Monday, December 17, 2012

Don't Confuse the Right to Bear Arms for a Right to Commit Violence

Eric Blair
Activist Post

The political storm taking place in the aftermath of the tragic school shooting in Newtown (CT) is unprecedented. The Internet is ablaze with demands for stricter gun laws, the banning of all guns, and even for killing gun owners. The issue of gun rights has just become much more heated.

It's normal to react emotionally to such an awful event, especially when we can relate to the victims.  This shooting hit home for me much more so than others in the past. One, because I'm from a small town in Connecticut and, second, because the principal killed was my son's Kindergarten principal before we decided to homeschool. So I deeply understand the grief.

However, we must do our best to not react out of emotion, and try to maintain some of our logical sensibilities.  Even gun rights advocates don't know how to respond because the usual arguments like self-defense or that guns don't kill people without someone pulling the trigger are lost to those grieving.

What's most disturbing is that some gun control advocates seem to be equating the right to own a gun with the right to commit violence. These are two very different things. No one has the right to commit violence or kill. The right to own a gun is not a license to kill, it's a right to self-defense.  I believe self-defense to be a God-given right, maybe even an obligation to preserve ourselves. The "devil" is in the details, however.

Possessing a gun should not be a crime; misuse of the gun against another is a crime. In a sense it's like drug prohibition. Drug possession should not be a crime because they may only cause the user harm, but if the addict violates someone else's rights (theft, assault, etc.) while on drugs or to get drugs, then they broke the law.

Speaking of prohibition, were fully-automatic Tommy guns to blame for Al Capone's violence or was it the policy of alcohol prohibition?  Additionally, do gun control advocates believe they will get rid of guns by prohibiting ownership of them?  Has drug use gone down since prohibiting drugs?  Even limited prohibition of guns will not solve anything or bring back the deceased from this atrocious act.

Tragedies and accidents will happen and they will cause pain, but no amount of "gun control" or Nerfing the world will prevent them. It is also unlikely that even a very limited right to purchase a firearm would slow the pace and severity of these tragedies. These tragedies are shocking because they are not the norm.

Some argue that the 2nd Amendment Right to Keep and Bear Arms for defense is outdated.  Is the right for a citizen in Afghanistan to own a gun outdated? Is it in Israel? Or Chicago? America is no different. Perhaps because there are so many guns in the hands of street thugs it's even more vital to protect our right to self-defense in the United States.

I agree that there should be limitations on firepower, but citizens should be able to possess equal force of anyone that they may have to defend against, including law enforcement. Therefore, if there are any legal limitations on guns, it should extend to all possible aggressors. In other words, cops should not be able to have fully automatic assault rifles if citizens aren't allowed to have them. The government should not have a different set of laws than the people.

Of course, no citizen should have advanced military weapons like rocket launchers because they aren't used in law enforcement in the US, yet. So I don't condone the right of personal ownership of nukes, but I also don't condone it for our military either.

It is shameful that the US has 12K gun homicides per year. Yet over 75% are gang-related (Wiki). In other words they're heavily influenced by social policies like illegal drugs and the desperation of poverty. Even more shameful are 17.5K suicides by guns each year. We have a problem much deeper than guns...and I wish that was the focus of all the outrage.

The motivation behind the seemingly random acts of violence against innocent people in Connecticut and Aurora is much more difficult to determine than Al Capone's violence. Yet, it is just as important because the guns did not cause the violence, mentally unstable people did.

Everyone who is hurting over this incident is clamoring for a quick fix to prevent this type of tragedy in the future. Unfortunately, there is no quick fix because this is a deep morality problem and maybe a psychiatric drug problem, not a gun problem.  And, in that regard, we have a long way to go.

When the people at the highest levels of our "leadership" condone killing innocent children in other countries, how can we expect that mentality to not trickle down into society? When our first reaction to difficult children is to drug them with chemicals proven to cause suicidal/homicidal tendencies, why are we continually surprised when that is the outcome?

These are just two of the many questions that should be asked by those who wonder why this happened beyond the choice of what type of tool was used during this massacre.

It seems the long-term solution is creating a more loving and compassionate society, but judging from the hatred directed at innocent and lawful gun owners the last few days, this too is a long way off.

