It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

To all the people who want to ban guns.

page: 13
225
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 03:38 AM
link   

Originally posted by RichardA
reply to post by blupblup
 


Actually at least one WAS armed. HE chose not to open fire on the dimbulb because of the crowd of people around. That shows the restraint and responsible thinking of a RESPONSIBLE gun owner. Loughner passed a background check on the FBI data base, which he wouldn't have if the local sheriff had been doing his job. The sheriffs department had been involved with this deranged individual in the past, even to the point of escorting him from the local community college because he was deemed dangerous by the administration. No 72 hour hold for psychiatric evaluation, nothing. Others who recieved death threats reported him to the sheriffs department and (according to their statements) were told that he was being handled very well by the mental health department and that it would be better to forgo pressing charges. There was also an implication that this happened because mommy worked for the county. I haven't been able to verify that his mom worked for the county yet since I just got home from work, but I'm working on it. This has nothing to do with gun control, this has to do with a democrat sheriff failing in his responsibility of protecting the community and instead attempting to deflect attention from his own failures by blaming vitriolic political speech. It has now been used by the anti-gun, anti freedom, liberal loon left to try once again to circumvent the constitution and force their beliefs down our collective throats. If you don't like guns don't own one but don't ever think I'm gonna give up mine. 42 years on this earth and I've seen just about every low a human being can sink to. I prefer to be armed and dangerous to those that could be dangerous to me. I treat everyone as a friend I haven't met yet, but I keep my head on straight and trust no one until they prove they can be trusted.

The statistics, as pointed out on this thread go against just about every argument the left can make for banning guns. IMHO an armed society is a polite society. Of course your gonna have your fringe loons and downright crazies, but if the liberal loons hadn't shoved all this touchy feelly, its societies fault, they'd still be locked up where they (and we) are safe from their delusions and fantasies. I've served in the military and been trained with a gun, I've owned a handgun most of my life, I haven't killed anyone that I didn't have to. I haven't gone out and shot up a meeting because I was angry a person there. However, if someone comes to take my gun away..................

thus endeth the rant.



Why you think all guns would be banned ? ( caps are for bold word because im not english )

IT CAN NOT NEVER HAPPEN IN USA !!! xD Even in Canada it's not totaly banned.

BUT RESTRICTED why not ?

Why you need a gun for shooting people ? For defense ? Ok cool

BUT PEOPLE WHO ATTACK CAN HAVE GUN TOOO !!! ( due to the legaly and easy acces )

Even if they are ppooor and mentally derange !

If you have AT LEAST, normal gun ( for hunting, not automatic gun ). It would make it more easy to defense against someone who got that.

People who like too much gun, seem too much think like they are super power full.

If you have easy acces to gun, other have acces to gun.

SO, if you are a criminal why would you not having a gun????

In canada, it's hard so less death by gun here ! We still got death by knife or beating ! But it would be more if we got easy acces to gun !

Lol i will stop to repeat myself xD Unless someone ask question
( or maybe my writing is too bad xD sorry
)


Edit : And i loled at " Society with gun, is a polite society". I imagine english gentlemen talking and being polite with gun xD it make no sennnnnnnse

Gun = death and violence !

I can't believe it's legal to have a gun in a parking school... For shooting pigeon ? xD or crocodile ? wth ?
edit on 12-1-2011 by FreeQuebec86 because: (no reason given)




posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 03:50 AM
link   
I would love to not have the need to own firearms for self-defense. I'd like to own them for hunting and sporting purposes only but, I'm unwilling to give the scum and low-lives in our society the upper hand. Gun laws do nothing but disarm law-abiding citizens. What we need, is zero-tolerance for crimes involving guns. People would think twice if they were staring at 25 to life over an armed robbery or home-invasion.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 03:54 AM
link   

Originally posted by silverbullett
I would love to not have the need to own firearms for self-defense. I'd like to own them for hunting and sporting purposes only but, I'm unwilling to give the scum and low-lives in our society the upper hand. Gun laws do nothing but disarm law-abiding citizens. What we need, is zero-tolerance for crimes involving guns. People would think twice if they were staring at 25 to life over an armed robbery or home-invasion.



