http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080615/ap_on_go_su_co/scotus_what_s_left;_ylt=AhKnTMIr1Qhq_xVVQ47bVles0NUE

“The dispute over gun rights poses several important questions. Although the Second Amendment was ratified in 1791, the court has never definitively said what it means to have a right to keep and bear arms. The justices also could indicate whether, even with a strong statement in support of gun rights, Washington’s handgun ban and other gun control laws can be upheld.

Officials at the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence said recently that they expect Washington’s 32-year-old handgun ban to fall but believe that background checks, limits on large-volume gun sales and prohibitions on certain categories of weapons can survive.

In addition to the guns case, the justices are still weighing whether Exxon Mobil Corp. has to pay a $2.5 billion punitive damages judgment over the Exxon Valdez disaster in Alaska in 1989 and whether people convicted of raping children may be executed.

Also awaiting a decision is the case of a man sentenced to death in Louisiana after he was convicted of raping his 8-year-old stepdaughter. Only five states — Montana, Oklahoma, South Carolina and Texas are the others — allow executions for the rape of a child, but only Louisiana has imposed death sentences on people convicted of the crime.

The Supreme Court banned executions for rape in 1977 in a case in which the victim was an adult woman. The last executions for rape or any other crime that did not include a victim’s death were in 1964.”

Or the government, which is even worse.

However, that is a great example of why concealed carry saves lives. Excellent post!

Maybe if Japan allowed concealed carry some of the victims of the slasher with the kinife could have fought back and killed him before he killed others. Just sayin, gun/weapon free zones aren’t adhered to be crazed or sane gunmen intent on mayhem.

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/asia/article4094961.ece

http://www.rgj.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20080526/NEWS18/80526010

excerpt:
“…It was at this point that the second shooter, the Reno resident, produced a concealed handgun and proceeded to fire upon Villagomez who succumbed to his wounds. The Reno resident was in possession of a valid Concealed Carry Permit issued through the Washoe County Sheriff’s Office.

After further investigation as well as ongoing discussions with Humboldt County District Attorney Russell Smith, the decision was made that the shooting of Villagomez by the Reno man was a justifiable homicide as outlined in Nevada Revised Statute 200.120 and 200.160. Because of this the Reno man was released from police custody.”

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2008/06/04/BARR1138G6.DTL

I would rather be judged by 12 than carried by 6.

reader, my favorite, LOA: List of Acronyms

Quest, are you LYAO at reader’s 282?

After giving it a little more thought, I couldn’t agree with disarming men and arming women. I guess I have some strong feelings about men getting blamed for alot of problems that they too are ultimately victims of, and don’t think I can stand behind ignoring female violence, female spousal/partner abuse, female child abuse, etc. ad nauseum, not including women’s role in the commission of male crime (and yes I am speaking generally and know all about identifying with the captor and empowerment v. disempowerment etc. so please don’t bite me).

Bottom line, lots and lots of men have guns and don’t commit mass homicide. Women commit crime too.