Jay Severin Pro 2nd Yesterday

[dbhn]

Jay Severin yesterday on 96.9 went off about the DC verdict (another thread on this already) and explained his views on the 2nd.

Very nice to hear him give gun rights some air time and to hear his views on it. He basically stuck up for the 2nd A wholeheartedly and said every non-criminal has the god-given right to keep and bear arms and carry them concealed as well. He said anyone who interprets the 2nd amendment as anything but an individual's rights is a moron or intellectually dishonest to serve their own liberal agenda. He bashed the NY Times front page article on the DC verdict because it started as "Interpreting the 2nd broadly..the court..." He jumped all over this.

He also quoted a Yale professor's book, whos name I can't remember, about gun control and how his study found that every single jurisdiction in the US that has softened its laws on gun control and made it easier for citizens to get permits has seen a reduction in violent crime. He explained this is because the bad guys don't know who's "packing."

On the flip side, he does believe we will eventually loose the private citizen's right to have firearms in the US altogether.

Just some food for thought. I listen to Jay often but know some folks on this site could do without him.

 

[Ripach]

While often agree with what he is saying I get the impression he is only saying it because he has some fetish for being a center of controversy, not because he actually believes it. I also don't like that typical news/talk host personality of if you don't agree with me you must be an idiot. That being said I do listen to Severin now and then.

 

[Finalygotabeltfed]

While often agree with what he is saying I get the impression he is only saying it because he has some fetish for being a center of controversy, not because he actually believes it. I also don't like that typical news/talk host personality of if you don't agree with me you must be an idiot. That being said I do listen to Severin now and then.

I disagree. I think he believes it unequivocally and wouldn't doubt one bit that he has an LTC himself.

As far as being the "center of controversy", that's his job and if you really listen to most of the people who call in that disagree with his opinion on most of his subject matter and the facts he presents to back them up, they ARE idiots and they usually prove it beyond any shadow of doubt in the first sentence or two of their responses.

The fact is, he is far more articulate and educated than the vast majority of his audience and most find that intimidating.

 

[codenamepaul]

He basically stuck up for the 2nd A wholeheartedly and said every non-criminal has the god-given right to keep and bear arms and carry them concealed as well. .

Anyone who adds a condition on exercise of the 2A is no supporter of it. There is no provision in the Constitution for denying a person their right to bear arms. That includes criminals.

 

[FalArAk]

The guy annoys the hell out of me.Ask him if the sun will burn your skin and he goes into a long ass explanation complete with dramatic pauses and long words,repeats the question at least 3 times,then finally says "yes" after 2 minutes.

I stopped listening to him all the time when he professed his undying love and support for Cindy Sheman.Those dentist commercials he reads bug me..LOL

It's also funny that he won't admit he left the national scene because his show sucked.He wanted to be back in Boston with his homies...rrrriiiiiight.

 

[News Shooter]

Not intending to rile anyone

as it is simply my opinion that Severin is a rat-faced little weasel

 

[Lugnut]

Anyone who adds a condition on exercise of the 2A is no supporter of it. There is no provision in the Constitution for denying a person their right to bear arms. That includes criminals.

Are you implying criminals should still have a right to bear arms? All criminals?

 

[drgrant]

Are you implying criminals should still have a right to bear arms? All criminals?

Well, if you think about it, in this country they tend to exercise that right
more often than the free men do. (regardless of whether or not "the law"
supports them doing so) and that is part of the reason why we have a
crime problem in this country. The system has made it difficult for the
law abiding to protect themselves and stay within the confines of the
law.

I guess what I'm getting at is, if FIP, lautenberg, etc, were abolished
tomorrow that there would be no dramatic increase in crime. The
deterrent effect is pretty limited. Criminals carry guns whenever and
however they want to, without asking permission from the
government... most of them don't even know what the hell FIP or
Lautenberg are to begin with. (it was that humming noise coming from
the judges mouth at the last sentencing hearing they were at).

IMO all "free men" should have the right to keep and bear arms. If society
cannot trust someone with a gun then they should be kept in
prison. I mean seriously... how many times do guys with light sentences
go out and commit ANOTHER violent crime again after getting released?
The numbers are pretty staggering.

-Mike

 

[Moderator]

Mike, you have a way of stimulating my mind as well as showing me the other side.

 

[squarooticus]

Are you implying criminals should still have a right to bear arms? All criminals?

I do, because once you give someone the power to determine who should or should not have access to firearms, you give them to power to deny YOU for any reason they choose. Better for the RKBA to be unequivocal.

