Mississippi Passes New Gun Laws – Prevents Government Confiscation of Firearms

(Zinnfigur)

Under the Tsar, Russia was one of the most heavily armed societies on earth. That all changed when Stalin and the communists took control. Stalin was able to control, starve, punish and imprison a defenseless people… after he took their guns.  ✧ This week the Mississippi House passed a trio of gun laws yesterday preventing the government from seizing firearms during a state emergency, The Clarion Ledger reported.

Read more at Gateway Pundit Read More......

What does the 2nd Amendment mean?

Question: Does the Second Amendment give individuals the right to bear arms? Vote by clicking the link: USA Today 2nd Amendment Poll Read More......

In case Magaña runs again

In 2006 Mario E. Magaña (D), associate professor of electrical engineering and computer science at OSU, challenged Sen. Frank Morse (R-Incumbent) for the Dist. 8 Oregon State senate seat but failed. In case the professor runs for elected office again, it might be instructive to keep this OSU Barometer forum exchange on hand for a glimpse into Magaña’s rather smug outlook.

Political science senior, Lyndsey Shaver, wrote a letter to the editor (4/26/07 Issue of The Barometer) critical of an anti-violence rally held on the OSU campus following the Virginia Tech shooting where 32 innocent students lost their lives. Among other points, Shaver advocated rethinking the ‘right to carry’ ban on the VT campus. He wrote, “...work to give students the KNOWLEDGE and ABILITY to PROTECT THEMSELVES.”

Professor Magaña had every right to disagree with the Shaver opinion (only one opinion regarding VT on Thursday) but let’s look at how he did this in his 5/1/07 letter (h/t: Reece).

Response to last Thursday's letters - Use your brain

In the aftermath of the tragedy at Virginia Tech, I find it very hard to believe that college students, who in principle are supposed to be capable of performing minimally complex thinking, can express such absurd and ludicrous ideas, and even have the audacity of justifying them with arguments worthy of small minds.

Minimal analysis of the speed of motion of a projectile launched by a fire arm should lead to the inescapable conclusion that no human being is capable of outpacing it. Moreover, with today's modern semi and automatic weapons, which can be obtained legally even by the mentally deficient, can release projectiles at an incredibly high rate and the probability of multiple targets (humans) being hit in a very short period of time is extremely high. The idea that the best way to protect ourselves is by having everyone carry a gun is laughable at best, unless we are willing to live in a society "a la OK Corral".

After reading these letters, I also decided to take a close look at the famous second amendment to see if I could arrive at the same conclusion as those who claim that the founding fathers could foresee the future (perhaps with a crystal ball) and figured that the parameters of that era would remain unchanged after more than two hundred years! Unfortunately, regardless of how much I tried to bring myself down to their level of mental development, I could not!

The proponents of such irrational and illogical thinking that support uncontrolled gun possession should take a look at countries such as Spain and Germany to educate themselves about sensible gun ownership laws. The fact that we live in the most violent society earth today does not mean that we have accept it and keep it that way.

-Prof. Mario E. Magaña
School of EECS

Do we need more elitist's looking down their noses at 'the little people'? I don't think so. See also Was Cho Taught to Hate? Read More......

Signs of Intelligence?

National Review Online, April 20. 2007 - Fred Thompson wrote,

One of the things that's got to be going through a lot of peoples' minds now is how one man with two handguns, that he had to reload time and time again, could go from classroom to classroom on the Virginia Tech campus without being stopped. Much of the answer can be found in policies put in place by the university itself.

Virginia, like 39 other states, allows citizens with training and legal permits to carry concealed weapons. That means that Virginians regularly sit in movie theaters and eat in restaurants among armed citizens. They walk, joke, and rub shoulders everyday with people who responsibly carry firearms — and are far safer than they would be in San Francisco, Oakland, Detroit, Chicago, New York City, or Washington, D.C., where such permits are difficult or impossible to obtain.

The statistics are clear. Communities that recognize and grant Second Amendment rights to responsible adults have a significantly lower incidence of violent crime than those that do not. More to the point, incarcerated criminals tell criminologists that they consider local gun laws when they decide what sort of crime they will commit, and where they will do so.

Still, there are a lot of people who are just offended by the notion that people can carry guns around. They view everybody, or at least many of us, as potential murderers prevented only by the lack of a convenient weapon. Virginia Tech administrators overrode Virginia state law and threatened to expel or fire anybody who brings a weapon onto campus.

In recent years, however, armed Americans — not on-duty police officers — have successfully prevented a number of attempted mass murders. Evidence from Israel, where many teachers have weapons and have stopped serious terror attacks, has been documented. Supporting, though contrary, evidence from Great Britain, where strict gun controls have led to violent crime rates far higher than ours, is also common knowledge.

So Virginians asked their legislators to change the university's "concealed carry" policy to exempt people 21 years of age or older who have passed background checks and taken training classes. The university, however, lobbied against that bill, and a top administrator subsequently praised the legislature for blocking the measure.

The logic behind this attitude baffles me, but I suspect it has to do with a basic difference in worldviews. Some people think that power should exist only at the top, and everybody else should rely on "the authorities" for protection.

Despite such attitudes, average Americans have always made up the front line against crime. Through programs like Neighborhood Watch and Amber Alert, we are stopping and catching criminals daily. Normal people tackled "shoe bomber" Richard Reid as he was trying to blow up an airliner. It was a truck driver who found the D.C. snipers. Statistics from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention show that civilians use firearms to prevent at least a half million crimes annually.

When people capable of performing acts of heroism are discouraged or denied the opportunity, our society is all the poorer. And from the selfless examples of the passengers on Flight 93 on 9/11 to Virginia Tech professor Liviu Librescu, a Holocaust survivor who sacrificed himself to save his students earlier this week, we know what extraordinary acts of heroism ordinary citizens are capable of.

Many other universities have been swayed by an anti-gun, anti-self defense ideology. I respect their right to hold those views, but I challenge their decision to deny Americans the right to protect themselves on their campuses — and then proudly advertise that fact to any and all.

Whenever I've seen one of those "Gun-free Zone" signs, especially outside of a school filled with our youngest and most vulnerable citizens, I've always wondered exactly who these signs are directed at. Obviously, they don't mean much to the sort of man who murdered 32 people just a few days ago.

Fred Thompson is an actor and former United States senator from Tennessee. © ABC
See also: Hollywood vs. Iran by Fred Thompson

Read More......