Subscribe
RSS
Mobile
Evan Todd was a student at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado in the late 1990s. He is a miraculous survivor of the infamous living nightmare that occurred there on April 20, 1999. In fact, he was the first student shot when Dylan Klebold and Eric Harris began their rampage that day.
One might think Evan would be supportive of the misguided efforts by President Barack Obama to restrict the Second Amendment rights of every law-abiding citizen in the United States of America. Nothing could be further from the truth: for the past decade, he has been an outspoken opponent of additional gun control laws. Now Evan has written an open letter to the president about the issue.
"The evidence is very clear pertaining to the inadequacies of the assault weapons ban," he writes. "It had little to no effect when it was in place from 1994 to 2004. It was during this time that I personally witnessed two fellow students murder twelve of my classmates and one teacher. The assault weapons ban did not deter these two murderers, nor did the other thirty-something laws that they broke."
But then, the president and his underlings already know that, as evidenced by a recently disclosed white paper written by the National Institute for Justice — the research and evaluation agency of the Justice Department — and obtained by the National Rifle Association's Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA). The report is an eye-opener for any who still believe that Obama & company are proposing "moderate" or "reasonable" gun control measures. They are neither moderate nor reasonable. They are radical and draconian. If you still count yourself among those who disbelieve that, read on.
The document states: "Since assault weapons are not a major contributor to U.S. gun homicide, and the existing stock of guns is large, an assault weapons ban is unlikely to have an impact on gun violence." However, the report goes on to state, "If coupled with a gun buyback and no exemptions, then it could be effective."
What, exactly, would such a mandatory gun buyback accomplish? Eliminating the types of firearms Barack Obama, Diane Feinstein and their elitist, gun-grabbing friends don't like? The purpose is certainly not reducing murders in the United States, since the DOJ has already concluded that "assault weapons are not a major contributor to U.S. gun homicide."
As for the proposals to limit the size of magazines to 10 rounds (it's now 7 in knee-jerk New York), the DOJ document states, "In order to have an impact, large capacity magazine regulation needs to sharply curtail availability to include restrictions on importation, manufacturing, sale and possession."
Mandatory gun buybacks...Proposals to make the very possession of high-capacity magazines illegal...Mandatory registration of all firearms...If these ideas don't sound to you like confiscation of private property guaranteed by the United States Constitution, then you belong in another country, not mine. Obama can hike up his mom jeans and take pictures all day long of him firing a shotgun, but those of us who know better are not convinced that he loves either the Constitution or the freedom guaranteed by it. His hand-wringing, limp-wristed, latte-drinking liberal base can wonder why gun sales are among the few areas of the American economy currently booming. Some of us know why, including Evan Todd, who certainly has earned the right to be heard on this issue.
As Evan wrote in his letter to Obama, "Gun ownership is at an all-time high. And although tragedies like Columbine and Newtown are exploited by ideologues and special-interest lobbying groups, crime is at an all-time low. The people have spoken. Gun stores shelves have been emptied. Gun shows are breaking attendance records. Gun manufacturers are sold out and backordered. Shortages on ammo and firearms are countrywide. The American people have spoken and are telling you that our Second Amendment shall not be infringed."
What part of that is hard to understand, Mr. President?
---
© 2013 by Doug Patton - Doug Patton describes himself as a recovering political speechwriter who agrees with himself more often than not. His weekly columns are distributed by Cagle Cartoons newspaper syndicate.
February 21, 2013 @ 8:15 am
Mr Patton they seem to have trouble with the entire part of the 2nd Amendment. After seeing how the election went I am kinda in support of Obama voters not having guns. Heck if that is the extent of their ration thinking could you imagine them with a Joe Biden limited edition shotgun (with a rape whistle in the stock).
February 21, 2013 @ 10:51 am
And don’t forget the Obamaphone to call for help!
February 21, 2013 @ 4:30 pm
Expand, ms! The Democratic Liberals are having a problem with the entire Constitutional ‘Bill of Rights’.
AND, the Obamaphone was used to call each and every liberal voter on Nov./ 1,2,3,4,5,6/2012 – handy, wasn’t it?