PS: I am not a gun owner because I believe in peace and love and all that hippie shit, but I don't want to lose my right to own one should I feel it's necessary to defend myself.

Read other articles by Eric Blair Here

This article may be re-posted in full with attribution.


If you enjoy our work, please donate to keep our website going.


Anonymous said...

and the government just bought how many hundreds of millions (or was is a billion)rounds of ammo that are specifically designed to kill humans?

Anonymous said...

Very well said. Nice article. Sorry about your son's principal.

Unknown said...

Probably all that ammo will be for the folks that don't want to turn in their guns? Looks like those fema coffins are goint to be filled in the new year. Horrifying how governments set-up incidents to take away something from the people. If gun owners give up their right to bear arms, they get what they get later - which won't be pretty!

Anonymous said...

Hopefully people can gather their emotions before there are any rash decisions made.

Anonymous said...

The bad guys (whomever that will be) will always have guns. Good moral people give them up and it's over. Our normal way of life is already gone, but just wait till people are forced to turn in their guns. The 2nd amendment was to protect oneself against an oppressive government first.

Anonymous said...

There are no school shootings in Israel, because Israeli teachers are required to carry guns.

The banning of guns in China has done nothing to stop hundreds of children from being stabbed in the last few years.

Mexico has strict gun laws and over 50,000 people were shot or tortured to death there last year.

Any country or city that has banned guns has seen a marked increase in murder and violent crime directly afterward.

Knowing all that, is the government's agenda really about saving lives?

Anonymous said...

"What's most disturbing is that some gun control advocates seem to be equating the right to own a gun with the right to commit violence."

Nope. No way, not me.
I equate an unhealthy national obsession with guns with the statistical certainty that more guns create more accidents and crimes of passion involving those guns. Way more dead people.
The facts back this up. Gun deaths in the USA per capita are much much higher than in any other first world nations.

That simplistic incorrect straw man argument seems to be very well received in comments here. Nobody seems to mind that he uses two wonderfully safe democracies to help defend his point of view......Afghanistan and Israel. How appropriate.

Anonymous said...

Americans might as well give up their guns as it is obvious not one of them are ever going to grow the balls to use them for their intended purpose.
I guess the old shotgun looks nice hanging over the mantle.

Americans have no idea just how lost their cause is but it truly is over for them.
These silly stupid people are STILL falling for the "lone gunman" story just too stupid for words.
They do this kind of shit to see if anyone will call BS and no one ever does they just accept it as true and start praying and raising money
(neither of which does anything except make you feel good)

If you have a gun you had better use it instead of talking about what your gonna do with it when they come for it. Use it while it may still do some good otherwise give em up
and accept the fact that you have lost and be a good little slave.
You have lost you know your just kept too entertained to know it.

OneHuman said...

Don't confuse the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms with the right to own any kind or amount of guns you want. The 2nd Amendment does not preclude gun control.

Nemetron 2000 said...

"In other words, cops should not be able to have fully automatic assault rifles if citizens aren't allowed to have them. The government should not have a different set of laws than the people."

That pretty much sums it up. It's not about protecting anyone. It's about ensuring the continued existence of one of the most corrupt governments of the modern era. Will they commit genocide if they take away guns? Probably not, but what they will have done is remove all possibilities of any meaningful resistance occurring in this country, which will help the corrupt bankers and politicians sleep more comfortably at night. It will also encourage the joining of more sociopathic, predatory minded, individuals into their rank and file (as if they didn't already have enough of those). The kind that are too chicken shit to join gangs and break the law, but will join a police force or government agency and break the law. In those peoples' minds it will be open season, and the U.S. citizen will be the quarry.

Anonymous said...

In six weeks all those mentally corrupted, rationality challenged individuals calling for more gun control will not have any recollection of any details of the event that precipitated their rants!

Anonymous said...

And the Sheeple continue to believe the gov't version of events.

If you do reasearch on this shooting, it becomes all to obvious, like 9/11,.. that our gov't orchestrated and carried out this horrific event.



The 2nd Civil War has just started, and our treasonous Fekd Gov't fired the first shots, and killed school kids!

What will it take to get people wake up?

If this doesn't do,.. nothing will.

