pa2a.org


Share Thread:  
Conservative Jared Loughner Trial Judge in favor of Retroactive AWB
#1
this is scary coming from this guy...supposedly a conservative gun owner (which I bet are hunting rifles).


Editorial by Judge Burns who decided the Jared Loughner case.

I know this guy and its scary that he would go so far to ban all AR, AK variants.


A conservative case for an assault weapons ban
By Larry Alan Burns
December 20, 2012

Last month, I sentenced Jared Lee Loughner to seven consecutive life terms plus 140 years in federal prison for his shooting rampage in Tucson. That tragedy left six people dead, more than twice that number injured and a community shaken to its core.
Loughner deserved his punishment. But during the sentencing, I also questioned the social utility of high-capacity magazines like the one that fed his Glock. And I lamented the expiration of the federal assault weapons ban in 2004, which prohibited the manufacture and importation of certain particularly deadly guns, as well as magazines that can hold more than 10 rounds of ammunition.

The ban wasn't all that stringent — if you already owned a banned gun or high-capacity magazine you could keep it, and you could sell it to someone else — but at least it was something.
And it says something that half of the nation's deadliest shootings occurred after the ban expired, including the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Conn. It also says something that it has not even been two years since Loughner's rampage, and already six mass shootings have been deadlier.

I am not a social scientist, and I know that very smart ones are divided on what to do about gun violence. But reasonable, good-faith debates have boundaries, and in the debate about guns, a high-capacity magazine has always seemed to me beyond them.
Bystanders got to Loughner and subdued him only after he emptied one 31-round magazine and was trying to load another. Adam Lanza, the Newtown shooter, chose as his primary weapon a semiautomatic rifle with 30-round magazines. And we don't even bother to call the 100-rounder that James Holmes is accused of emptying in an Aurora, Colo., movie theater a magazine — it is a drum. How is this not an argument for regulating the number of rounds a gun can fire?

I get it. Someone bent on mass murder who has only a 10-round magazine or revolvers at his disposal probably is not going to abandon his plan and instead try to talk his problems out. But we might be able to take the "mass" out of "mass shooting," or at least make the perpetrator's job a bit harder.

To guarantee that there would never be another Tucson or Sandy Hook, we would probably have to make it a capital offense to so much as look at a gun. And that would create serious 2nd Amendment, 8th Amendment and logistical problems.
So what's the alternative? Bring back the assault weapons ban, and bring it back with some teeth this time. Ban the manufacture, importation, sale, transfer and possession of both assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Don't let people who already have them keep them. Don't let ones that have already been manufactured stay on the market. I don't care whether it's called gun control or a gun ban. I'm for it.

I say all of this as a gun owner. I say it as a conservative who was appointed to the federal bench by a Republican president. I say it as someone who prefers Fox News to MSNBC, and National Review Online to the Daily Kos. I say it as someone who thinks the Supreme Court got it right in District of Columbia vs. Heller, when it held that the 2nd Amendment gives us the right to possess guns for self-defense. (That's why I have mine.) I say it as someone who, generally speaking, is not a big fan of the regulatory state.
I even say it as someone whose feelings about the NRA mirror the left's feelings about Planned Parenthood: It has a useful advocacy function in our deliberative democracy, and much of what it does should not be controversial at all.

And I say it, finally, mindful of the arguments on the other side, at least as I understand them: that a high-capacity magazine is not that different from multiple smaller-capacity magazines; and that if we ban assault weapons and high-capacity magazines one day, there's a danger we would ban guns altogether the next, and your life might depend on you having one.

But if we can't find a way to draw sensible lines with guns that balance individual rights and the public interest, we may as well call the American experiment in democracy a failure.
There is just no reason civilians need to own assault weapons and high-capacity magazines. Gun enthusiasts can still have their venison chili, shoot for sport and competition, and make a home invader flee for his life without pretending they are a part of the SEAL team that took out Osama bin Laden.