They dont already got that ? :O I thought USA was really hard for that.

Then yeah, you need that. Here too it's low, surely like 10yr of prison.

But you realize that Law on gun will make people like you still have a gun ??? ( maybe not fully automatic rifle )

And low-life,poor,criminize people have less gun ? ( unless they pass the test and use money for that )



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 04:12 AM
link   
reply to post by FreeQuebec86
 


Yes. People like me should have them. I don't commit crimes. I train and practice and teach my loved ones how to handle them in a safe manner. More law-abiding, responsible, armed citizens are a good thing for our country.


edit on 12-1-2011 by silverbullett because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 04:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by silverbullett
reply to post by FreeQuebec86
 


Yes. People like me should have them. I don't commit crimes. I train and practice and teach my loved ones how to handle them in a safe manner. More law-abiding, responsible, armed citizens are a good thing for our country.


edit on 12-1-2011 by silverbullett because: (no reason given)



So more control ( and hard law ) is good ? Then crazy and criminial will have hard acces to them ?

Good people like you will surely keep the gun xD. USA will never ban gun for all people xD Gun lovers seem to think that.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 04:20 AM
link   
reply to post by Rocky Black
 


I guess you just don't know any different, how sad.

IMHO guns can't really be banned in the states anymore - its too late - it just has to be policed sensibly, I'm from the U.K, I've never heard a real gun shot in my life and I hope its the same for my kids.
Its a completely alien concept to me...



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 04:20 AM
link   
I'm not trying to be condescending but I'm amazed at how many people on here are not getting it and most of the anti gun replies are from people that don't even live in the freak'n country. So I'll say it again, there are to many guns here already, you CANNOT remove 200+ million plus guns from this country there is NO way it will or can happen, a good gun can last a lifetime, Americans are NOT going to give them up period and they are NOT going to disappear no matter how many gun control laws you pass. To the anti gun people here, How many people do you think would be standing in a line at the police station to turn over their arms if the US banned guns tomorrow? And next question would be: How do you plan on taking arms from all the criminals and gang bangers that have a bigger arsenal cache than most countries? I can't think of any city in this country that doesn't have the local police out gunned, I'm sure there is somewhere but I can't think of one. Can anyone answer those two question and be realistic about your solution?



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 04:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by mtnshredder
I'm not trying to be condescending but I'm amazed at how many people on here are not getting it and most of the anti gun replies are from people that don't even live in the freak'n country. So I'll say it again, there are to many guns here already, you CANNOT remove 200+ million plus guns from this country there is NO way it will or can happen, a good gun can last a lifetime, Americans are NOT going to give them up period and they are NOT going to disappear no matter how many gun control laws you pass. To the anti gun people here, How many people do you think would be standing in a line at the police station to turn over their arms if the US banned guns tomorrow? And next question would be: How do you plan on taking arms from all the criminals and gang bangers that have a bigger arsenal cache than most countries? I can't think of any city in this country that doesn't have the local police out gunned, I'm sure there is somewhere but I can't think of one. Can anyone answer those two question and be realistic about your solution?



Ban is impossible yeah.

But starting to make more control and laws would help to lowering the gun market ! One day, gun could be just for hunting/shooting gallery ( the gun would stay there ) and police and army !!

I can't see why "sefl-defense" gun should be on the market. Because the majority of human killed by gun was not attacking ( the gun owner criminal was attack ). So they are attacking gun :S.


And yeah, people outside of your country don't think like you about that xD.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 04:37 AM
link   
reply to post by JohnnyCanuck
 


I 100% agree with this point. I don't think anybody can understand why two such close societies, with the same values can have such a discrepancy in this regard. I've heard people talk about other societies as not having "the same value of life as we do". Australia has a very tight gun law, and very few gun related homicides. Apart from the Canadians, Australians are probably the closest aligned in terms of ethos as the Americans.