February 21, 2013 @ 8:50 am
It’s gotten to the point that I just don’t care what the left tries to do any more….I will absolutely refuse to obey….$crew them! I have a distinct feeling that MANY people in this country feel the same. I don’t envy anyone tasked with attempting to enforce the lastest lefty policies.
February 21, 2013 @ 9:32 am
I refuse to obey the “Laws” of a government that uses the constitution as toilet paper. They can have my firearms when I run out of bullets and I reload.
February 21, 2013 @ 9:31 am
Unfortunately I can’t write this in crayon so that most of those here can understand. What part of the more important (since it is placed FIRST in the 2d Afterthought) clause “WELL-REGULATED MILITIA” is so difficult to understand for all you paranoid delusional Dirty Harry wannabes? While your myopic hero, the ‘strict constructionist’ Dishonorable Mr. Scalia conveniently ignored this part of the archaic mistake in his Heller opinion, even he recognized that the death toy lunatics need to be reined in regarding the obsession with owning something that is only used for murder. So keep dreaming and fooling yourselves into thinking you’ll be some Lone Ranger someday gunning down desperados and saving the Republic while the reality is that you will probably NEVER be in a situation that will necessitate owning a gun, and if you do, you will probably need adult diapers more than any kind of weapon. And try to remain smug and secure over a law as outdated as owning slaves, which you also could do when this unfortunate addendum was written, and hopefully the faces of the Newtown victims will dance in your heads every time you try to sleep, since your idiotic clinging to an outdated mistaken idea enabled their deaths.
February 21, 2013 @ 10:11 am
sb24, your mindless and liberal rants are being posted on the wrong website. You are dealing with educated people here that understand the Constitution and what America is supposed to stand for. Your posts only serve to illustrate how anti-American you and people like you are and the threat you present to our freedoms.
February 21, 2013 @ 10:31 am
If you cared to do even the slightest bit of research, you would find that all of the original bill of rights refered to individual rights, not collective rights. Why would the 2nd be any different. The only reason the phrase regarding the militia was included was to further declare that the US should not have a standing military, and that militias formed from individual citizens was the best way to ensure freedome. Alexander Hamilton from New York spoke quite clearly that this should should not be abridged and that free men should have whatever arms necessary to ensure their freedeom. Take your socialist **** back to whereever you came from. We will not freely give back a fundamental right that is not the governments to control. Also, pick up a book sometime and research the bill of rights, and the federalist papers. You might learn something more than watching CNBC.
February 21, 2013 @ 11:00 am
Well SB24, you really exposed youself for who you really are. So often those that cannot articulate a well written defense of their position will often resort to name calling, degradation of character, and attempt to put those who disagree in some artificially created box. Congratulations on your exposure.
Now regarding the Second Amendment of our Constitution, this is what George Washington (our first president in case you were unaware) had to say at the first session of Congress,
“Firearms stand next in importance to the Constitution itself. They are the people’s liberty teeth keystone… the rifle and the pistol are equally indispensable…more than 99% of them by their silence indicate that they are in safe and sane hands. The very atmosphere of firearms everywhere restrains evil interference. When firearms go, all goes, we need them every hour.”
February 21, 2013 @ 11:09 am
Any fool understands that the second ammendment was put into place to ensure that the others were to be obeyed, and that you and your person would not become the slaves owned by an oppressive government which today seeks to make financial slaves out of us all. It won’t be the people holding the guns that need adult diapers, it will be the children in adult bodies too weak to make their way in this world and have to rely on 911 Obama to clean up their mess and wipe up the drool of leaking liberal brains and orifices, and feed them off the teat of the government milk of magnesia which causes amnesia of what it means to be an American.
February 21, 2013 @ 11:13 am
@sb24 -
I see you are AT IT AGAIN — Wow, I actually look forward to your Indcotrination Post. Well done.