JD - US Marines - TELLING AMerincas, this shooting was a CIA Black-Op all the way, and the evidence is all to easy to see,.. BUT,.. you have to willing to look.

Anonymous said...

Oh but the second amendment does preclude gun control.
Gun control should be accepted by the people first before it is handed to the law makers (We hire) for administrating. Not made a law with no representation, and I say no representation since laws are now passed via executive order (Illegally), or against the will of the majority of the people by a personal gain from the representative.

Anonymous said...

Americans, not the United States Government, are the only people on God's green earth that are standing in the way of a One World Monolithic Government and Fascist State.

Don't give up your guns folks. Fight back! Start recalling all of your Senators and Reps that look like they are going to cave in to the anti gunners.

I love this one: Anti-gunners want to kill all gun owners! Ha! Hypocrits! They think the government will do the dirty work for them. If the anti-gunners were going to be shot for trying to disarms Americans I believe they would tuck tale and run. You'll get no help from the government; it knows which side their bread is buttered on.

Anti-Gunners, you can try to take my firearms if you so desire, but it will be the last thing you ever try. I can hit a 35mph moving target 1 mile away every time. A target the size of 55 gallon drum belongs to me at 1 mile and there are millions just like me that will not surrender their firearms.

So you communist fascist a_sholes lets rock and see who comes out on top. Good day.

Anonymous said...

Clip from a Fox News article about a movie being released on Christmas day...

Indeed the tragedy in Connecticut, in which with 27 people, including 20 school children, were killed by a lone gunman, has many in the entertainment industry struggling with the issue of firearms and gun violence. The star and director of the upcoming blood-and-gore filled “Django Unchained” differed this weekend about Hollywood’s responsibility when it comes to violence in film.

Actor Jamie Foxx told the Associated Press that the entertainment industry needs to start bearing some responsibility for violent content it produces. "We cannot turn our back and say that violence in films or anything that we do doesn't have a sort of influence," Foxx said. "It does."

But director Quentin Tarantino, who has built his career on depictions of graphic violence in films like “Inglourious Basterds” and “Kill Bill,” said he was tired of having to defend his movies, noting that “tragedies happen” and the blame should fall on those guilty of committing them.

“Quentin Tarantino seems to believe he is magically disconnected from the human race. Somehow everything he creates has no impact on us? He’s not the only director or movie producer who denies any negative effect from their work,” scoffed documentary producer Nicole Clark, who also educates young children on the effects of the media. “But ask any of these producers or directors if they think films can have a positive effect on society, and they will instantly say yes."

The Tarantino movie – described by one early filmgoer as so violent that they had to leave the theater midway through – is slated for official release on Christmas Day, prompting many to wonder if producer Harvey Weinstein, who recently called for a Violent Movie Summit to discuss the hot-button topic, will look to delay its release given the current circumstances. The film’s press junket, held in New York the day after the Connecticut shootings, proceeded as scheduled.

Anonymous said...

ANON 10:04

When was the last time you visited the inner cities in America? The amount of gun violence in the US is precisely why lawful citizens need the right to defend themselves.

Anonymous said...

Gods green earth has many people who are standing up to the most evil empire in History.

Syria is fighting back against USA terrorism. The Afghanistan people and Pakistani people continue to resist the full weight and cruelty of the American military and its new drones, controlled by fat cowards sitting in air conditioned offices.
The Libyans tried to resist, and they failed. You destroyed their country.
Vietnam Laos and Cambodia fought bravely against the American killers who invaded their peaceful nations.

Now the controllers of the USA have turned their sites on the American people. So many different sneaky tricks are used to destroy the little people. Chemtrails, big pharma drugs and vaccines, toxic GMO food, and soon drones.
Your guns will mean nothing if your rulers decide to get serious. Keep fantasizing if it makes you happy. Happy slaves are what the rulers want, good boy.

Anonymous said...

The right to bear arms is there so that the govt will think twice before forcing the people into slavery. Sadly, the govy has won. GMOs for breakfast anyone?

Anonymous said...

Here’s the thing. Owning a gun is not a human right.
Freedom of speech is a human right.
To remain silent until you have been assigned an attorney is a human right.