The argument that having an armed society is safer is flawed, since becoming an unarmed society would take decades and the largest gun amnesty I can think of, the mindset of people would take even longer to change. Like a previous poster has stated, making guns illegal will have no impact, since guns are already prevalent. If it was uncommon, almost rare, that somebody had a gun, you can assume that gun related homicides would reduce. After that, we can examine the rate of stabbings......



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 05:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by RichardA
reply to post by blupblup
 
Actually at least one WAS armed. HE chose not to open fire on the dimbulb because of the crowd of people around. That shows the restraint and responsible thinking of a RESPONSIBLE gun owner.


Then why is the argument so often presented, that events like this would not happen if people in the crowd were armed? I get the notion that you'd be praising this conscientious gun owner even if they'd opened fire and added to the casualties.


Loughner passed a background check on the FBI data base, which he wouldn't have if the local sheriff had been doing his job. The sheriffs department had been involved with this deranged individual in the past, even to the point of escorting him from the local community college because he was deemed dangerous by the administration. No 72 hour hold for psychiatric evaluation, nothing. Others who recieved death threats reported him to the sheriffs department and (according to their statements) were told that he was being handled very well by the mental health department and that it would be better to forgo pressing charges. There was also an implication that this happened because mommy worked for the county. I haven't been able to verify that his mom worked for the county yet since I just got home from work, but I'm working on it.


So now some gun control is okay? You really can't have it both ways. Basically you're saying "everyone has the rights to have a gun except for people who I think shouldn't" which is blatantly hypocritical.


This has nothing to do with gun control, this has to do with a democrat sheriff failing in his responsibility of protecting the community and instead attempting to deflect attention from his own failures by blaming vitriolic political speech.


A democrat Sheriff failing to protect his community from a violent, murderous republican terrorist. So tell me genius. If this evil, vile, anti-American piece of filth of a Democrat had actually arrested the pure, chaste, wonderful and god-fearing republican, wouldn't YOU be first in line to demand the sheriff's head on a platter for his obviously political arrest? What did poor Jared do, right? Harrass a few people? Bah, it was just good-natured frat humor, people should lighten up, right?


It has now been used by the anti-gun, anti freedom, liberal loon left to try once again to circumvent the constitution and force their beliefs down our collective throats.


Well, at least we're putting it to vote, rather than, you know, just SHOOTING people who disagree with us. It's not perfect, but it IS better than the alternative the Republicans have brought to bear in this particular instance.


If you don't like guns don't own one but don't ever think I'm gonna give up mine.


Okay. Here's something you might not know; we're not really interested in banning guns. Know why? Self preservation. See, we liberals own plenty of guns, ourselves. We do this because our competition has a nasty habit of murdering people. And those people most prone to killing other people with illegal firearms aren't exactly your average Kucinich voter, if you catch my drift. Thus it's in our interest to maintain access to weapons.

We just want to make sure it's well-regulated so all the Jareds in the neighborhood aren't blasting away at us.


42 years on this earth and I've seen just about every low a human being can sink to. I prefer to be armed and dangerous to those that could be dangerous to me. I treat everyone as a friend I haven't met yet, but I keep my head on straight and trust no one until they prove they can be trusted.


Let's do a little logic exercise.

You're walking down a quiet street, and I jump out, brandishing a weapon - knife, gun, crowbar, whatever. I demand your wallet and your watch. Do you give me what I'm demanding, or do you pull your piece and try to turn the tables?

If your head is on straight, you'll realize that your gun is not helpful in this situation. If you reach for it, I'm guaranteed to shoot, stab, or clobber you, and odds are I'll be able to do this before you even get your hand on the butt of your weapon, since mine is out and I'm ready for you. Your risk of injury or death skyrockets when you go for your gun, while mine only rises by a few notches. I am much more dangerous to you than you are to me, in part because I stand to lose more in this situation. If you let me have my way, you lose some money and the time it takes to file a report and cancel your credit cards. if I let you have your way, I stand to lose life or limb. So it's suddenly in my best interest to beat the hell out of you and rob you anyway. That includes your gun.

