PDA

View Full Version : Question for Ken Klukowski on Second Amendment?


Foghlai
02-16-2012, 1:43 PM
Hey Guys,

We are having guest Ken Klukowski speaking over here at Chapman University School of Law tonight on second amendment issues. Any question you want me to ask him?

Erik

OleCuss
02-16-2012, 2:02 PM
I'd be interested in hearing the response to something like, "The SCOTUS has recognized (as incorporated) the individual right to keep and bear arms as specified in the Bill of Rights. This being the case, why is the RKBA still treated radically differently than is the right to Free Speech?"

Oh, and I think he could be very interesting. If I were anywhere close by I'd be asking if I could sit in to listen.

Librarian
02-16-2012, 2:15 PM
?

Ken Klukowski?

Maybe this guy: http://www.frc.org/biography/ken-klukowski-director-of-the-center-for-religious-liberty ?

Foghlai
02-16-2012, 2:24 PM
?

Ken Klukowski?

Maybe this guy: http://www.frc.org/biography/ken-klukowski-director-of-the-center-for-religious-liberty ?

That's the one. He has written a few amicus curiae in some of the seminal second amendment cases.

bwiese
02-16-2012, 2:46 PM
Oh gawd. An FRCer.

Prob someone who wanted due Process incorporation instead of under P&I to stop those pesky gays from getting married.

Gray Peterson
02-16-2012, 4:49 PM
He'll believe gun rights can be taken away based on behavior, believes Lawrence v. Texas should be overturned, and believes Congress can jurisdiction strip, which would allow an anti gun Congress to stop all 2A litigation cold.

No way in hell can he be truly pro gun. The statist worldview of FRC is clearly anti liberty.

Foghlai
02-16-2012, 6:07 PM
I have to agree with Bill and Gray. It was interesting to hear him speak, he mostly gave a background history of the amendment (for those not familiar with it) and had a good Q and A, but yes for overall tone those beliefs were pretty evident.

Wherryj
02-17-2012, 11:17 AM
I'd be interested in hearing the response to something like, "The SCOTUS has recognized (as incorporated) the individual right to keep and bear arms as specified in the Bill of Rights. This being the case, why is the RKBA still treated radically differently than is the right to Free Speech?"

Oh, and I think he could be very interesting. If I were anywhere close by I'd be asking if I could sit in to listen.

The second amendment isn't treated 'radically different' than the first. The main issue is that firearms ownership is still a minority. Ownership of a mouth is nearly universal.

That makes it a bit more controversial when it comes to government control. Government needs to procede with far more caution and less haste. Rest assured, any government feels at least as strongly about the right to free speech as they do about the right to bear arms. Inconvenient ideas can be just as dangerous to despots as the weapons themselves.

lhecker51
02-17-2012, 12:01 PM
The second amendment isn't treated 'radically different' than the first. The main issue is that firearms ownership is still a minority. Ownership of a mouth is nearly universal.

That makes it a bit more controversial when it comes to government control. Government needs to procede with far more caution and less haste. Rest assured, any government feels at least as strongly about the right to free speech as they do about the right to bear arms. Inconvenient ideas can be just as dangerous to despots as the weapons themselves.

Very true although I would say that ideas can be much more dangerous than any physical weapon we can create.