Just like driving a car is a right you have to earn, in that you have to learn how to handle a car responsibly and get a licence, owning a gun is a right that has to be earned as well! It has to be justified with logic by way of rational thinking, and rational thinking is hardly what is happening right now!

In light of what happened, this is understandable. But even though people have licences, they aren’t even able to drive responsibly, so how can they ever handle guns responsibly?

It’s like a lie, as one gun begets another gun, in that almost half the nation of a country’s population owns at least one fire arm. This proportion is not only ridiculous, but also great cause for the concern. We have to ask ourselves where this is going to stop?

So, gun control? YES! In a world with a total lack of common sense, this is an ABSOLUTE, without any shadow of a doubt. The recent shooting certainly bears that out.
Any person has the right to bear arms? ABSOLUTELY NOT! And if it’s in the constitution, it’s antiquated and needs to be amended, if not removed altogether!

In a world where we’re striving for a peaceful coexistence, WHY SHOULD PEOPLE BE ALLOWED TO CARRY GUNS? It’s not a prerequisite for living, and not a notion coming from a peaceful soul! This is the 3rd millennium, not the old wild west anymore!

Anyone demanding the right to bear arms, certainly has ulterior motives!

Anonymous said...

@ Anon 12/17/12@10:04am
The only ridiculus arguement is that getting rid of guns will end violence. While in the US we had a shooting that killed those kids several hours before that just as many died and even more were injured in china by a mentally ill person with a knife(in a primary school).
Quite frankly it shows your lack of understanding of the 2nd amendment which leads me to a conclusion that you most likely do not understand the others as well.
The media needs to give no "glory" to the killer
We need better methodology to find and help the mentally ill. These 2 things alone will help the problem.

Anonymous said...

The right to bear arms has expired because it was conditioned on belonging to a militia under authority of the government. Only those, according to the 2nd Amendment, who belong to a govt miliitia (well-regulated....discipline".

Clause 15. The Congress shall have Power *** To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions.

Clause 16. The Congress shall have Power *** To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the Militia, and for governing such Part of them as may be employed in the Service of the United States, reserving to the States respectively, the Appointment of the Officers, and the Authority of training the Militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress.

Calling Out the Militia

"The States as well as Congress may prescribe penalties for failure to obey the President’s call of the militia. They also have a concurrent power to aid the National Government by calls under their own authority, and in emergencies may use the militia to put down armed insurrection.1668 The Federal Government may call out the militia in case of civil war; its authority to suppress rebellion is found in the power to suppress insurrection and to carry on war.1669 The act of February 28, 1795,1670 which delegated to the President the power to call out the militia, was held constitutional."

So, by the text of the 2nd Amendment, if you do not belong to a Militia controlled by the government and well-regulated (meaning with a chain of command (Obama), rules, obligations, etc).

So other than military and National Guard, which make Militias obsolete and so undermine the justification given for the right to bear arms, no one else has the right.

Gun ownership is not given by the Creator; it is a privilege, and like all privileges (like using a car or practicing plumbing), it comes with rules and duties and obedience to a chain of command under govt control.

The price of a bogus "right to bear arms" without belonging to the military is 30,000 gun deaths a year. More people are murdered in this "land of the free" every day than have been killed in Japan (which some years has zero gun murders)in the past 10 years.

Germany, with 25 million guns, has 90% fewer gun homicides each year. Spain and Austria have 98% fewer...and this is the case with ALL industrialized naions (except Russia, the only other nation where weapons of mass murder (ie combat weapons) re legal). All other 33 nations have strict gun laws, strictly enforced (ownership is possible only with non combat weapons, training, screening, registration, etc...similar to your driver's license requirements) and 90-99% fewer gun murders.

This proves without a doubt (for Japan and Germany, Austria and Spain all have violent, militarist pasts) that where there are strict gun laws, even where guns are plentiful, the rate of gun homicides goes down 90 percent at least.

But in the US, a person on the terrorist list who cannot fly, can legally buy assault weapons, and anyone, crazy, criminal, mass murderer can buy combat weapons without any rules or regulations.

The NRA is against manditory backround checks and bannign assault weapons. In the past year, 20 mass murders, all using assault weapons.

So guns are not the problem; the problem is the law which allows anyone to get as many combat weapons as they want and a gun lobby (the NRA) which opposes stopping this madness. If it sells more guns (which mass murder does, as fear leads to more gun sales).

see pt 2

Anonymous said...

