Replies

As horrifying as it is to contemplate, the next gunfight may not be at the O-K Corral; it might be in our own community.

Uh, dude, the OK Corral was in someone's community. The town of Tombstone Arizona to be exact. Did you think that was in Trashcanistan, or maybe on Mars?

Typical gun grabber, dumb as a bag of rocks, if that is not too insulting to the rocks.

None of our constitutional rights are absolute. Not being allowed to shout “Fire!” in a crowded theater is the most often cited limitation on free speech.

There is no law prohibiting you from yelling "Fire" in a crowded theater. In fact, if there is a fire, you are probably morally obligated to make others aware of that fact. There are, however, legal consequences if one irresponsibly yells "fire" in a crowded theater, just as there are consequences if one uses a firearm irresponsibly.

The author appears not to be a deep enough thinker to appreciate this.

None of our constitutional rights are absolute. Not being allowed to shout “Fire!” in a crowded theater is the most often cited limitation on free speech.

But the government can't tape your mouth shut because you might shout fire when there was no fire. If they did, you also couldn't shoult fire when there was one, and thus could not warn the other patrons about it. IOW, no prior restraint is allowed on free speech. Only abuse of free speech can be and is punished.

And controls on your guns can be imposed that would protect the public but allow enthusiasts to collect guns and to hunt as a sport.

Neither the Second Amendment to the US Constitution nor Art 1 Section thirten of the Virginia consitution (That a well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the proper, natural, and safe defense of a free state, therefore, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; ... ) have anything to do, directly, with hunting or collecting. It's all about protecting a free state. (The "safe" in the above quote means safe for the liberty of the people, unlike a standing army, or in the modern context, a standing police (in the sense of "law enforcement" rather than "peace officer") force or a police state.)

As horrifying as it is to contemplate, the next gunfight may not be at the O-K Corral;

Umm, the gunfight at the O-K Corral was, at least ostensibly, a law-enforcement action on the part of peace officers (details and gray areas aside). Does the author have a problem with peace officers being armed in the course of their duties?

Almost too easy. Shall we see what happens to crime statistics in Virginia over the next, say, six months and then revisit this hysterical nonsense?

The "OK Corral" and the "Wild West" are repeatedly invoked with horror by anti-gun zealots who know as little about those as they do about firearms. In point of fact, the bloodbaths that are always predicted somehow never materialize, but even so, we'd be very lucky to have crime rates as low as Tombstone or Dodge City in the "bad" old days.

Random thoughts - does the Consitution allow you to yell "MOVIE!" in a crowded firehouse?