PDA

View Full Version : Madison, WI newspaper compares gun rights to civil rights…huh?



old Grump
10-10-2010, 02:10 PM
Dave Workman (http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-seattle/dave-workman)

Seattle Gun Rights Examiner (http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-seattle/dave-workman)



The headline says it all about the disconnect some people in the press have about gun rights: “Is struggle for gun rights like the one for civil rights?”

Note to headline writer: Hey, bonehead, the right to keep and bear arms is a civil right. Same as the rights of free speech, freedom of religion, the free press (you are familiar with that one, correct?). Does the Bill of rights ring a bell with you? The Second Amendment is right in there with the First, Third, Fourth, Fifth and so forth right up to the Tenth Amendment. Your headline makes it seem like gun rights are somehow different from other rights, and they are not. The right to own (keep) a firearm and carry (bear) it has the same weight as the right to remain silent, and the right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures.

Note to writer Steven E.lbow, who bylined the story (http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/govt_and_politics/article_9fa0c010-cf48-11df-ad8f-001cc4c03286.html)in the Madison-based Capital Times: You’ve written a reasonably understandable piece that touches lots of bases and holds the reader’s interest, though it seems to focus on open carry problems in Wisconsin as though they were unique. The piece even quotes my esteemed colleague, fellow Gun Rights Examiner John Pierce.

Wisconsin’s gun rights situation is not unique. As noted here (http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-seattle/guns-make-people-nervous)the other day, gun owners – and especially folks who openly carry their sidearms – face problems elsewhere, including right here in Washington State. Some in the open carry crowd may be self-convinced their struggle is unique, but that is hardly the case. Their specific issue is just the latest manifestation of a much broader gun rights movement that dates back decades. And for the Madison headline writer’s edification, the gun rights struggle is a civil rights struggle.
“The more we have in the way of funding, the more aggressive we can be. We’re a nation of laws, and many of our laws are constitutionally questionable in the wake of the McDonald ruling. We need to challenge those laws in court and strengthen our Second Amendment protections.”—SAF Executive Vice President Alan Gottlieb


The notorious Black Codes of the 19th Century were designed, among other things, to prevent free blacks from having guns. (It’s easier for racist hooded thugs to terrorize unarmed people than it is burn someone’s farm or lynch them if they’re shooting at you.) Gun laws in the Northeast were thinly disguised efforts to keep immigrants, especially from southern Europe, disarmed and thus reinforce the power of the Tammany Hall types and their supporters. Alan Gottlieb and I wrote about this in two books, These Dogs Don’t Hunt: The Democrats’ War on Guns (http://www.amazon.com/These-Dogs-Dont-Hunt-Democrats/dp/0936783559), and Assault on Weapons: The Campaign to Eliminate Your Guns (http://www.amazon.com/Assault-Weapons-Campaign-Eliminate-Your/dp/0936783605/ref=pd_sim_b_1).

During the recent Gun Rights Policy Conference in San Francisco, Gottlieb recalled to a packed audience that in the early days of the conference, he determined that for the gun rights movement to be successful, it had to be modeled after the civil rights movement of the 1960s. This calls for diversity in the gun rights movement and an understanding that there is strength in numbers.

That doesn’t mean the gun rights struggle is somehow different from other civil rights efforts. To paraphrase one of my favorite lines of dialogue from one of the best movies ever filmed – Richard Brooks’ The Professionals (http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0060862/)with Lee Marvin and Burt Lancaster – “Maybe there’s only one civil rights struggle, since the beginning. The good guys against the bad guys….”

The good guys are those pushing for all civil rights, including the right to keep and bear arms.

This battle is waged on several different fronts. One level is the open carry movement, which has been in headlines lately around here following an incident in Spanaway.
“Everyone knows what a boycott is. We’re unveiling a venue for gun rights activists to start a ‘BUYcott.’ By shopping on-line with the SAF Store, gun owners can directly support critical Second Amendment legal actions and be part of our effort to restore gun rights one lawsuit at a time.”—Alan Gottlieb


The “bigger picture” effort right now is in the courts, with the Bellevue-based Second Amendment Foundation (http://www.saf.org/)leading the way with several legal actions, in Maryland, North Carolina, New York’s Westchester County and in Chicago. The latter case is a study in government demagoguery, pitting the SAF and Illinois State Rifle Association (http://www.isra.org/)– they teamed up to win this year’s McDonald v. City of Chicago federal lawsuit that extended the Second Amendment to the states – against the Daley administration’s attempt to dance around the Supreme Court’s ruling. The National Rifle Association (http://www.nra.org/)has also filed suit against Chicago over the same issue, but their case is in a different court and seems to be on a much slower track than the SAF/ISRA case.

Lawsuits take money, and to that end, SAF has just announced (http://www.saf.org/viewpr-new.asp?id=343)the on-line “SAF Store,” which offers thousands of hunting and shooting related products, videos and books for sale. Revenues from sales will support SAF legal efforts. Because gun rights have been eroded for more than 50 years, one can reasonably anticipate that there is a mountain of litigation over the horizon.
http://www.examiner.com/gun-rights-in-seattle/madison-wi-newspaper-compares-gun-rights-to-civil-rights-huh?cid=examiner-email


I see one major difference:

The good guys are those pushing for all civil rights, including the right to keep and bear arms. If we were as strident and as obnoxious as the Gay Rights activists or the Pro Choice activists they would declare war on us and we would all be having to get our sunshine piped in to us. Among the liberals there is only one way to describe a civil right. Do THEY approve of it. If not then its obviously not a civil right and shame on us.

I suppose that is why they call us politically incorrect.

aliceinchains
10-10-2010, 06:36 PM
Right ,the good guys should be pushing for everyones civil rights.


Not special rights like what is going on now.