So here's the lie: that gun laws don't work (I can show you 33 peer nations where they do! and that guns are not the problem. Where guns are rare, so is gun murder: zero-10 in Japan (where you can own a shotgun) or 35 in the UK. Fewer guns means fewer gun deaths.

The other lie is that Americans want loose or unenforced law with loopholes. A vast majority, even of the 1% who belong to the NRA, want stricter laws, bans on assault weapons, and closing of the loopholes.

And the last lie is that even tho you are not part of a"well regulate" govt militia, that you have a RIGHT to bear arms. You do not. The SC is wrong on this. They ignore the actual text of the 2nd Amendment, which does not mention hunting or even self-defense as the basis of the right to bear arms. If you do not recognize Pres Obama as your ultimate Commander in Chief, and actively participate in govt military organizations, your gun ownership is a privilege, with strict limits.

They say guns don't kill people, but each year guns kill 30,000 Americans, including several hundred little kids who are killed by accident.

Japan: 0-10 gun murders a year; Spain, Austria, 50 or 60, the UK 35.

If these formerly violent nations can do it, so can we. Anyone who tells you otherwise is a shill for the gun industry, which profits from mass murder and the fear it creates and plays up (They are coming to get your better buy more; "only more guns will end the violence caused by guns.")

Common sense gun laws save tens of thousands of lives in the other 33 peer nations.....what is their secret? Strict gun laws (common sense) and strict enforcement. Since 9/11, 400,000 Americans have died by gun (half murder/half suicide). There will always be murder...therefore, why make it easy. If assault weapons were totally banned, this year alone, in 20 mass murders, many lives would have been spared.

And if you disagree, explain all 35 peer nations (except the 2 with the assault weapons, the US and Russia) have gun murder rates (and overall violence rates (including knives, bombs, bats, etc)90-99% less than in the US?

People talk about controlling the border (undocumented workers have a lower rate of crime than the US average) but what we really need to control is the irrational unregulated transfer and ownership of weapons of mass murder and sales (40) beyond the law. Send a few gun merchants to prisons for selling guns without background checks and it will stop fast! And if the NRA continues to oppose registration, background checks, and weapons intended for war, it should be shot to death.
For clear data on guns, gun deaths, and gun laws, see Wikipedia and Nationmaster, which are my sources for most of this argument for strict gun laws, strictly enforced, for the sake of our children and the other 30K who die from guns in the US each year.

Anonymous said...

The Constitution states (clause 15 and 16) that the govt militia, membership in which confers the right to bear arms, can be called up to put down rebellions, not arm them.

The 2nd Amendment created the legal basis for govt militias to down insurrection and civil war. MOst pro-gun folks think, against the clear words of the Constitution that it exists to provide arms to rebellions. NO! It says to put them down. The best way to defeat tyranny is thru non-violence: Ghandi toppled he British Empire in India, DR. Kind ended 400 years of legal persecution, and unarmed protesters in Tunesia overthrew a dictator and started the Arab Spring.

Dale see pt 2

Anonymous said...

Pt 2

"War settles is stupid." General and President Eisenhower.

Today America is at war with itself, with guns doing nearly all the lethal damage with 30,000 gun deaths a year. Let's all agree to go back to stones and knives. And if you must have a gun, remember: the Constitution says Obama is your Commander in Chief and can call you up anytime.
So don't disrespect him or you could be courtmartialed. Read the Constitution for yourself and stop believing the lies told about what it really says.

Anonymous said...

Connecticut’s Strict Gun Control Laws Did Not Stop the School Shootings in Newtown, CT


Democrat From NY: To Get Gun Control, Obama Must ‘Exploit’ CT Shooting

List of school shootings known to be linked to SSRIs

Gun-Town USA: 25 Years Murder Free

Media Blackout: Oregon Mall Shooter Was Stopped By An Armed Citizen Sunday, December 16, 2012 9:02

Anonymous said...

I always thought of guns as a defence against violence.How come a spider gets to carry enough poison to kill something a hundred thousand times its size while humans are getting killed with bats and machettes? Gun control is unnatural and wrong.

TheTruth said...