But I also see you refuse to dialog with us – Just – “HIT AND POST (Copy/Paste) your Brain Washing and than are NOT ALLOWED to dialog – because you might learn something. I understand, why you are NOT ALLOWED to dialog, it would cause you to think for yourself and thus might short out your brain washing. I understand – I do. “There is an App for that!” …
I read one post in a different thread that suggested that you might be ‘one of us’, trying to make the Dems/Progressives “look bad” – IF that is the case, they do NOT need any help. They are doing fine shooting themselves in the foot. (Another reason I am against Gun Control. I like seeing the Shoot Themselves in the foot!
But to “paraphrase” a Dirty Harry line – “Thanks for making my day!:
February 21, 2013 @ 11:33 am
Woodberg, your post was factual and very well done. The problem is “low end” liberals like sb24 are brainwashed to the point that they cannot learn and are not interested in the facts. Their emotions seem to power them to their utopian socialist goals. Attempting to reason with liberals or open an intellectual dialog is in most cases impossible. Progressives that post on this website are so dumb that they do not realize that they are “outing” their hate for traditional America and hurting their own agenda.
February 21, 2013 @ 1:44 pm
The children of Newton do dance in my mind – only in my scenario they are still alive because self defense was not legislated out of existance on school property (aka “kill Zones” in the minds of deranged murderers).
In my scenario, my well trained staff and/or teacher with a concealed carry weapon returned fire, planted the cretin and saved countless lives from a psychopath.
So go ahead sb24 and be a sheeple. In fact, I urge you to post a sign on your porperty announcing to the world that you have a gun free zone. Good luck. I hear begging and groveling for psychos not to hurt you works oh so well.
February 21, 2013 @ 2:00 pm
Liberals/progressives are notorius word smiths. They change language to suit their agenda. Take the phrase: “A well regulated militia…” The founders used the word “regulated” to mean “perfected”, “proficient” i.e. “A well regulated clock kept accurate time.” Liberals have changed the common meaning of regulated to mean surrounded by governmental rules and bureaucracy.
“Militia” was understood by the founders to be all able bodied adults (usually men). As such, when the “militia” was called up, the citizens were expected to muster with their own military grade firearm in hand. Progressives have changed the meaning of militia to mean a small group of toothless, half witted military wannabes who just want play with guns. Militias are to be characterized as extremely dangerous and violent. Pursuing these lawless groups no longer is limited by the the niceties of due process or the rule of law. Members of a militia are guilty by association and may be killed on sight by Federal law enforcement (reference Ruby Ridge.)
sb24 your scholarship is lacking as is your demeanor. Your poorly atempt to utilize Saul Alinsky tactics are of no avail. I guess I should feel sorry for you as you obviously come from the shallow end of the gene pool. Poor baby! Thanks for playing…try again.
February 21, 2013 @ 2:37 pm
sb24 read (if you can) “Paul Revere’s Ride” and compare the English to Obama’s government then maybe you can see why we deem the 2nd amendment so important. Those of you who don’t arm themselves to keep this government in check should not only thank God for those of us but do but
February 21, 2013 @ 3:28 pm
SB24,
Unfortunately I cannot call the SHEER Bull Excretion that your name of BS must stand for, or that it is effective for you 24 / 7.
The meaning of the phrase “well regulated militia” is not difficult to understand. May I suggest that you may find the definition of who is in the milita under US Code 10 – Armed Forces Subtitle A – General Military Law Chapter 13 Milita Section 311 Militia. composition and classes Which states;
“(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are -
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of
the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the
Naval Militia.
In order to be a member of the militia you could not be a felon and you could not be “mentally enfeebled”. Thus criminals and the mentally incompetent, such as the newtown shooter and the aurora shooter and the shooter of gabby gifford would have been excluded from being members of the milita. I can easily see one obstacle to your being able to join the milita and strongly suspect a second
Now, regarding your disrespect to one of the justices of the supreme court. I am not surprised that a fascist lacky such as yourself would resort to such measures.
As for your maintaining that owning and carrying firearms for personal protection is a paranoid delusion, I have experience to disagree. On two occasions my carrying of a handgun has prevented my being assaulted by a criminal intent on harm. In both cases the simple display of the weapon cause the criminal to recall and urgent appointment elsewhere. I did not need adult diapers, although the criminals may have.
