Is this what Tom Coburn wanted? Shots fired at Holocaust Museum in D.C.

[wndycty]

Isn't the Holocaust Museum considered a US PARK?

(CBS) Gun shots were fired at the United States Holocaust Memorial Museum in Washington, D.C. Wednesday, FBI officials confirmed to CBS News.

D.C. police were at the scene responding to reports of gunfire, local authorities told CBS News.

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2009/06/10/national/main5077874.shtml

[konnichi wa]

1. No it isn't. Coburn is wrong about most things but to suggest he supports this kind of thing

is pure stupidity.

[wndycty]

2. It is actually protected by the US Parks Police so it could very well mean that. . .

. . .the shooter did not break any laws by bringing a gun in to the Museum I am sure we will find out soon.

[konnichi wa]

3. The law you appear to be thinking of does not go into effect for 7 months

but facts don't much matter, as I've noticed, to gun grabbers.

[wndycty]

4. Oh I am gun a grabber?

Not wanting guns in National Parks makes me a gun grabber, despite the fact that I support the 2nd amendment?

[konnichi wa]

5. I merely made an observation. It was nothing personal.

It's one of those 'if the shoe fits' things.

[wndycty]

6. The shoe doesn't fit. . .explain to me how not wanting guns in National Parks. . .

. . .makes one a gun grabber. If you are going to throw out the accusation I would like to think you would back it up. Would you acknowledge that wanting sane and sensible gun laws does not make one a gun grabber.

[Howardx]

10. make sure that while you are being called a "gun grabber"

you dont call anyone a gun nut, they dont like that.

[konnichi wa]

12. Really? I thought everyone liked to be called a nut.

:eyes:

[Howardx]

14. keep thinking genius

you'll get the hang of it soon.

[konnichi wa]

19. Who could ever counter such a cogent argument?

jeezus...
:eyes:

[konnichi wa]

13. Look...YOU are the one who started out the thread with an idiotic strawman

concerning Coburn. Don't get all sensitive when someone else continues the trend.

[wndycty]

16. Its an idiotic strawman? The issue of guns in National Parks is relevant. . .

. . .even though it appears this is not a National Park it does really drive home how idiotic the concept of allowing guns in National Parks is, so it is no strawman argument.

[konnichi wa]

18. No. Your implicit suggestion was that Coburn wanted someone shot.

Go ahead and deny it if you want, but the transparency was all too obvious. Maybe it was just ill-advised snark but either way you needed to be called on it and I won't apologize for doing so.

[notesdev]

17. This is how

The 2nd Amendment reads "shall not be infringed". Not "shall not be infringed except in certain circumstances".

Consider the impact if other unalienable rights were also subject to the same restrictions. No freedom of speech in parks? No freedom to assemble? No right to a jury trial if you are charged with a crime in a national park (actually no need to even charge someone with a crime, since the Constitution doesn't seem to apply to national parks, according to that line of thought).

[11 Bravo]

9. I own two long guns, two handguns, and have hunted for 46 years. I don't want guns in national parks

Am I a "gun grabber" as well?

[konnichi wa]

11. I'm not a mind reader. I did not accuse anyone in particular, I simply made an observation

why that is so difficult to grasp, I can't imagine.
Are you of the opinion that nobody ever went into a national park with a gun? I sure as hell hope not...
because it's hard to imagine anyone could be that naive.

[11 Bravo]

15. "Are you of the opinion that nobody ever went into a national park with a gun?"

Umm ... did I say that ... or anything like that? Because it's hard to imagine anyone could be so devoid of reading comprehension skills.

[konnichi wa]

21. Poseur

I don't believe you.
Adios

[11 Bravo]

23. I'm crushed.

An anonymous newbie stain doesn't believe me. How can I go on?

And "konnichi wa" is an anagram for "A no win hick". Coincidence? I think not.

[jpak]

20. If someone enters a national park with a gun - the feds should grab it

and keep it

National Parks are not shooting ranges or hunt clubs.

Guns have no business there.

Grab away...

:D

[brendan120678]

7. If the shooter is legally allowed to carry a firearm in the District...

and if the museum falls into the category of a National Park, then it could possibly be argued that no laws were broken by carrying the firearm into the museum. The fact that people were shot, however, makes the actions obviously illegal.

[wndycty]

8. Right, and the ability for the prosecutors to pile on the gun possession charge. . .

. . .might be off the table.

[aikoaiko]

22. probably not because Coburn's law hasn't gone into effect yet

and when it does carrying in a national park will still be controlled by the state laws in which the park resides. For example, if the park is in the DC, then people would have to follow the DC law which is, if I remember correctly, very limited. I'm pretty sure that nonleo civilians cannot carry (concealed or open in DC). So no, this is not what anyone wanted.

What it may highlight is that people with malice will find a way to bring guns into parks and its only reasonable to let law-abiding folks be able to carry to defend themselves from these people.

[konnichi wa]

24. Yeah...since national parks have historically been 'gun-free zones' we all know for sure that

nobody ever went into one with a gun. I think there may actually be idiots who believe that. :eyes:
(I take a gun with me every time I go to Jamaica...and declare it on the customs form...nobody has ever said boo)
\

[aikoaiko]

25. Reminds me of the time when I was teaching my college class and mentioned that it was illegal

to carry a firearm on to campus (GA state law), and a female student in the front row exclaimed, "Really!", and clutched her purse.

But there is no need to criminalize her for carrying a weapon for self-defense as there is no reason to criminalize other law abiding folks who wish to carry in nat. parks.