posted on Jan, 24 2013 @ 11:48 AM
Warning, this rant is likely to go all over the place and cover the different things about the current liberties debates currently going on that
First of all, and to the point of the title of this post, just because I support the second amendment and the constitution doesn't mean I'm some
"macho gun nut who loves their gun as a phallic substitute" and the other inane things people who support the right to bear arms are being called.
(which is not to say that those who support my side haven't been guilty of calling people names, which I also disagree with, and example of this is
the "you didn't mind american guns when the nazi's were knocking" and other such comparisons which just remind me of me being accused of being
personally responsible for american slavery or the abuses the indigenous indian tribes suffered, it's nonsensical and counter-productive.) I don't
own a gun, I don't want to own a gun. My stake in this gun conversation is the preservation of the right to own a gun, just because I don't choose
to exercise a right doesn't mean I believe it should be taken away.
Next thing I don't get. Sandy Hook was the beginning of this, and all I want to say about that is, instead of enacting new laws limiting our
liberties and punishing those who have done nothing wrong, how about we look at how the precautions we already have in place failed and shore up those
deficiencies. Here in PA, the elementary school where the children I look after attend, you have to be buzzed in after school starts. When we lived in
Maine I once went with the childrens parents to the school where they had a teacher conference, I waited in the vehicle and was approached and
questioned about why I was there twice by three different people in the school in 5 mins. How did the perpetrator terminator his way into the school?
I'm not looking to blame others for what he did, but lets analyze how it happened and how that circumvented the safety measures already in place
before we make new laws. We already know that his mother apparently didn't properly store her firearms and a push to educate the american public
about the importance of and proper methods of safe storage of firearms is a logical pursuit for safety that doesn't infringe on any existing rights.
Let's follow it through and figure out other ways.
Next thing I don't get. Assault weapons ban. It seems to me (and those with knowledge of firearms, feel free to correct me where I am wrong) the
utility of an "assault weapon" as they are loosely defined over a handgun is a matter of extended operating range and larger clip capacity. Well if
we are gonna pass legislation that limits the maximum clip capacity to something that is within the range of most semi-automatic handguns, that only
leaves extended range, but the incidents that have occurred to spur this ban have all, to my knowledge, been enacted easily within the operational
range of handguns, they weren't sniper or long range incidents. So if we ban large capacity clips why do we need to ban "assault weapons"? Although
I believe that if we limit clip capacity for civilians we should also do so for any non-military personnel including law enforcement, if we don't
need them, why should they. Although I know there are those out there who would argue that limiting the clip capacity of a firearm constitutes
infringement, it's a far weaker argument then against an assault weapons ban, and a compromise that addresses peoples concerns without trashing a
Some personal thoughts about non-americans in the debate. While I am loathe to try and limit anyones free speech some personal moderation of your
speech would be appreciated. This doesn't effect you if you don't live here, us gun-loving americans aren't bringing our firearms to your country,
there are some pretty stringent safety measures in place keeping us from taking weapons to other continents. I'm not saying if you have an opinion
that you shouldn't be allowed to express it, but yours should not be the loudest voice in the debate, we americans need to address this as it effects
us quite profoundly. You have an opinion express it and let it go, don't argue it for six pages, or post your own rant and encourage people to debate
with you there, or post a foreigners opinion of the american gun debate post, it doesn't have to be rant. I had a knee-jerk reaction where I had
wanted to say to those who aren't american citizens that if you want to strip from me my 2nd amendment rights, why should I extend to you my 1st
amendment rights, rights which by virtue of your not being a US citizen you don't have here. But I don't want be like that, it's just hard to deal
with this debate and hope that people will move beyond emotional attacks and begin to discuss the issues and how we can deal with them without an
armed insurrection, which I'm against. And people without a stake stirring up the pot bothers me. But I'm currently so pessimistic about the entire
situation and where we are going that I guess your contributions don't really make anything much worse. I'm conflicted and apologize to anyone I
offended by thinking I seek to silence you, I don't, not really.
One more personal thought and I'm done, to the universal love and harmony people who say be one with the universe, don't resist, if someone comes at
you to do harm greet them with love and feel bad that they need to do violence. That is not at all harmony with the universe, the universe is all
about resistance, even when futile. Does the gazelle lay down for the lion? Does the mongoose lay down for the snake? Do chickens lay down for the
fox. Or does a celestial body enacted upon by a greater gravitational force immediately follow the path of least resistance straight at the source of
the greater gravitational force? Resistance is inherent in the operation of the universe.
Ok I'm done,