As I've said before, I'd rather live in a world in which *everyone* was armed---criminal or not---than the one in which we live, where a far greater percentage of unlawful people are walking around armed than lawful people.

Kyle

 

[GaryO]

Severin reminds me of Rosie O'donnell. He uses his show as a bully pulpit to tear apart everyone who does not agree with his views, also he tries to be uber macho like he might be hiding his real feelings.

 

[LiquidTed]

Severin reminds me of Rosie O'donnell. He uses his show as a bully pulpit to tear apart everyone who does not agree with his views, also he tries to be uber macho like he might be hiding his real feelings.

friend of mine in radio claims it's an open secret that Severin lives with his life partner

 

[KMaurer]

Anyone who adds a condition on exercise of the 2A is no supporter of it. There is no provision in the Constitution for denying a person their right to bear arms. That includes criminals.

Well, since the Constitution recognizes that convicted criminals can be punished by forfiting their lives (capital offenses), liberty (imprisonment) and property (fines), I don't find it a real stretch to see it accepting this sort of restriction on their post-release actions. That doesn't mean that I approve of the way in which it's implemented under current law, but then I don't like a lot of things that might still pass constitutional muster.

Ken

 

[Bandit]

friend of mine in radio claims it's an open secret that Severin lives with his life partner

Quote
NY Times March 14 ,2007

May 17 ,1997
Marrage of Renee Melanie Klock to Jame Severin 3rd @ Old Whalers Presbyteran Church , Sag Harbor , N.Y.

 

[heron163]

Jay Severin or Jimmy Severino (as he was born with that name) I doubt is a true suporter of 2A. As others have pointed out, he is an opportunist looking to stir up shit.

I do know that despite all his macho posturing on his radio show, he is married and has one child...

 

[Adam_MA]

While you may not believe he is pro 2A, since the beginning of his show, he has been vocal about being a gun owner. Weather or not it's true... I don't know, but in the beginning (before his head got so big) he was very open with letting the listeners know he had guns, and at one time was very proud of his new Sig.

 

[The Goose]

I sometimes listen to Jay on my ride home. Sometimes I love his show, other times I switch it off because I cannot stand it. I heard much of the show the other day regarding the 2nd. Amendment and I thought it was outstanding. Some of you may not like Jay and I can sure understand that opinion and you are entitled to it. I just want to point out that his show is nationally popular, he has a huge listening audience. Can anyone here point out another public personality with a substantial following who spoke out positively this week about the DC decision or the 2nd. amendment? In fact not just positively, but overwelmingly supportive of the 2nd. Amendment. I am not aware of that person, at least not someone with the reach of Jay severin. How about at least giving the guy a pat on the back for speaking out.

In terms of "Anyone who adds a condition on exercise of the 2A is no supporter of it." That is a mighty strong statement. I suspect that if all of the NES members were polled that there are probably at least some who think that criminals should not be allowed to legally own guns. So I guess because of that one point we can discount their otherwise vigorous support. After all, our cause is so strong and secure that we don't need anyone who is not 100% in agreement with the literal interpretation of the 2nd. Amendment. Personally, I agree with the literal interpretation, but I am not willing to dismiss an otherwise avid supporter who may have some reservations. We are still on the same side.

 

[Dirtypacman]

I loved him
I hated him
I loved him
I hated him

Now I just respect him.

I had been a listener and fan for some time but I started getting aggrivated with his viewpoints changing. And at times the reaction he gives a caller when they are having trouble making a point is just straight disrespectful.

That being said any supporter or even slight support for the 2nd A. from any media outlet at this time in our country gets a thumbs up for me.

 

[Ripach]

any supporter or even slight support for the 2nd A. from any media outlet at this time in our country gets a thumbs up for me.

I have to say that is a good point and hard to argue with. We can use all the help we can get regardless of what we think of the individual.

 

[Scrivener]

friend of mine in radio claims it's an open secret that Severin lives with his life partner

Most of us do.

It's just that, for most of us here, that life partner is legally a spouse and of the opposite sex.

 

[av8r]

friend of mine in radio claims it's an open secret that Severin lives with his life partner

He lives with his wife and young daughter. I have met the entire family. He prefers to keep them out of his public life due to the stalkers who showed up at his Long Island residence, although he was only broadcasting in the Boston market at the time.

 

[csharpdev]

The attitudes of some people here are just rediculous. On another thread someone had said I should join the other side because I'd support shall issue licenses and would want away to stop criminals from buying guns. I see comments like these all the time, like the one in this thread of if you don't support the 2A 100% you don't support it at all.