NO, it is a right, and anyone comparing a right to a privilege is an idiot. As per your mass murder assertion of "Assault Weapons", wrong again (BTW, these are semi-auto rifles, whereas an actual Assault Weapon would be the equivalent of an M16/M4)! The worst mass shooting was VA Tech, and the gunman had two handguns, nothing more (Most homicides in the U.S. are from smaller caliber pistols, and occur in the inner-cities with the strictest gun control laws). The worst mass attack period was OK City, which occurred via a few hundred dollars worth of fertilizer. You'd be funny if your assertions weren't so ass backwards.

TheTruth said...

WRONG on all accounts! I won't waste my time correcting all of your nonsense, but Britain has five times as much violence as the U.S., and twice as much as South Africa (Canada has two times as much as the U.S.). Violent crime includes but is not limited to attempted murder (Tons of stabbings and shootings), rape, assault, aggravated burglary and robbery, car jackings, etc. The U.S. leads the world in gun ownership, but is down near number 30 on the list of firearms related deaths (In terms of annual deaths in the U.S., firearms homicides account for the same amount as HIV (Approximately 0.20%)). Oh, and in Japan they have an exceptionally high suicide rate (Twice that of the United States'). Not to mention that compared to all of those other countries, the U.S. is leaps-and-bounds above them all in terms of standard of living.

TheTruth said...

You need to not only read the Bill of Rights, but you need to take some serious time aside to study history, as well as the Founders and Framers intent. You are lost beyond belief. Now run along and hit the books! ;-)

Anonymous said...

While I was living in NW Arkansas in the early 80's I realized that the son of a friend had stolen my buck knife and a vial that had a gold tooth in it. It was a couple years after the fact that I put two and two together and asked him about it. He said "I can't remember."(Now I can imagine a kid had stolen so many knives that he couldn't remember but a gold tooth?) That was Our esteemed president, Ronald Reagan's answer to questions about the contras. People and particularly kids pick up on the messages from parents, teachers, representatives and presidents. Our country has become the most aggressive and violent country in the history of the world. We produce so much of the arms that are being used in the world. It is no wonder that Americans, particularly "troubled" Americans are so quick to pick up a gun for violence. IT IS NOT THE GUNS IT IS THE GUN MENTALITY OF OUR PRESIDENT, REPRESENTATIVES, AND BUSINESS LEADERS: our essential CULTURE.

the resistance said...

1st amendment-Freedom of speech. 2nd amendment-Right to bear arms. IT IS A RIGHT! I have guns because of people like you. Tool!

Anonymous said...

Clearly the gun nuts are only a small part of the comments here. The gun lobby professionals are busy earning their paychecks. Vermin.

Anonymous said...

canada doesnt gave a fraction of the violent cime our standard of living is among the best in the world. only violence on our news comes from america. i live here and lived in america there is no comparison. your comments are the most ridiculous ive heard yet.

Anonymous said...

"Amendment II. A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

The use of the comma in grammar is to separate elements in a sentence. The regulation of militias is separate from "the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." No mention of hunting or sports, no references to "muskets only" or "future weapons technology excluded", no position that its a "privilege" to keep and bear arms.

What grants equality between a 120 pound woman and a 300 pound rapist? A gun. More people die in car accidents than by guns in this country, you want cars outlawed? Doctors and other healthcare "professionals" kill up to 10 times the number of people per year than gun owners, how about them?

Did you even bother to note that all these shooters were on medication for depression?

Based upon your logic all men should be castrated since men are equipt to have children, but this equipment can be used for rape, therefore to stop all rapes all men must be castrated. That is your logic isn't it? Because less than 1% of gun owners commit gun crimes, all 80+ million of them should lose their right to self-defense.


escapefromobamastan said...

I'm a female and I carry a gun for personal protection. I hope I never have to use it but I will if I have to. It's a jungle out there.

Anonymous said...

The anti-gun nuts need to reassess the violent crime rates in all nations they looked at. Total all of the killings, not just by one method.

Those that think a right somehow can be turned into a privilege, should not vote any longer.

The second amendment has two thoughts in it, using three commas. The second thought is that any infringement on the right to keep AND bear arms, shall not be allowed.

",,, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed."