Frankly I am sick and tired of you fascist lackies ignoring the constitution. If you dislike the second ammendment so much, then AMMEND THE CONSTITUTION! It has been done 27 times in the past. Then you can institute whatever draconian policies you want. But ignoring the constitution will not work.
Frankly I am disgusted with you and your ilk. I see no way for us to live together peacefully. The only way to prevent a civil war is to separate. You take the left coast, hawaii, New England, the rust belt and the lower half of Michigan. We get the rest of the country. You go ahead and pass all the laws you want, taxes you want, any kind of effin regulations you want. We will move out from your areas and you take all the liberals, progressives and communists from our part of the country. We’ll split the national debt based on a per capita basis. Two years to decide what part of the country you want to be a citizen of. You vote with your feet and move there.
Now go out and place a “GUN FREE ZONE” sign on your front lawn. That way the criminals will know to leave you alone. Like that happens.
February 21, 2013 @ 6:01 pm
theophilous,
I agree with your position entirely, and I would go one better. First of all the pholosophical split between the liberal progressive socialists, and the Constituonal Freedom loving American patriots is so wide that we are divided beyond any common ground. Simply put, there are those who cherish what this country was at it founding and those who wish to accept the opposite and support the tyrannical government which we now have become.
How the geographical split will be designed is unknown at this point. But we have become two nations and the best solution would be to recognize this and bring about the reality.
I would say that the national debt is a product of the present day government and was created primarily by the socialists and the government of the last century which went into partnership with the Banking Cartel known as the Federal Reserve.
Since the debt was created by this faction, let them pay it.
Let the new free America create its own valid currency, and reject the fiat counterfit system which has destroyed the wealth, economy and prosparity of the nation.
Let us make a new banking system outside of the clutches of the western banking central bank criminals all under the BIS umbrella.
The way I see it, let those who supported the creation of the debt be responcible to pay it.
February 21, 2013 @ 7:35 pm
Hey TROLL, why don’t you go pedal your papers somewhere else besides here? You’ll win no converts here, and probably won’t piss anyone off either, since we are used to you drivel. Just an FYI, whether the 2nd amendment is “archaic and outdated” or not it is STILL the law of the land. Get used to it, it ain’t gonna change any time soon! While you’re at it, check out the “Dick act” which was passed in 1902, much more recent. You might actually learn something……Silly liberal, what ya gonna do when they come for YOU?
February 22, 2013 @ 5:41 am
Actually, well regulated meant ‘well trained’ when this was written.
February 21, 2013 @ 10:26 am
Since when does “well-regulated” mean “self-regulated”? Instead of dissing someone for their “liberal rants”, why doesn’t someone answer that question?
February 21, 2013 @ 10:35 am
Well regulated means instead of a standing army. The founders of our country who fought for our rights, deemed a standing army as one of the most dangerous things to a free society. Freedom was to be upheld by free men being able to think for themselves and protect themselves. Ironically, these are both ideals that the liberal mindset is trying to destroy. The right to bear arms is not a right that the government can grant or deny. It is a God given right known since the beginning of time. The second amendment just restates the fact, that the givernment has not right to infringe on this right. Period. Is that simple enough for you?
February 21, 2013 @ 11:18 am
Well regulated does mean SELF-regulated in a society designed for SELF-government, the basic requirement is the abiltiy to sustain and govern SELF. Our AMerican experiment was designed for no other kind of people other than those who can regulate SELF, and will never work when the rights of the collective of the weak take precidence over the rights of the strong individual SELF. Any society that worships at the altar of edification of the weak, the poor, the children, the self chosen disenfranchised who refuse to contribute just ends up becoming a disenfranchised weak nation of poor people run by children in adult bodies. It is no more a parent’s job to raise a child than a government’s job to raise dependent citizens. It is the job of both to raise adults, with the ability to sustain SELF in SELF-government. That is what being an American is all about,,,,,that nasty inconvenient experiment where the power resides in the people who become powerless when they lose the ability to govern themselves and become slaves to their passions and emotions which is all the liberal persuation has to offer. The beginning of the end of all good things American began when the liberals began teaching dependency, entitlement, and false equality based on the ability to take up space insead of the ability to contribute in society,,,taught in the schools, in the media and from the mouths of our politicians,,,dependency and entitlement ,,,,which are the real enemies of the American experiment and will ultimately lead to it’s downfall unless reversed and reversed soon.
