HARTFORD, Conn., July 1, 2008
FBI Head Wary Of High Court's Gun Ruling
Campus Safety Could Be Jeopardized, Director Says Of Landmark 2nd Amendment Case
-
Photo
FBI Director Robert Mueller (AP)
-
Interactive
Crime Beat
Statistics and specifics on crime in America.
Speaking at a convention of the International Association of Campus Law Enforcement Administrators in Hartford, Mueller said the ruling "does throw a lot of things up in the air."
By a 5-4 vote last week, the nation's highest court struck down the District of Columbia's 32-year-old ban on handguns, the first major pronouncement on gun rights in history. It upheld the right for communities to license guns.
Mueller said communities will have to determine their own license programs. As a former Marine who served in Vietnam, he said "I tend to believe weapons harm people and more often than not they harm the people carrying them."
With his grandchildren going to college, Mueller said he hopes "those campuses will be weapons free."
Mueller said the FBI's top priority remains counterterrorism, counter-intelligence and protecting the secrets of the United States.
He said college campuses and small communities could be "potential incubators of terrorism" even while major cities such as New York and Los Angeles remain primary targets for terrorists.
"The fact is we can't rule out any community in the United States as a potential incubator of terrorism," Mueller said.
© MMVIII The Associated Press. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 66 CommentsAnd the more oppressive the police and government become, the more likely they are to do so.
The FBI has a long history of suppressing dissent, including provoking and sponsoring violence at anti-Vietnam war demonstrations to give the cops a chance to use their weapons.
As a Roman said millenia ago, "who will guard the guardians?"
Over the last 15 or so years, the FBI went from being a first rate law enforcment agency to something that scares many LEOs. Their organization went from superb investigations and flawless arrests to obscure investigations and dubious arrests, some using unnessary deadly force tactics that would embarass the most hardened of agents. I am embarassed for that once great law enforcment organization and those who made it so. From a former LEO.
I wonder if they have heard the term "freedom isnt easy"
Posted by JFurmage71 at 10:33 AM : Jul 01, 2008
I think you are mis-characterizing the Director of the FBI and you should care what this position thinks on recent rulings that affect law enforcement. You like this Supreme Court ruling but in 2, 4 or 6 years it can be reversed and this is the very person who will be protecting your arse...
Posted by IOWEIGN
Posted by diatreme at 11:13 AM : Jul 01, 2008
I am all for gun ownership but up to a point. Are you advocating violence because you do not get your way ??
Wrong. The court expressly declined to rule on that issue at all. On p. 59, the majority wrote that *** Heller had said he was OK with licensing, and "We therefore assume that petitioners'' issuance of a license will satisfy respondent''s prayer for relief and do not address the licensing requirement."
"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."
All rights are granted in the Constitution with no predetermined order of importance. When everybody is exercising their rights, we will inevitably step on one another''s toes. The practical result is that we have to accept a less than full enjoyment of these rights at any given time, even with those rights that are considered ''inalienable'' to a free man.
The above passage lays out the basis for the right to bear arms, as a guarantee the people have a means to resist tyranny and in this context, it is ascendant over other rights. But one must ask if the ownership of a gun or lack thereof materially changes that guarantee. If so, the Court must make this finding. And if not, then the right to own a gun must rest on a different basis. To assume that there is such a basis when the Constitution does not present any constitutes the creation of a right where none exists, something that should reverberate loudly in the mental confines of the Court''s conservative majority.
Posted by diatreme at 11:23 AM : Jul 01, 2008
The pen is mightier than the sword - vote wisely...
cool - I hope they pass it. I will call my reps and urge them to pass it. Thanks for the heads up.
And he does not welcome the prospect that the ruling will more forcefully oblige mayors and governors across the nation to focus on improving the Criminal Justice System rather that simply scapegoat the citizens , as if gunownership undermines the criminal justice processes!
it is not hard to forecast a reduction in violence acrossed the USA from the increased accountability and challenge to our leaders to do a better job!
A lot of official pretenciousness is going to be much more difficult to pull off now, even if the news media ramps up the discrimination campaign against fire arms owners (which we must expect).
If only we had leaders today of the caliber of the founding fathers!
The tone of our FBI director suggests the posibility that his comments came threw a HOSTILE interview or press conference.
The battle for freedom with public safety has only begun. The news media wants to play as if it''s simply the referee, but it will be an activist referee!
You absolutely currect. In perspective, "the right to bare arms," was in response to the war of independence, prior British rule and indian attacks. Its outdated law and the Courts did not interpret the standard of living and society. It is not 1776, but 2008.
Posted by zoe2006 at 11:41 AM : Jul 01, 2008
I agree it''s outdated. How can you fight tanks, stealth fighters, 5,000-pound bunker busters with guns? It doesn''t make any sense at all. The only use for guns is for people to kill each other.
Posted by ratman617
In most developed countries, you don''t have an automatic right to own or carry guns. They all live in less violent societies than ours. What kind of "freedom" are you talking about when people are scared to go out at night in many places in the US, because of gun violence. Why is it that Americans can never see the connection between availability of guns and gun violence?? To the rest of the world, it is so obvious.