What is it a certain type of religious person is told,,, the "devil will change the meanings of words to suit themselves". So what do you emotionally violent people doing changing the definitions of 'NOT BE INFRINGED' for?

For the Anon comment of Dec 18th 2012 at 10:07AM,, tell that to the natives up there, you liar. You are still treating them like the USA did in the mid 1800's.

Anonymous said...

America is so obsessed with gun control, NOBODY is giving any thought to the victims. The reactionary Obama worshiping fools call for gun control, and the reactionary gun loving right wingers freak out and through a hissy fit cause the gubermint might come and take away assault rifles.

The gun fetish pussies remind me of Imelda Marcos and her shoe collection. Can never have enough. To all the selfish cowardly pricks here who spent so much more energy on defending your guns than you have on thinking about the pain this massacre caused..........God is watching you, and he is sickened by your lack of humanity.
I have made several comments here criticizing the gun nuts and the sneaky slimy gun industry trolls. I believe in people having the right to guns, always have, hunted in my youth and enjoyed it.
The gun lobby does not speak for me, their refusal to support any laws that keep crazy criminal scum from getting guns clearly shows where their loyalties are. Dirty pigs, profiting off death and misery, conning simple folk into accepting their lies without thinking.
America is a mess for so many reasons. Stupidity and guns in overabundance is a dangerous combination. Your problems are just beginning.

Anonymous said...

"Germany, with 25 million guns, has 90% fewer gun homicides each year. Spain and Austria have 98% fewer."
This data is false- Just look at the crime increase in Australia since guns were banned.

*Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent;

*Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent;

*Australia-wide, armed-robberies are up 44 percent;

*In the state of Victoria, homicides-with-firearms are up 300 percent.

Anonymous said...

When cops, federal agents, and military personnel are banned from having access to firearms, then I might consider handing over my firearm.... maybe.

The biggest threat to our safety is the criminals that are licensed to kill.

Anonymous said...

Dear Anonymous (2nd. comment above) You are obviously a paid Government Troll. The entire investigation is not even completed and you want to start pointing fingers in all directions except the PARENTS direction not the Mental Health organizations which are over capacity thanks to our wonderful Government. Far too many admitted gun owners have commented here and other threads, clsing their comments with a prayer for the little one killed in this horrible nightmare and have asked God to ease the pain from the Parents and loved ones. Just because you do not see the out pouring of cards, letters and donations to the families, does not mean it is not going on. Rest assured, these things are happening yet you are blind of this fact.

The truth of the matter is, a mentally ill person took these childrens lives, NOT the NRA, NOT you,, Not me but, ONE indivudual. Lay the blame where blame should be. If it had not been a gun, it would have been knives or arrows, or setting them on fire. There are thousands of ways for a madman to kill another human. You obiously live in a gated community with an expensive alarm system and would not know a rabid coyote from a tea cup poodle. Perhaps when you get a few minutes in your cubical farm where you work, you can look it up. I live in a rural are and have been jumped twice in 2 years by coyotes/wild dogs and, wolves. Had it not been for a rifle with a 30 round magazine, I would have been mauled to death. The REAL reason we cling too our guns? To keep people like you and the other idiots in D/C from disarming us so they can round us all up bound for the "Re-education Camps". If you do not believe in the FEMA camps, you are a much bigger fool that I at first thought. For those of you who think a total ban on guns is such a great idea, save yourself a lot of internal gas and move to England or Austrailia where guns ARE banned and lets see you defend you wife and daughter/s from gangs breaking into you safe little gated community hole, er, home and, have their was with your Wife and Daughters while you sit there watching because you were too near sighted to see a legitmate reason for owning a gun in the first place. You are no different from the idiots that are grossly overweight and blame McDonals or other fast foods in lieu of the REAL problem, YOUR lack of self control.

Lastly, ask any policeman if it is his job to ride around in your neighbothood all day and all night to 'protect' you. Yo will get a resouinding "NO" as an answer. If you do not have the back bone to protect your OWN family, there is not much about you at all.

Personally, I am GLAD the gun industry does NOT speak for you as that would have to ne a major embarassment to do so.

