[nabs-l] an interesting question

Fri Sep 11 23:51:50 UTC 2009

That is an excellent point Joe. In my opinion your statement if we have 
responsibility before we have rights means it is are responsibility to 
properly utilize and not abuse are rights. But there is nothing said about 
giving different rights to different people. Attempting to deny someone 
something for any difference actual or perceived is an infringement on there 
civil rights. That is the core of the matter.

In response to your comment on joining the armed forces I submit that there 
is no reason that a blind person couldn't do most non combat jobs in the 
military. In the military there is a lot of support and technical positions 
that are similar to many of the jobs blind people perform every day in both 
the public and private sector.

This thread about firearms and the blind has generated so much chatter that 
I am wondering if there is any interest in starting a blind shooting sports 
list to discuss the sport of recreational shooting further. If you are 
interested in starting such a list feel free to email me off list at 
kramc11 at gmail.com

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Joe Orozco" <jsorozco at gmail.com>
To: "'National Association of Blind Students mailing list'" 
<nabs-l at nfbnet.org>
Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: [nabs-l] an interesting question

> Mark,
>
> I like your constitutional point.  It is a difficult one to counter, but 
> in
> thinking of it I remember something my high school history teacher used to
> repeat over and over, that just as in the dictionary, we must have
> responsibility before we have rights.  It's cheesy, but I think it's valid
> for this discussion.  A blind person may clear, draw and aim with stunning
> precision, but without the element of accuracy the activity is
> irresponsible.  In hunting it is expected that missed shots will 
> inevitably
> occur, but even in hunting great steps are taken to make sure that the
> missed shot does not result in a wounded bystander.  Hunting is not the 
> same
> as street encounters.  One presumes that if a gun is drawn it is to 
> defend,
> and if one is defending one is also under enormous stress.  Adrenaline,
> coupled with the inability to clearly gauge a target, makes for an already
> tense situation turn all the more risky where human lives are at stake.
>
> If blind people are allowed to legally carry guns then I should think I 
> have
> the right to pursue my original ambition of joining the Marine Corps.  The
> second amendment, after all, spins out of defense of self and state, and 
> so
> if I understand the risks and knowingly place my life at risk I should not
> be barred from joining the armed forces on account of my sight alone.
> Actually, the Air Force should be studying ways to accommodate blind 
> people
> in the flying of their aircraft.  Never mind the gentleman who spoke at
> convention about his own experience with flying.  It is not independent
> until the aircraft is launched, flown and brought down by that individual.
>
> Again, in response to Peter's thoughtful contribution, my hesitation has
> nothing to do with ability but rather with the technology that stands
> between the person and the result.  Some people feel adamant about driving
> or shooting or flying or whatever the case may be.  I am not convinced 
> that
> innocent people's lives should be put at risk because we believe in a very
> literal definition of equality.  Why spend so much money on reinforcing 
> that
> middle man when the funds could be devoted to fixing the root of the 
> problem
> in the first place.  My own life will not crumble if medicine does not 
> allow
> me to see better before I die, but if the technology could be used to the
> advantage of eliminating the need for technology itself, I think we will
> carve out that equality far quicker than the current means of advocacy and
> education that takes years to make tangible differences.
>
> Joe Orozco
>
> "A man who wants to lead the orchestra must turn his back on the
> crowd."--Max Lucado
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org
> [mailto:nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org] On Behalf Of Mark J. Cadigan
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 11:08 AM
> To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] an interesting question
>
> It is both. The right to bare arms is a right guaranteed by the
> constitution; this is not to be confused with a privilege.
> Having a weapon in the house is a good way of keeping safe, it
> has saved many peoples lives.
> As a political issue, it is important because it is clearly
> stating that blind people have exactly the same rights as
> sighted people.
>
> As a side bar, driving is a privelige. There is nothing in the
> constitution that guarantees it as a right.
>
>
> ----- Original Message ----- 
> From: "Teal Bloodworth" <tealbloodworth at gmail.com>
> To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
> <nabs-l at nfbnet.org>
> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 10:12 AM
> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] an interesting question
>
>
>> so you are saying that its not necessarily actually carrying
> a gun but
>> rather its the priveledge of  being able to carry a gun with
> appropriate
>> training and license like everyone else?
>>
>>            -Teal
>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>> From: "Mark J. Cadigan" <kramc11 at gmail.com>
>> To: "National Association of Blind Students mailing list"
>> <nabs-l at nfbnet.org>
>> Sent: Friday, September 11, 2009 6:39 AM
>> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] an interesting question
>>
>>
>>> The 2nd amendment should apply to all Americans, not just
> those of us
>>> that the government deems fit a certain criteria. The
> question of whether
>>> a blind person can safely use a fire arm is not the main question at
>>> stake. In my opinion there is not a question that with the proper
>>> training a blind person can be just as safe as a sighted
> one. The bigger
>>> question is if the government denies us protections under the 2nd
>>> amendment, it will set a precedent and who knows ware it
> might lead to.
>>>
>>>
>>> ----- Original Message ----- 
>>> From: "alberto arreola" <alberto.2500 at gmail.com>
>>> To: "'National Association of Blind Students mailing list'"
>>> <nabs-l at nfbnet.org>
>>> Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 11:19 PM
>>> Subject: Re: [nabs-l] an interesting question
>>>
>>>
>>>>I think a blind person could carry a gun if he or she
> receives training
>>>>to
>>>> use it properly.  I don't think anyone should carry a
> weapon if they
>>>> don't
>>>> know how to handle it the way it is supposed to be used.
>>>>
>>>> You might be interested in checking out this website which
> you might of
>>>> heard of already.  www.careymcwilliams.com This guy actually has two
>>>> conceals weapon permits.
>>>> Alberto
>>>>
>>>> -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org
> [mailto:nabs-l-bounces at nfbnet.org] On
>>>> Behalf
>>>> Of Kevin Wassmer
>>>> Sent: Thursday, September 10, 2009 8:41 PM
>>>> To: National Association of Blind Students mailing list
>>>> Subject: [nabs-l] an interesting question
>>>>
>>>> Hello folks. I have an interesting question for you all. Do
> you think a
>>>> blind person can cary a hand gun for self defence? If the
> answer is yes,
>>>> then how would a blind person be able to shoot someone if
> by the time
>>>> the
>>>> gun was loaded the other berson atempting to hurt the blind person
>>>> turned
>>>> around very fast? Can a blind person cary a hand gun and defend
>>>> themselves?
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nabs-l mailing list
>>>> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your
> account info for
>>>> nabs-l:
>>>>
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/alberto.
> 2500%40gmail
>>>> .com
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> nabs-l mailing list
>>>> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
>>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your
> account info for
>>>> nabs-l:
>>>>
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/kramc11%
> 40gmail.com
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> nabs-l mailing list
>>> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
>>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account
> info for
>>> nabs-l:
>>>
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/tealbloo
> dworth%40gmail.com
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> nabs-l mailing list
>> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
>> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
>> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for
>> nabs-l:
>>
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/kramc11%
> 40gmail.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nabs-l mailing list
> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account
> info for nabs-l:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/jsorozco
> %40gmail.com
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of
> virus signature database 4417 (20090911) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus 
> signature
> database 4417 (20090911) __________
>
> The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus.
>
> http://www.eset.com
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> nabs-l mailing list
> nabs-l at nfbnet.org
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/listinfo/nabs-l_nfbnet.org
> To unsubscribe, change your list options or get your account info for 
> nabs-l:
> http://www.nfbnet.org/mailman/options/nabs-l_nfbnet.org/kramc11%40gmail.com
> 