Well the Vietnamese and the Afghanis, seem to do a pretty good job of it with little more than small arms. The Vietnamese fought "the world''s most powerful military" to a standstill, and the Afghanis played a serious role in the collapse of the Soviet Union.
I grew up in a very rural, isolated area of this country. Back in the 1950''s we depended on the annual hunt for sustenance. I still know people who live in those areas who still count on the hunt for sustenance.
Ranchers use their guns to protect livestock from wild animals.
I have been told by a native Alaskan that in that state which depends on private planes for transportation and delivery of supplies, that it is unwise and not recommended to plan a trip in a small plane without taking a weapon. If the plane goes down, how would the pilot and passengers protect themselves from animals, or if stranded out in the wilderness, how would they sustain themselves?
There are a number of valid reasons why private gun ownership should be protected as a right under the constitution, but the number one reason was the first one I cited. I don''t want our society to become a society where only "officials," the military, and government can own weapons.
Posted by excoachken
Congratulations, and then you can sit back with your arms folded while the Messiah, Obama, fixes everything for you.
We should also ban baseball bats, sticks, rocks, lead pipes, candlesticks, rolling pins, frying pans, bathtubs, swimming pools, vehicles, hat pins, wire of any kind, bare hands, bare feet, chairs, lamps, plastic bags, pillows, duck tape, ropes, poisons of all kinds including cleaning agents, gasoline, matches, battery acid, glass, razors, knives, and probably a lot of things I haven''t thougt up this morning.
Thugs who want to terrorize people for power and control will find other ways when they no longer have the use of guns.
Yes, then we can all sit back and fold our arms while Obama fixes everything. Personally, I can''t wait for the social programs for people on lower income. I will retire, and let the government take care of me.
The Supreme Court is responsible for interpreting laws, and determining if they are consistent with the Constitution.
In a long awaited landmark decision, the Supreme Court has upheld the 2nd Amendment as it was originally written and intended, that The People have an individual right to keep and bear arms. This right existed prior to the Constitution. It was not granted by the 2nd Amendment. It is guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment.
As clearly stated in the majority opinion, it is not the prerogative of the Supreme Court to declare the 2nd Amendment extinct. To do so would be an act of judicial activism. Their duty was, and is, to interpret the meaning of the Constitution, as it was written, in the context of when it was written.
To all those who are opposed to the court%u2019s decision, I would first urge you to read the decision in its entirety. It really is interesting. If, after having read and comprehending the decision, you are still opposed to the 2nd Amendment, you are welcome to exercise your constitutional right to petition for a new constitutional amendment.
Neither the Supreme Court nor the NRA or anyone else endorses or in any way promotes the unlawful possession or misuse of guns. To suggest otherwise is dishonest and irresponsible. What needs to be controlled in this country is criminal behavior, not the lawful exercise of our constitutional rights.
I do not believe that the majority of the people in this country are liberals. While the liberals may be some of the loudest, they are not the majority.
Who is this idiot in charge of the FBI? We the people have the right to have weapons. Considering we could end up under Marshall law, have rioting in the streets because there is no food due to the high cost of gas and distribution issues, I should think every home would want a rifle to protect themselves with. Or does the Government plan on taking them away when this happens?
Check out Directive 51. What do you think will happen when Israel bombs Iran?
The day that criminals and law enforcement and oppressive governments everywhere alike all decide to lay down their guns and conduct their daily business with paintball guns, count law abiding citizens in with them.
"The fact is we can''t rule out any community in the United States as a potential incubator of terrorism,"
And that would include the FBI I suppose. No offense intended but they''re his words, not mine. Time for a reality check on this kind of thinking in general regarding our fellow Americans - perhaps the fear felt in government circles, when it reaches the point that encompasses anyone and everyone, is the result of that thing others may refer to as their consciouses speaking to them? Most assuredly, there are crackpots out there, just as there are working in the public sector. Some even seem to get elected to public office, or appointed to office by other their crackpot friends. Hey I''m just saying...
The day that criminals and law enforcement and oppressive governments everywhere alike all decide to lay down their guns and conduct their daily business with paintball guns, count law abiding citizens in with them.
"The fact is we can''t rule out any community in the United States as a potential incubator of terrorism,"
And that would include the FBI I suppose. No offense intended but they''re his words, not mine. Time for a reality check on this kind of thinking in general regarding our fellow Americans - perhaps the fear felt in government circles, when it reaches the point that encompasses anyone and everyone, is the result of that thing others may refer to as their consciouses speaking to them? Most assuredly, there are crackpots out there, just as there are working in the public sector. Some even seem to get elected to public office, or appointed to office by other their crackpot friends. Hey I''m just saying...
"I, Robert, Slack jawed, communist, pinko, Mueller, do solemnly swear to support, uphold and defend the CONSTITUTION OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA against all enemies, foreign and domestic, to obey the lawful orders and directives of those appointed before and above me, and that I
enter into this office without any mental reservation whatsoever, so help me GOD."
That''s ALL of the Constitution, not just the parts he agrees with.
- 1
- 2
- next
See all 66 Comments