Scum of the Girth: Proposed gun amendment to La. Constitution goes too far
New Orleans had 199 homicides in 2011, making it America’s most deadly city. The three years prior, saw an average of 175 murders annually, according to The Times-Picayune.
Baton Rouge averaged 30 murders for every 100,000 people in 2011, placing seventh on the nationwide list.
A proposed amendment to the state constitution making its way through the legislature would make guns easier to get. Simple as that.
Really not quite simple as that. The requirement now to purchase a firearm are that you are not a prohibited person. Persons who make the prohibited list are felons and wife beaters. SB303 would change none of that.
The lawmakers can call it protecting the Second Amendment, as if the government would ever be crazy enough to try to disarm citizens. The only reason disarmament worked in the U.K. is because the British prefer to beat and stab each other.
I see you've put very little fact checking into your little article. It must be an opinion piece. You've obviously forgot about the unlawful gun confiscation during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Yep, that's the same hurricane when the NOPD were killing people in cold blood. It makes you wonder why they wanted the population unarmed.
Although the US has a higher murder rate than the UK, the UK has a violent crime rate 5 times that of the US. Disarmament only worked in the UK to allow a safer working environment for the rapist and robbers.
The proposed amendment could go so far as to allow guns in churches and schools.
Has anyone ever sat in church and been disappointed they left their pistol at home? Do people actually do that?
Had anyone done the slightest little bit of fact checking, they would know about the recent incident in which a church memeber with a concealed carry permit disarmed a man with a shotgun in church in S.C.
Giving ordinary citizens the right to essentially “play police” after an afternoon or two of training is ludicrous.
The Constitutional amendment gives no policing authority to the citizens of Louisiana, it merely protects the citizens' right to keep and bear arms. In the state of Louisiana, citizens can openly carry firearms without any type of permit (the way it should be) and carry concealed weapons with a permit. SB 303 does not change that.
I recently received an e-mail from a gentleman from New Hampshire. He gave me the link to a Fox News story about a female student in Nevada who was sexually assaulted walking to her car on her university campus late at night.The woman had a concealed weapons license but was not allowed to carry the weapon on campus.
What do you say to something like this? Obviously, we all wish this woman had been carrying her handgun at the time. This is a situation when lethal force is needed for a person to protect herself. But if we allow this woman to carry a gun on campus, we have to allow everyone else to do the same. That includes individuals like Anders Breivik, the Virginia Tech shooters and the clock tower sniper from the University of Texas.
With the laws currently in place, it’s still possible for a shooter to easily come to campus. So why amend the constitution to make their job easier?
These people that you mentioned were in violation of the laws the moment they stepped foot on campus (except Charles Whitman, I don't think it was in violation of the law to carry a firearm on campus). The law and "no guns" sign did nothing to prevent these people from killing. What could have stopped them is if just one student or faculty member would have been carry a firearm.
It's not hard for someone intent on killing his classmates to conceal a firearm and carry on campus, SB303 wouldn't make it easier or harder.
Why make it so an individual in plain clothes with a holstered revolver no longer stands out as unusual? We have to find a balance. Instances like the one in Nevada should never occur because a person cannot adequately protect themselves. That being said, we cannot toss a Glock 9mm at anyone who wants it.
I have never read or heard of a person who was openly carrying a firearm to go on a shooting spree on school campus. When a person openly carries a firearm, he is noticed. This is why, even though it's legal to openly carry a firearm, criminals tend to conceal theirs.
If the constitution is amended, which I believe it likely will be, the state must take measures to protect the rights of those who do not carry guns equally as much as they protect the rights of those who pack heat on the daily.
I absolutely agree. When was the last time you had to show identification to purchase a pen? I have to show an Id every time I purchase a firearm. If you're in the park writing notes, you'll never be questioned by the police, if I'm sitting in the park, you bet a police officer will want to talk to me to ask why I'm carrying a firearm.
Lengthier and more thorough training is needed for individuals who wish to carry a concealed weapon, along with a more intensive psychological examination.
There is no data to indicate that the training requirement for a concealed license is lacking in any manner. Had you done any fact checking, you would have known that.
We must keep guns out of the classroom and preferably off campus entirely. If students feel unsafe on campus, I advise them to make use of non-lethal projectile weapons, like taser guns or mace.You'll never keep guns out of the classroom or off campus entirely. The moment someone decides to go on a killing spree is the moment your 'gun free zone' sign failed.
Raping or robbing anyone should be the most dangerous activity a person should take part in. Shooting them with a Taser or pepper spray may not be effective. There are plenty of news reports of Tasers not being effective in the hands of the police, imagine how bad it could turn out without a back up weapon.
Instead of Student Government spending time and money establishing a campus-wide recycling program or rerouting a drunk bus to downtown, maybe they should work to have panic buttons installed across campus or improve LSUPD’s late-night presence.
Yes, because when seconds count, the police are always minutes away. Why not just let the citizens protect themselves?
Gun rights are not in jeopardy. Citizens will forever have the right to compensate for their inadequate sexual abilities with a jet black semi-automatic.
Now you just sunk from being an misinformed 'columnist' to an anti-rights bigot.
The Second Amendment gives citizens “the right to keep and bear arms.”
Correction, the Second Amendment doesn't give a citizen rights, it protects inalienable rights that are granted by birth.
Nowhere does it say “all the damn time.”
Nor does it say "part time" but it does say "Shall Not Be Infringed"