Granted, if you've got the thing out in the open, I might be less-inclined to try it. But let's be honest here - if I'm in a position where mugging is a valid career choice, you're still at risk. If we're in an area where plenty of thugs like me are on this sort of career path, then we're accepting that armed people are going to come in and out of our line of work. So I might pass you over. I also might not - guns are lucrative on the black market, after all. Even in this situation, I pose more of a threat to you than you do to me, so you're better-off following my demands for both our sakes.


The statistics, as pointed out on this thread go against just about every argument the left can make for banning guns.


Incidentally, I only ever hear the right talking about "banning guns." This is not a platform in any "liberal" political party in this country, but the assumption that it is IS a core part of American conservative theology. You take it on faith that we want to take your guns, when in fact all we really want are your women and cattle.


IMHO an armed society is a polite society.


Well, guns aren't banned yet, and there's almost as many licensed, privately-owned guns as there are US citizens. So I'd guess we're an armed society. I'm not seeing a lot of the "polite" side of this society. On the other hand, I live within driving distance of Canada. They're pretty darn polite. Not many guns, though.

Now, I'm not saying that there's any direct correlation between number of guns and level of politeness on a society. I don't have the data for it (how would you measure politeness, anyway?) But it does seem this adage is blatantly false - a polite society is not one where an armed gunman takes out 16 people over his own sense of politics, is it?


Of course your gonna have your fringe loons and downright crazies, but if the liberal loons hadn't shoved all this touchy feelly, its societies fault, they'd still be locked up where they (and we) are safe from their delusions and fantasies.


That's a rather deluded outlook. You really think people get released from prison because "they're a product of society"? Laughable nonsense. That argument doesn't ever stand up in court, and it never stands up to the parole board.

There are three main ways for people to get our of prison.

Number one is, they serve their time and get released, either on parole, or for good. What they do on the outside is their own damned fault.
Number two is when the case agaisnt them has been tainted. Bad evidence, perjurous witnesses, corruption, you name it. This often happens at the behest of an overzealous "tough on crime" DA and prosecution team.
Number three, and the most ludicrous, is "he found religion" - which for SOME inane reason, does seem to carry weight with parole boards. Go figure.


I've served in the military


I don't know you, and I don't mean offense, but if I had a nickel for everyone I've seen claiming to be a member of the armed or police forces on a discussion forum, I'd be a very, very wealthy man.


and been trained with a gun, I've owned a handgun most of my life, I haven't killed anyone that I didn't have to. I haven't gone out and shot up a meeting because I was angry a person there. However, if someone comes to take my gun away..................

thus endeth the rant.


If someone ever comes for your gun they're going to do so with more firepower than you can match. AIM lost, the Black Panthers lost, David Koresh lost, Randy Weaver lost, and the list could go on. We're back to the mugger situation; you can turn over your gun, or you can get your butt kicked and have your gun taken.

Really, I don't know why you guys insist on this silly "If they come for my guns, I'll give them what fer!" - no you won't. You'll die in a bloody, useless heap, possibly while on fire.
edit on 12-1-2011 by TheWalkingFox because: Tag fix



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 05:27 AM
link   
i live in the u.s. and have had much recreational use with firearms. coffee cans, soda cans cardboard boxes, and old toilets have great stress reduction value when you're with friends and to understand gun safety and responsible use of firearms is just as important and patriotic as owning firearms. me i don't own any guns but shoveling snow and mowing lawns can remedy that. i believe that it isn't the rate of fire in which you hit your target or the fact that you can atomize your target from 7 miles away with a missile, but the accuracy, discipline, and years of practice it takes to use and maintain a tool that you can gather food, protect your home with, and also to be an upstanding, responsible, and hard working citizen. if you are not familiar with the use of guns and live in a European country that does not allow guns then please understand that you are relying on yourself when it comes to protection and awareness. i also study many different martial arts, and military history and in battle the rifle becomes a spear or short staff at a moments notice. if you ban guns then you ban swords, knives, hammers, crescent wrenches, long wooden poles, gas cans, silverware, pens pencils, acupuncture, fire, steel, chains, stones larger than the human hand, the knuckles of your index and middle finger, your elbows, knees and hands



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 05:37 AM
link   
reply to post by FreeQuebec86
 





But starting to make more control and laws would help to lowering the gun market ! One day, gun could be just for hunting/shooting gallery ( the gun would stay there ) and police and army !!