February 21, 2013 @ 12:02 pm
America is NOT and was NOT an ever an “experiment” … It was a Dream – “That man should be free to … peruse their dreams without a King taking it all. That we can have God in our Nation, not because a King says so, but WE SAY SO!”
In fact – The “American Experiment” was a phrased taken and re-coined in the 20th Century by people that WANTED to see it fail and thus came up with phrases that our Founding Fathers never said — “America is an experiment”.
It was actually a man named: Alexis de Tocqueville, and he actually wrote this:
“Tocqueville warned that modern democracy may be adept at inventing new forms of tyranny,…” . o O ( ponder that )
Now the question is, better asked, if we are allowed to be honest:
Why are some hell bent to see America Fail and more to the point, why are they working so hard towards that goal?
ONE REASON -> THEY WANT TO CONTROL US. They are power hungry – greedy people that want take what they could not have. Our freedom! Then everything else!
It is called “TYRANNY”. I suggest all look up that word.
But America is/was NOT an “Experiment” that is/was doomed to fail. That is a lie that was/is pushed by those that want to see it thus and it will NOT happen – unless we ‘roll over’ and let men take our rights away, one-at-a-time. The “experiment” if there is one, is WILL WE? Will we simply “Roll-Over” and let other men walk on and over our rights that the Founding Fathers fought hard to give us?
Are we afraid of a bloody nose? A fat lip and yes even some deaths to save our Freedoms?
I for one am not!
February 21, 2013 @ 2:14 pm
thFerret…you make the common mistake made by most liberals. A little more scholarship on your part might have prevented you from embarrassing yourself as you just have.
The founders used the word “regulated” to mean “perfected”, “proficient” i.e. “A well regulated clock kept accurate time.” Use those synonyms within the context of the Second Amendment and it approximates what the Founders intended. Liberals have changed the common meaning of the word “Regulated” to mean surrounded by governmental rules and bureaucracy.
Just as Inigo Montoya said to the six fingered man, I say to you: “You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.”
February 21, 2013 @ 10:30 am
sb24—
Are you describing yourself when writing insults against firearm owners??
If you don’t want to own a firearm , that is ok , maybe you live such a secluded life and in an area like Biden does , that you just have no need or want for one –but that’s just you–
I was issued an M1 Rifle at the age of 17 by the U.S. Marine Corps, and was taught how to fire that rifle by some very excellant instructors, used an M1 Rifle and a BAR in Korea in combat, became one of those Marksmanship Instructors later after Korea, always had an issued M1 Rifle in my locker at whatever duty station I was serving–and was able to take it home to clean and maintain if i wanted to –but I never used that Rifle to threaten or kill anyone , other than in Korea, and I will be 80 in April, and all my life I have had a firearm or two in my possesion–
The 2nd Amendment guarantees me that right , now I don’t write articles saying that YOU should own a firearm when you don’t want to, that is your choice , so please don’t try to tell me and other firearm owners what we should do concerning wanting and owning firearms — You have your opinion on this subject and I have mine —so why cause yourself all that problem of trying to force your thoughts on to other folks that you know will disagree with you–a Milita?? yep ,a Milita is “We the People” who will volunteer to defend your rights to be as offensive as you seem to be in your last article here on this site—I have read many of your articles and they all smack of being kind of holier than thou type of writing–but I doubt that you are any better than anyone else in this USA–if you are really an American??
February 21, 2013 @ 10:39 am
Just one comment daleh,
The 2nd amendment doesn’t guarantee you the right to bear arms. It limits governments ability to deny you of that right. The right was yours before the government even exists. It is an inherent right.
