-That is the COMPLETE text of the second ammendment of the Constitution of the United States of America. It is so straight forward. I can't figure out how people can misinterperate it.
This is the first of what I suspect will be MANY posts regarding the second amendment on this blog.
There are those who would say such things as, “Our founding fathers never intended for us to have the guns we do. They couldn’t have imagined the power of current weaponry.”
WRONG. They meant for We the People to have WHATEVER means necessary to defend ourselves from WHATEVER means by which we are attacked.
The original arms the founders of this great nation included swords, spears, bayonets, rifles, pistols, and even cannons ANYTHING the people could afford. If they’d had Springfield Soccom 2’s, or Aerolite .50 cals. at the time, there is do doubt they would have included them.
The reason the Constitution includes the right to bear arms, is to defend against tyrants by any means necessary.
Why would they include such an amendment? Because they had just fought a massive and bloody war against tyrants! Had they been outgunned, they would have lost the war, and there would have been no free America. Further, they had just fought against their ruling government. This wasn’t a foreign invader. It was their own tyrannical, Government. I think people have forgotten that. It was a government that wanted to disarm them so they couldn’t revolt. The people recognized this, and made a preemptive strike before they had been completely disarmed.
Another issue you must remember, is that not all of the nation WANTED liberty. Many were British loyalists. They were happy to live the life of British Dominance.
Sometimes doing what’s right, means going against the will of a complacent, and somnambulant public.
Again, they argue: “Our founding Fathers, never intended for us to use Modern guns, the second amendment only applies to the guns of THEIR time.”
I hear this argument Time, and Time again.
If that is true, then the first amendment is also restricted by the same application.
Meaning the freedom of speech is only intended for the technology of the time.
So, the freedom of speech clearly does not apply to Telephone, radio, Cellular Phone, Blog, online forum, email, text message, marquise, bumper sticker, T-shirt, music, recording, tattoo, billboard, movie, magazine, electric sign etc.
In fact, the only places free speech is recognized are live discussion, parchment, and the “town holler.”
Hey, these aren’t my rules they are apparently the Un-written rules of the constitution, any left=wing nut job can tell you all about it.
In addition to my previous lessons, I make the following argument to those who say,
“Why do you need a gun? You can call the police.”
I say:
“Why do you have a Fire extinguisher? You can call the fire department.”
There is no difference! You keep a fire extinguisher so that you can battle a fire until the fire department can arrive, and you keep a gun for the same reason.
Sometimes with an extinguisher, you won’t even need to call the Fire Department.
Again, the same applies with a gun and criminals.
Just because you have a work force available to you, doesn’t mean you should sit back and resign yourself to apathy.
Be proactive! Be productive, but most of all, be armed!
To those who lobby for more strict gun laws, I present to you these facts:
Automatic weapons are all but illegal in the U.S. You need special training, expensive licensing. And buying one in a gun shop usually requires it being shipped in, and it raises all sorts of red flags. Yet somehow, criminals manage to get a hold of them.
The fact still remains that automatic weapons are used in Crimes committed in the U.S. almost EVERY DAY. More than are sold through legal outlets, Further proof that gun sales do not even equal effective gun control. If you want to control gun crime, watch the borders more vigilantly. Criminals don’t buy guns at gun shops, they don’t buy them at gun shows, they don’t even buy them out of the newspaper! Criminals buy their guns from other criminals, they buy stolen guns or illegally smuggled guns. Guns which will have no trail back to them. It’s a fact.
In 2007 The National Academy of Science researched hundreds of case files and law records, to find a correlation between gun laws and a decrease in violent gun crime. Six of the seven scientists were openly against guns and had a vendetta against legal gun ownership. The survey was conducted with a vendetta against guns.
However, the result of said research revealed gun laws have no effect in deterring violent gun crime even in the least. And in fact all of the scientists involved are now avid Gun supporters.
In 1976 Washington D.C. enacted the strictest gun laws in the nation (which were later found to be unconstitutional.) and in the first year, violent gun crime rose by 30%
It’s a fact. Science has shown that Gun laws are COMPLETELY Ineffective. No question, No two ways about it, no anything.
According to the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Bill:
Citizens with carry permits are more law-abiding than the general public. Only 0.01% of nearly 1.2 million permits issued by Florida have been revoked because of firearm crimes by permit holders. Similarly low percentages of permits have been revoked in Texas, Virginia, and other RTC states that keep such statistics. RTC is widely supported by law enforcement officials and groups.
States with RTC laws have lower violent crime rates. On average, 22% lower total violent crime, 30% lower murder, 46% lower robbery, and 12% lower aggravated assault, compared to the rest of the country. The seven states with the lowest violent crime rates are RTC states. (Data: FBI.)
Crime declines in states with RTC laws. Since adopting RTC in 1987, Florida’s total violent crime and murder rates have dropped 32% and 58%, respectively. Texas’ violent crime and murder rates have dropped 20% and 31%, respectively, since its 1996 RTC law. (Data: FBI.)
The right of self-defense is fundamental, and has been recognized in law for centuries. The Declaration of Independence asserts that "life" is among the unalienable rights of all people. The Second Amendment guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear arms for "security."
The laws of all states and constitutions of most states recognize the right to use force in self-defense. The Supreme Court has stated that a person "may repel force by force" in self-defense, and is "entitled to stand his ground and meet any attack made upon him with a deadly weapon, in such a way and with such force" as needed to prevent "great bodily injury or death." (Beard v. U.S., 1895)
Congress affirmed the right to guns for "protective purposes" in the Gun Control Act (1968) and Firearm Owners’ Protection Act (1986). In 1982, the Senate Judiciary Committee Subcommittee on the Constitution described the right to arms as "a right of the individual citizen to privately possess and carry in a peaceful manner firearms and similar arms."
So, this is my official Challenge. I am calling out Nancy Pelosi, Joe Biden, Barak Obama, Debora Feinstein, and anybody who follows them in their unjust war against guns.
You show me the science behind your fallacious claims. Your hatred is unfounded, it is prejudice, I see it as nothing more than discrimination; and according to the principles which you claim to support Discrimination is a hate crime.
No comments:
Post a Comment