigots want to do, but it's a pretty safe bet it was not what the authors of the Constitution wanted to do.

 
Truth, logic, and common sense are all on the side of the patriot.  Irrational appeals to emotion and massive propaganda campaigns are on the side of the anti-gun bigot.  I've explained the truth to anti-gun bigots many times, and it's a waste of time because they are mindless drones, totally devoid of critical thinking ability.  It's still good to challenge their lies though in a pubic forum, to educate the low-information voters who so often travel with the liberal herd.