Well guess what, we didn't get where we are today overnight, we didn't go from no gun control to the crap in this state in 1 day and if we keep up this ALL or NOTHING crusade we'll end up with NOTHING. If the anti's came at us full force with every anti gun law on day one they'd have been met with so much public opposition they'd be shut down so fast no one would know who Sarah Brady is. But they're smart and did it in small pieces to pick us apart.

If I lived in VT would I support a shall issue LTC or FID... NO!!!! it would be a step in the wrong direction for VT. But in MA it would be a step in the right direction and it would be better than it is today. Then we can work on only needing an LTC to actually Carry, and then work on not needing one at all. Baby steps, baby steps.

 

[The Goose]

The attitudes of some people here are just rediculous. On another thread someone had said I should join the other side because I'd support shall issue licenses and would want away to stop criminals from buying guns. I see comments like these all the time, like the one in this thread of if you don't support the 2A 100% you don't support it at all.

Well guess what, we didn't get where we are today overnight, we didn't go from no gun control to the crap in this state in 1 day and if we keep up this ALL or NOTHING crusade we'll end up with NOTHING. If the anti's came at us full force with every anti gun law on day one they'd have been met with so much public opposition they'd be shut down so fast no one would know who Sarah Brady is. But they're smart and did it in small pieces to pick us apart.

If I lived in VT would I support a shall issue LTC or FID... NO!!!! it would be a step in the wrong direction for VT. But in MA it would be a step in the right direction and it would be better than it is today. Then we can work on only needing an LTC to actually Carry, and then work on not needing one at all. Baby steps, baby steps.

Very good post!

 

[codenamepaul]

Are you implying criminals should still have a right to bear arms? All criminals?

Absolutely.

If they remain a danger to society, they need to remain in prison. No danger-full restoration of rights. There is no provision in the Constitution to deny anyone-from a federal standpoint anyway-their right to bear arms.

 

[codenamepaul]

Its good to see a few TRUE supporters of the 2nd Amendment. Some of you are no different than Zumbo.

 

[reinbeau]

as it is simply my opinion that Severin is a rat-faced little weasel

I see you like him as much as I do!

 

[Cato]

The attitudes of some people here are just rediculous... like the one in this thread of if you don't support the 2A 100% you don't support it at all.

Well guess what, we didn't get where we are today overnight, we didn't go from no gun control to the crap in this state in 1 day...

That's right. It happened slowly do to the the individual’s willingness to compromise and allow their rights to be disabled. If you compromise more you will sacrifice more rights. Rights are not a commodity to be traded.

 

[Jay G]

Absolutely.

If they remain a danger to society, they need to remain in prison. No danger-full restoration of rights. There is no provision in the Constitution to deny anyone-from a federal standpoint anyway-their right to bear arms.

Bingo.

Folks, once you allow that a (allegedly former) criminal is not to be allowed access to firearms, yet is allowed out on the street, you're imbuing the firearm with that same mystical aura that gun-grabbers use to rile up anti-gun fervor prior to a ban.

All the firearm does is make putting a hole in something from a distance easier. That's it.

A criminal released from prison should be allowed access to firearms - if they are safe enough to be allowed back among the law-abiding, they should be trusted with guns. Otherwise, you're trusting them with thousands of other implements of death and mayhem, but restricting only firearms. You're giving ammo (pun intended) to the gun-grabbers who think that guns are the be-all, end-all to crime - if criminals can be denied guns in the interest of safety, why not deny guns to everyone so that no one has them, and then we'll all live in peace and harmony with Gaia and rainbows and unicorns?

Nope. If they are allowed out of the graybar hotel, they get it all back. If they can't be trusted with a gun, they stay in the clink...

 

[Lynne]

Like Adam, I've listened to him since he first started,,,well, okay, maybe a month after he started on 96.9. He has always supported the 2nd Amendment and has talked quite a few times about being a gun owner and God help anyone who broke in to his home.

He's got a good sized audience, so the more that hear him when it comes to RKBA, the better, like him or not.

 

[Jeremiah]

I tuned out Jay because of his to-the-left-of-Sheehan tirades against the war, but I never had much doubt about his 2nd ammendment cred. Once, when he was doing a bit on reducing welfare, an objector called in saying something along the lines of: "if I lose my job, welfare protects you from discovering me breaking into your house to steal food." To which Jay shouted: "Oh, yeah? Try it! I'm a good shot!"

I loved that answer; that was the end of the discussion.