It speaks horribly of the public discourse in this country that talking about gun reform in the wake of a mass shooting is regarded as inappropriate or as politicizing the tragedy. But such a conversation is political only to those who are ideologically predisposed to see regulation of any kind as the creep of tyranny. And it is inappropriate only to those delusional enough to believe it would disrespect the victims of gun violence to do anything other than sit around and mourn their passing. Mourning is important, but so is decisive action.
Congress must reinstate and toughen the ban on assault weapons and high-capacity magazines.
Larry Alan Burns is a federal district judge in San Diego
glocke12, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#2
Judge Burns can kiss my ASS!.
das, proud to be a member of pa2a.org since Sep 2012.
Reply
#3
So this fuck stick wants to make it harder for a mass murderer to kill?

So he admits he is an asswipe right there IMO.

And his comment also is a perfect example of why the whole thought process he is spewing is ignorant:
If ten rounds makes it more difficult for a murderer to kill, it also makes it more difficult for someone to defend themselves using his "logic".
Some people need to read this book: http://www.amazon.com/dp/1936976021/ref=...jwbZH1GAZF

Reply
#4
So much fail in that rant. For one, we're not a democracy. Two, James Holmes didn't empty the AR in the theatre. It jammed almost immediately and he did the vast majority of the damage with a shotgun and a pair of Glocks.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
Reply
#5
Quote:federal district judge in San Diego

And it was George W Bush who appointed him. If we can call this phoney a "conservative", then I can call my turds taffee.

This guy is a statist, a RINO. he can kiss it.
[Image: incubi+INK.jpg]. ABC,CBS,NBC,CNN no diff
Reply
#6
I wouldn't mind if this traitor felt 6 feet of dirt on his face. Idiot.
Soldats ! Faites votre devoir ! Droit au cœur mais épargnez le visage. Feu !
Reply
#7
Spacemanvic;57198 Wrote:
Quote:federal district judge in San Diego

And it was George W Bush who appointed him. If we can call this phoney a "conservative", then I can call my turds taffee.

This guy is a statist, a RINO. he can kiss it.

Well that goes with gwb saying he would sign an awb if it landed on his desk!
Reply
#8
ExcelToExcel;57249 Wrote:
Spacemanvic;57198 Wrote:And it was George W Bush who appointed him. If we can call this phoney a "conservative", then I can call my turds taffee.

This guy is a statist, a RINO. he can kiss it.

Well that goes with gwb saying he would sign an awb if it landed on his desk!

I don't know either way if GWB would have signed a renewed AWB but when he made the comments, he knew the chances of one hitting his desk were basically nil. I wouldn't have been suprised if he pulled that out of his ass in an attempt to get votes. It was an election year.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
Reply
#9
Warpt762x39;57262 Wrote:
ExcelToExcel;57249 Wrote:Well that goes with gwb saying he would sign an awb if it landed on his desk!

I don't know either way if GWB would have signed a renewed AWB but when he made the comments, he knew the chances of one hitting his desk were basically nil. I wouldn't have been suprised if he pulled that out of his ass in an attempt to get votes. It was an election year.

Simply amazing how you guys makes excuses. He said it, you know he said it, but ehhhhhh he was trying to get votes. Mind boggling. Do you know what happens when we make excuses for them? Look at my sig..
Reply
#10
Not making excuses. I don't know either way what he would have done had a renewed AWB hit his desk. That's just the impression I got when he said he would sign one. Congress had already made it clear they had no intention of renewing it. It was just before an election fight against John Kerry who was very anti gun. It may have been an attempt to try and steal some of the pro gun control votes. Again, I don't know. This is just what I got out of it.
Interdum feror cupidine partium magnarum Europae vincendarum
Reply






Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  School Filtering Out Conservative Web Results, Leaving Liberal Sites Untouched das 3 1,040 06-19-2014, 06:04 PM
Last Post: das
  Judge drops charges against man for violating NY SAFE Act 7-round magazine limit middlefinger 0 641 03-02-2014, 10:00 AM
Last Post: middlefinger
  BREAKING: NY Federal Judge Strips 7-10 Rule from NYS Gun Law ArcticSplash 8 1,335 01-01-2014, 06:15 PM
Last Post: Philadelphia Patriot
  Judge rules guns ok in USPS parking lots.... nomad 17 1,800 10-08-2013, 11:10 AM
Last Post: twency
  Delaware Senate Bill 37 (AWB) Emoticon 4 1,097 04-05-2013, 02:19 AM
Last Post: panopticonisi



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)

Software by MyBB, © 2002-2015 MyBB Group.
Template by Modogodo Design.