We have plenty of gun control laws, murder rates went down after the assault rifle ban was lifted, what does that tell you. It would take many, many decades to remove guns from the people here in the states and even then the criminals would still have guns and they're not going be storing them in no shooting gallery locker and I bet you would be lucky to remove even 25% of the arms in this country after 20-30 yrs. It's to late and until they throw the constitution away it's my right to own and bear arms. No matter who likes it or not thats the way it is. Obama or whoever cannot hold true and defend the constitution one day and the next day say it's not binding. That's one of the reasons why people can't wait to get him out of office. He will not uphold the constitution with the immigration issue but would like to emit or amend other parts of it.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 05:40 AM
link   
We here in Australia don't carry guns, and guess what? NEARLY NO-ONE GETS SHOT!
Sometimes I suspect that those two facts are correlated.
edit on 12-1-2011 by JACKRADAKILL because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 05:46 AM
link   
reply to post by JACKRADAKILL
 


I call shenanigans! In Australia, every living thing on the continent wants humans dead. Of course you guys aren't shooting each other; you need all that ammo for the spiders!



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 05:56 AM
link   
Amendment II protects the right of American people to keep and bear arms. It's deeply linked to the right of protecting one's home. Being the II Amendment to the US Constitution would be enough for the rest of us to understand how important that amendment is.

When someone says "BAN GUNS" is of course understood by US born like "END OUR RIGHT TO DEFFEND OUR HOMES". I would never permit that banning if I were American. I absolutely understand your point of view.

We have born in places were it's illegal to carry guns, thats why maybe some non-US born believe guns are EVIL, because in our Absolutely Outstanding European Paradise guns are something that only EVIL people use.

Ridiculous. Guns are objects. Evil is what some people do with those guns. Imagine you ban guns, "evil doers" would get them anyway (they're evil-doers right) and could break smiling in law-abiding citizens homes finding no response at all. The banning of guns in America it's just absurd and would be uneffective.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 06:10 AM
link   
Being from the UK I don't understand the the US obsession with guns. I don't think the idea of gun control, means banning them out right, it means what it means gun control, stricter regulations to stop lunatics like the most recent fella from shooting people he has a problem with politically, it's hardly healthy for a democracy. If everyone in the crowd had had a gun and returned fire the carnage that would have ensued could have been a whole lot worse. I know there are a lot of responsible owners of firearms across the USA, and those people shouldn't be punished because of the random acts of nutters, but you wouldn't be affected because you are responsible with your guns. If people cannot behave responsibly with firearms then they shouldn't be allowed to own them. Anyone with a history of mental illness or a criminal record, shouldn't be allowed one. Everyone who buys a gun should, by law attend a training course on how to use, maintain, and keep your firearms safe. Owning a gun is a huge responsibility, 'your right' as an American to own one, to my knowledge, was put there for you defend your country from foreign invasion. I don't think anyone is going to mess with USA, after all you have around 9000 nuclear warheads, I think you are quite safe. Guns don't kill people I know, but it makes it easier for some deranged nut to kill someone with a gun. Tighter gun control doesn't always stop people 'going postal' as we saw in the UK last, two mass shootings within the month, very rare for the UK, one of them had a firearm license the other didn't. Loose Gun laws are just part of the problem, the main problem is the way the media terrifies people in the States, and the hate filled political bile thrown at each other, dressed up as genuine debate. You can't stop gun crime outright, if someone wants a gun they will find one, but making it harder for lunatics and criminals to own one, should surely reduce the amount of senseless killing.

