Michael A. Schwartz December 23 at 11:13am
http://thepaperskiff.blogspot.com/2009/11/only-thing-more-frustrating-to-gun.htmlLearn something about the Second Amendment. Read this blog.
The Paper Skiff: The Second Amendment
Michael Crimmins December 23 at 11:24am Report
Having served 21 years in the Marine Corps and having studied the Constitition, I know the Second Amendment well. Why do you supose #2 is #2 and not # whatever?
Michael A. Schwartz December 23 at 12:38pm
Then why would you mention hunting in your stance on the Second Amendment? At what point was the colonists’ ability to hunt threatened by the British necessitating a need for a right to keep and bear arms? And since when does one use “arms” to hunt?
Michael Crimmins December 23 at 12:48pm Report
What you need to know is that I'm pro 2nd Amendment. However, there's no way I will support the public access to fully automatic assault weapons and cop killer bullets. Least of all felons and wack jobs!FYI "arms" as you use it is a derivative of firearms which we use to hunt.
Michael A. Schwartz December 23 at 1:02pm
You have no clue what you are talking about. I cannot believe you were a teacher. Wait...if you were a public school teacher it makes a lot of sence. Obama said he is pro Second Amendment despite the fact he supports handgun bans and so called "assault weapon" bans. Just saying you are pro Second Amendment doesn't cut it. Fully automatic weapons have been federally regulated since the '30s. there is no debate about them anymore. Even the NRA isn't looking to change this. the term "assault weapon" is a meaningless term. It is a term used by anti gun people to describe scary looking guns used in movies. The state of California uses it to describe the aesthetic characteristics (not the functional characteristics) they use to ban guns. There is also no such thing as a "cop killer bullet". This also was a term used in the '80s by anti gun people to describe Teflon covered bullets. Covering bullets with Teflon does NOT make a bullet more dangerous, but does allow you to switch from a lead core to a brass core. And as far as I know…there is not a single group in the United State who is fighting for the ability of felons and “wack jobs” to own automatic rifles or Teflon covered brass core bullets. So this begs the question….what are you talking about? And “arms” is not a derivative of “firearms”. The term arms has existed far longer than “firearms”. If you’d read the blog that I sent that explains the Second Amendment…you’d know that. As it is stands, you really have no idea what you are talking about. You have no historic perspective of the Second Amendment and clearly do not understand its meaning. You are easily persuaded by anti gun lobbyists. I think the only reason I am not more incensed by your ignorance and arrogant attitude towards it is because I am 100% sure the people of the 53rd district will never elect you.
Michael Crimmins December 23 at 1:19pm Report
Being a teacher, sence is spelt sense in your first paragraph. You're sounding and writing like a 2nd amendment zealot which is just as dangerous as the anti-gun lobbyists because that type of person gets the rest of us who are pro 2nd amendment painted with the same brush they paint you with.Personally I believe most of our blog submitters are frustrated opinion piece writers who can't get published in newspapers. So now, isn't the Internet a beautiful place for bloggers with no peer reviewed standards?
Michael A. Schwartz December 23 at 1:50pm
I dunno about the peer reviews, Mike. But what I do know is that you have no idea what you are talking about when it comes to the Second Amendment or the issues surrounding the Constitution today. In California, we have seen horrible gun laws enacted due to a lack of understanding of the Second Amendment and firearms in general. On the federal level there was talk of another "assault weapons" ban less than a year ago. If we elect more like you, we will surly lose more rights, Mike. I do wish you would show some leadership, a sincere interest in the pro gun lobbyist concerns especially coming from such a hostile environment like California, and an understanding of the Constitution. I have more than proven that I have a level head and a broad, deep understanding of the Second Amendment. You have chosen to use this exchange to correct my spelling and rehash some Republican talking points about blogging. You chose to use your Second Amendment stance to talk about limiting guns and ammunition to all citizens rather than talk about how you will make sure the rights of the law abiding are protected rather than a plan to make it more difficult for criminals to get guns. Every answer you give continues to show arrogance and disrespect to citizens. You say I sound like a zealot and it is with enormous zeal I defend all of my rights from those who propose they are taken away. Especially those who are running for office and prove over and over again they just don’t have a basic grasp on the reality of what the Constitution stands for.It amazes and saddens me.
Michael Crimmins December 23 at 2:28pm Report
Actually I own about a dozen assorted weapons. I also regularly attend the S.D. County Gun Rights Commission meetings which is pro 2nd Amendment. If you are familiar, my views closely parallel those of Jay Le Suer who's running for Sheriff.You talk about issues surrounding the Constitution today. That feeds into Al Gore's definition of the Constitution as a "living document". I do not believe in that position or philosophy. Rather if you hold in the Constitution as originally written and intended 200 plus years ago that suffices with me as being an American.Isn't it a bit strange how people read things into the Constitution that aren't there at all but something written in black and white is interpreted as "the Founding Fathers didn't mean to say that or mean that?"
Michael A. Schwartz December 23 at 2:47pm
I will be sure to discuss our conversation with Jay and the guys at the Gun Rights Committee. Owning a gun and being pro Second Amendment are two different things. Vice President Biden duck hunts with a Beretta shotgun. He also helped author the Assault Weapon Ban back in 1994. In no way do your views parallel Jay's from what I can see. Jay stood against the California Assault Weapons ban in the assembly and I have never heard him talk about limiting guns to citizens that aren’t used for hunting.You read my statement as wrong as you read the Constitution. There are issues TODAY regarding the Constitution. You brought up fully automatic weapons which is a Constitutional issue but it is not being discussed TODAY. You brought up “cop killer bullets”. Again…not an issue being discussed TODAY. If you bothered to read the blog I sent you that explains the Second Amendment so clearly that even a school principal can understand it, you would see that I go back to the original meaning of the words used in the Second Amendment. Like “militia” and “well regulated”. The Constitutional issues being discussed TODAY when it comes to the Second Amendment has to do with it being an individual right and if it applies to the states. Can a certain class of guns be banned based on their aesthetics rather than function? Should CCWs issued by a state be honored by all states? You really don’t have a clue. It is amazingly frustrating to voters when such a basic, fundamental issue is lost on a candidate. (Although I am using the term “candidate” loosely in this case.) I would like to respond to your last sentence, but it doesn’t make sense or cents or scents or since.