You state "Your problems are just beginning". I, alomg with many others consider that a a threat and challenge you to follow you through on you childish threat. Even with just bare hands, I could put you down and, faster than amy gun known to man. Do you REALLY think your Government in going to marchin amidst a Nation with 280 MILLION known guns snd simply "Take" pot guns with that many Armed Citizens????

NO They WILL NOT even try. The day they try to takeour guess again. No way. Our weapoms were by design, put into place by the founding Fathers for a REASON, permiting the citizens a way to prevent Big Government from becoming basically a distatorship and "CONTINUE" to break the laws of the land and violate our Constitution on a daily bases. Who is it going to defend us and our Constitution??? It certianly will not be some two bit wussy like you.

SherryAnn said...

What evidence have you found? That's a scary thought..

SherryAnn said...

So you really want to live in a country where the only ones who have guns are outlaws and those in power??

Anonymous said...

Anonymous, plenty of cities in the US and other countries with strict gun control laws. Try a vacation in a place that reflects your personal views. And sorry, freedom of speech may be a 'human right' in your opinion, however, look into all the countries with hate speech laws. The same people that enacted gun laws also forced hate speech laws on their subjects. God speed on your folly of trying to protect on without the other.

Anonymous said...

12:02 AM must watch a lot of Television, a lot of crappy fantasy based television. He says all the right things, even challenging an anonymous commenter to a fight. How sad.

The gun nuts are extremists. I say I hunted in my youth, support the right of people to own guns.........BUT I dare to support logical laws that prevent criminals, drug addicts, and such from getting a gun, I support limits on automatic weapons and stuff like that. So you flip out, through a hissy fit (like a girl) and talk tough.

Surely you have had your limit of logical talk and wish to take the low road. It suits you and leads you closer to your final destination. Jesus will reject violent hate filled people like you and you will go to the other place, nice and warm. Or maybe you will see the light, find love and God and change your wicked ways. I hope so.

Anonymous said...

"Don't confuse the 2nd Amendment right to bear arms with the right to own any kind or amount of guns you want. The 2nd Amendment does not preclude gun control."

Yes, it does. The Founders were crystal clear on this point.

"The strongest reason for people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." -- Thomas Jefferson

Paul V. Cassidy said...

That gun lobby motto 'Guns don't kill, people do', should really be 'Guns don't kill, people with guns do' , because guns being inanimate objects plainly don't. And as for the people with guns who do kill you tell us 12'000 of them kill other people, mainly in gang related killings (75% homicides in the US being gang related by your estimation), while 17'500 kill themselves. This alone indicates that owning a gun presents the owner and their household a far greater risk than not owning one. And if 75% of those gunshot homicides are gang related surely that means a combination of gun control, policing and anti-drugs policies would be more effective in terms of promoting public safety than the proliferation of gun ownership? Your argument is clearly self-defeating.

There's a real issue with the stance your taking given that Nancy Lanza was also a 'Prepper', from Connecticut and likely a subscriber to Activist Post which is essentially a prepper-zine exploiting armageddonist, conspiratorial and ecological arguments to promote paranoia and the sale of survivalist kit including guns. In some respects Activist Post reads like a charter for paranoid schizophrenics the danger being that it really is targeting the mentally ill. Now you plainly cannot disconnect from the events in Newton because there is an obvious link here. The fact that you see being responsible, in gun ownership terms, as not advocating the proliferation of RPGs and home-based nuclear devices, far from being reassuring, suggests that the preppers movement constitutes a military threat to the security of the US far greater than international terrorism.

You guys need to talk about a decommissioning process in return for the formation of an established Christian church which is sufficiently progressive and liberal in it's character to accommodate the wisdom and diversity of the age. One of the main purposes being the reintegration of Christian faith with the education system. If you succeeded in doing that all of those 290Million legally held private firearms might just have served to justify themselves. In my view if there were a million privately held guns in the US it would be enough and they really only ought to be owned by security professionals, sportsmen and country-folk who could justify ownership in terms of lifestyle.

Read complete response at:

Anonymous said...

I'm from canada and we cannot own handguns without a restricted firearms licence which is granted after training and a full federal police background check. Even then they are only used at ranges and must be case locked in transport and at home, separate from the ammo. All of this and I don't see gangs busting into homes frequently to kill us because we're seen as vulnerable.

Post a Comment