Peace:-)



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 06:15 AM
link   
reply to post by AboveTheTrees
 


So what you're saying is that the whole of Europe is living under a terrifying plague of armed-to-the-teeth home invaders assailing people in the dead of night? And that it's only the foresight of our slave-raping, Indian-killing demigods from the 18th century that has prevented this terrifying scourge from leaping the Atlantic to plague our homes?

'Cause if that's what you're trying to say, I'm pretty sure it's backwards.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 06:19 AM
link   
To be honest I had not noticed that Texas has not got a 'No Guns' ban.


I don't know about guys that are Anti-gun nuts but I refuse to be classified as a sheep, slave or no-good arse kisser. Ever since there have been rules that guns aren't allowed at some places it kinda makes it easier to carry them in. WHY??? Because when you have that kind of sign; "NO FIREARMS ALLOWED" say for example a corner shop. Shopkeepers don't expect you to carry one because of the sign posted outside.



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 06:19 AM
link   
reply to post by TheWalkingFox
 




If someone ever comes for your gun they're going to do so with more firepower than you can match. AIM lost, the Black Panthers lost, David Koresh lost, Randy Weaver lost, and the list could go on.

Those are isolated incidents not national, if were talking SHTF nationally, we out gun the military with small arms. I mentioned earlier that I was in LA during the riots it was chaos for a couple of days and the military or the police couldn't do a damn thing about it in some areas and the LA task force is not small. There were guys walking around w/AK's defending their businesses, citizens walking around with guns and cops not saying anything to them, they were out gunned and short on resources. They had police watching people walk right buy them with their new free TV's. stereo, fridges you name it. If they start trying to walk around collecting guns it could be like the riots 10 fold
edit on 12-1-2011 by mtnshredder because: (no reason given)



posted on Jan, 12 2011 @ 06:19 AM
link   
It is time to speak plainly for the good citizens and patriots of this nation who believe unendingly in the Constitution of the United States of America.

Though foreign governments may disarm their subjects, we will not go down that road. We will not disarm and see our freedoms stripped away. The lessons of history are numerous, clear, and bloody.

A disarmed population inevitably becomes an enslaved population. A disarmed population is without power, reduced to childlike obedience to-and dependence upon - the organs of a parental state. A disarmed population will lose-either piecemeal or in one sweeping act - those basic rights for which the citizens of America risked their lives and fortunes over 200 years ago.

We Will Not Disarm.

The right to self-protection, the internal directive of every living creature be it mouse or man is the most fundamental right of all. It is a right that must be exercised against the predators of the streets, against the predators hidden within agencies of law enforcement, and against the most dangerous predators of all, those to be found in government, whose insidious grasping for power is relentless and never-ending.

We Will Not Disarm.

Not in the face of robbers, rapists and murderers who prey upon our families and friends. Nor in the face of police and bureau agents who would turn a blind eye to the Constitution, who would betray the birthright of their countrymen; nor in the face of politicians of the lowest order-those who pander to the ignorant, the weak, the fearful, the naive; those indebted to a virulent strain of the rich who insulate themselves from the dangers imposed upon other Americans and then preach disarmament.

* We will not surrender our handguns.
* We will not surrender our hunting arms.
* And we will not surrender our firearms of military pattern or military utility, nor their proper furnishings, nor the right to buy, to sell, or to manufacture such items.

Firearms of military utility, which serve well and nobly in times of social disturbance as tools of defense for the law-abiding, serve also in the quiet role of prevention, against both the criminal and the tyrannical. An armed citizenry the well-regulated militia of the Second Amendment, properly armed with military firearms - is a powerful deterrent, on both conscious and subconscious levels, to those inclined toward governmental usurpation's.

An armed citizenry stands as a constant reminder to those in power that, though they may violate our rights temporarily, they will not do so endlessly and without consequence. And should Americans again be confronted with the necessity of - may God forbid it - throwing off the chains of a tyrannical and suffocating regime, firearms designed to answer the particular demands of warfare will provide the swiftest and most decisive means to this end.

