BCT Editorial – 9/9/08

This page was last updated on September 14, 2008.

Common sense; Editorial; Beaver County Times; September 9, 2008.

The editorial subtitle is “Don’t forget that responsibility is part of constitutional rights.”

Below is a detailed critique of the subject editorial.

“The arrest of John Noble for disorderly conduct has led to a debate over the right to bear arms.

“But while many people are wrapped up in the argument over the Second Amendment, few are talking about the responsibility that comes with exercising any constitutional right.

“The Industry resident was arrested near the political rally for Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama and vice presidential nominee Joe Biden in Beaver on Aug. 29. He was wearing a loaded, holstered Glock 9mm handgun, wielding a Bible and distributing fliers about gun rights.”

[RWC] “[W]ielding” a Bible? Was Mr. Noble using his Bible as a weapon? Which did the Times consider more dangerous, the “loaded, holstered Glock 9mm handgun” or The Bible?

“He has been charged with one count each of disorderly conduct and disrupting meetings and processions.

“Noble and his defenders argue that he was exercising his constitutional right as protected by the Second Amendment and did not violate state law, which allows people to wear a weapon out in the open without a permit.”

[RWC] The “Right to Bear Arms” is also guaranteed in the PA Constitution (Article 1, Section 21).

“Law enforcement officials argue that the presence of an armed Noble violated another constitutional right — people’s right to peaceful assembly. State police contend that Noble’s wearing the gun was alarming to others around him, thus the disorderly conduct charge.”

[RWC] This paragraph would have us believe all “Law enforcement officials argue that the presence of an armed Noble violated another constitutional right.” That’s not true based on some letters from local law enforcement officers.

“So which constitutional right, if any, should take precedence over the other? Perhaps it would help to look at this incident from another angle.”

[RWC] Here’s where the editorial really goes off the tracks.

“What if five Middle Eastern-looking men and two women wearing burqas were within a block of a joint outdoor appearance of Republican presidential and vice presidential nominees John McCain and Sarah Palin? What if the men were wearing holstered handguns, waving the Quran and chanting ‘Death to America’?

“Would you shrug that off as American citizens exercising their constitutional rights, or would their presence alarm and intimidate you? Would you be comfortable with law enforcement officials observing constitutional niceties and leaving them alone, or would you prefer that the police arrest them?

“Suddenly, the matter isn’t so black and white, even though the underlying constitutional principles are the same.”

[RWC] Seriously, the Times really believes this hypothetical situation is equivalent to Mr. Noble peacefully “distributing fliers about gun rights?”

“One thing that constitutional absolutists of all stripes forget is that rights come with responsibilities. And as the Noble incident shows, a little common sense when exercising them doesn’t hurt, either.”

[RWC] Actually, both Mr. Noble and the police officers should have used some common sense. While showing up nearby (Remember, Mr. Noble “was arrested near the political rally.” He didn’t attempt to attend the rally itself.) such an event with a weapon wasn’t exactly the smartest thing to do, I’m sure both parties could have come to some agreement that didn’t result in Mr. Noble’s detention, arrest, and the confiscation of his handgun.