More CSGV deception

It seems that the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence has been on an advertising blitz regarding the Second Amendment debates back in the 1780s. Their claim is that openly carrying handguns was never debated regarding the Second Amendment. (They also cling to their interpretation that the 2A only refers to militia service and we all know that's been settled at the Supreme Court level).

Individuals carrying handguns in public was never so much as mentioned in debates over 2nd Amdt.

Another Student reaction to SB303

LSUReveille has another response to SB 303. This time by one of its 'columnists'.


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"

CSGV Bill of Rights Fail

Oh, my word. These Asshats just don't give up making fools of themselves. This is the latest from the CSGV facebook page.

"...Furthermore, not all the amendments in the Bill of Rights deal with individual rights."

What? Here's the slim skinny on the Bill of Rights. It's all about the Individual's rights. Don't believe me? Here we go

I Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances. [Yep, that's a right of the individual]

II A well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed. [yep, another right of the individual]

III No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law. [Protecting the Individual Homeowner.]

IV The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause, supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized. [another individual right]

V No person shall be held to answer for a capital, or otherwise infamous crime, unless on a presentment or indictment of a Grand Jury, except in cases arising in the land or naval forces, or in the militia, when in actual service in time of war or public danger; nor shall any person be subject for the same offense to be twice put in jeopardy of life or limb; nor shall be compelled in any criminal case to be a witness against himself, nor be deprived of life, liberty, or property, without due process of law; nor shall private property be taken for public use without just compensation. [person, that must be an Individual]

VI In all criminal prosecutions, the accused [an Individual] shall enjoy the right to a speedy and public trial, by an impartial jury of the State and district wherein the crime shall have been committed, which district shall have been previously ascertained by law, and to be informed of the nature and cause of the accusation; to be confronted with the witnesses against him; to have compulsory process for obtaining witnesses in his favor, and to have the assistance of counsel for his defense.

VII In suits at common law, where the value in controversy shall exceed twenty dollars, the right of trial by jury [for the defendant, an Individual] shall be preserved, and no fact tried by a jury shall be otherwise reexamined in any court of the United States, than according to the rules of the common law.

VIII Excessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. [referring to a defendant, an Individual]

IX The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people. [not a collective right, the Individual right]

X The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people. [the states are the collective, so the people but be Individuals]

Hey, Asshats, the Bill of Rights is ALL ABOUT THE INDIVIDUAL, you know, THE PEOPLE.

What say you?