Any law which prohibits or limits a citizen's possession of firearms of military utility or their proper furnishings, provides an open window through which a corrupt government will crawl to steal away the remainder of our firearms and our liberties. Any law which prohibits or limits a citizen's possession of firearms of military utility or their proper furnishings, being directly contrary to the letter and spirit of the Second Amendment, is inimical to the Constitution, to the United States of America, and to its citizens.

Now-today-we are witnessing the perilous times foreseen by the architects of the Constitution. These are times when our government is demanding - in the guise of measures for the common good - the relinquishment of several rights guaranteed to Americans in the Constitution, foremost among which is the right to keep and bear arms for our own defense. These are times when our government has abdicated its primary responsibility-to provide for the security of its citizens. Swift and sure punishment of outlaws is absent, and in its place is offered the false remedy of disarming the law-abiding. Where this unconstitutional action has been given the force of law, it has failed to provide relief and has produced greater social discord. This discord in turn now serves as the false basis for the demand that we give up other rights, and for the demand for more police, more agents of bureaucratic control to enforce the revocation of these rights.

Legislators, justices and law officers must bear in mind that the foundation of their duties is to uphold the fundamental law of the land-the Constitution. They must bear in mind that the unconstitutional act of disarming one's fellow citizens will also disarm one's parents, spouse, brothers, sisters, children and children's children. They must bear in mind that there are good citizens who - taking heed of George Washington's belief that arms are the liberty teeth of the people-will not passively allow these teeth to be torn out. There are good citizens who-taking heed of Benjamin Franklin's admonition that those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety-will surrender not one of their rights. Those who eat away at our right to own and use firearms are feeding on the roots of a plant over two centuries old, a plant whose blossom is the most free, most powerful nation ever to exist on the face of this planet.

The right to keep and bear arms is the tap root of this plant. All other rights were won at the point of a gun and will endure only at the point of a gun. Could they speak, millions upon millions of this world's dead souls would testify to this truth. Millions upon millions of the living can so testify today. Now, today, is a critical moment in our history.

Will we Americans passively lie down before a government grown disdainful of its best citizens? Or will we again declare:

WE are the government, government functions at our behest, and it may not rescind our sacred rights? Will we place our faith in public servants who behave like our masters? Or will we place our faith in the words and deeds of the daring, far-seeing men and women whose blood, sweat and tears brought forth this great nation?

Will we believe those who assure us that the police officer will shield us from the criminal? Or will we believe our eyes and ears, presented every day with news of our unarmed neighbors falling prey in their homes, on our streets, in our places of work and play?

Will we bow our heads to cowards and fools who will not learn and do not understand the lessons of human history? Or will we stand straight and assume the daily tasks and risks that liberty entails? Will we ignore even the lessons of this present era-which has seen the cruel oppression of millions on the continents of Europe, Asia, Africa and South America-and believe that the continent of North America is immune to such political disease? Or will we wisely accept the realities of this world wisely listen to and make use of the precautions provided by our ancestors?

Will we be deceived by shameless liars who say that disarmament equals safety, helplessness equals strength, patriotism equals criminality? Or will we mark the words of our forefathers, who wrote in plain language: The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed?

Let us make known: We will choose the latter option in every case.

Legislators: Do your duty to your country. Uphold the Constitution as you swore to do. Do not shame yourselves by knocking loose the mighty keystone of this great republic - the right to bear arms.

Justices: Do your duty to your country. Examine the origins of our right to weaponry and uphold the letter and spirit of the Constitution.

Lawmen: Do your duty to your country. Do not be misguided and misused. Your task is to serve and to protect-not to oppress, to disarm and to make helpless your countrymen. To the blind, the ignorant, the apathetic, the safe and sheltered, these may seem to be concerns of another age. They are not. They are as vital as they ever have been through history. For times may change but human nature does not. And it is to protect forever against the evil in human nature that the Founding Fathers set aside certain rights as inviolable.

For these reasons we must now make known:

We will not passively take the path that leads to tyranny. We will not go down that road. We Will Not Disarm.

Author Unknown.




top topics



 
225
<< 10  11  12    14  15  16 >>

log in

join