February 21, 2013 @ 12:19 pm
To daleh: The answer to your question as to why they can’t just let other people alone? Liberal democrats are, at heart, MEDDLERS. They cannot help themselves. They have a compulsion to meddle in other people’s lives, and if they are able to get the power, to FORCE them to live their lives as they (the Democrat liberals) see fit for you to live them.
Free people are content to live their own lives and let others do the same. Idiot liberals are not–they want the power to compel YOU to live your live as THEY see fit, and if you don’t fight back, they will DO it. Hence the current assault on the Second Amendment. It is so HARD to legislate meddling into compulsion on people who are armed, you see.
February 21, 2013 @ 10:39 am
For a long time, whenever Obamaites were being accused of pushing a “socialist” or “communist” agenda, they would immediately deny it and say conservatives were paranoid, afraid to change, etc. But yesterday I saw something that really disturbed me on a comment site — a bunch of people openly talking about pushing and promoting communism via the Obama administration. They talked about how much better things would be, etc., and that there would be jobs, food, housing for everyone. One of them even slipped and used the word communism. . . Is anyone else here old enough to remember when communism was one of the biggest threats in the world?
February 21, 2013 @ 11:03 am
Yes. They were refered to as “usefull idiots”.
February 21, 2013 @ 12:01 pm
Wasn’t it only back in the 50′s and 60′s when Our country had arrested and tried people for being communists ? And Yes We have a God given right to defend Ourselves and As Citizens a duty to be able and prepared to defend Our Country !
February 21, 2013 @ 12:10 pm
Here is the “Funny” thing – Name one country where Socialism works?
Now – when they give you a country – tell and/or ask them, “Then why do you not just go live there, since that is what you want.”
The answer – at least the one’s I get: “What, and give up my freedoms?”
But here is the other thing – the ones that fight for a countries downfall for their “leader” are usually the ones that are killed first. (By guns)
Why?
They are seen as dangerous, because they can turn on their country so easily.
February 21, 2013 @ 2:04 pm
The part that disturbed me most (aside from the obvious) was that this bunch (of I’m guessing twenty-something-year-olds) didn’t even bother to try to hide what they were after. No more thinly-veiled motives, no more smoke and mirrors. They were quoting Lenin and Marx and were pretty straight forward about their goals. With all that’s been going on to take away our freedoms in this country, are the Obama followers about to take the next step and start a whole new phase?
As Conservatives, I believe we’ve really got to step up to the plate and work as a team. We can’t afford to lose more elections. Our country is just too valuable.
February 21, 2013 @ 10:59 am
Obviously some that have commented here have not read or even briefly associated themselves with the origins of the Second Amendment to the Constitution. “Well regulated” in the context of the era meant equipped and trained. The government has failed miserably to regulate the militia. If the militia were properly regulated we would more closely resemble the Swiss. There would be a machine gun in every home with appropriate amounts of ammunition. Proficiency with a firearm would be demonstrated twice yearly at taxpayer funded shooting ranges. “Being necessary to the security of a free state”. The founders knew that without a free and armed populous the country would never have any assurance of continued freedom. It is under attack now. “The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed”. This part in self explanatory except for neo-Marxist, racist dolts who do not and cannot understand plain English. It always boils down to old dead white guys who oppressed people by slave ownership. If the second amendment is so damn bad then repeal it. And while you are at it, get rid of the 1st, the 3rd, the 4th, the 10th and the 14th as well. You won’t need them anyway. Because the truth of the matter is the constitution isn’t worth the paper it’s written on if you won’t stand for the principals.
February 21, 2013 @ 11:28 am
Woodberg–
You of course are correct—I realize that the 2nd Amendment does stop the Govt from taking that right away –but to me it also guarantees that inherent right to bear arms by stopping the govt and whomever might be in that govt (such as the people now)from consficating my weapons, as they would like to —
We have enough laws written that goes against the 2nd Amendment now , so I see no reason to write more laws –WE and by WE I mean all Americans , especially Politicians know that and that any more laws against Firearms will do nothing to stop a person if he or she decides to take out one person or a bunch of people –for politicians it is just more Power, for some folks like sb24 it is trying to force their beliefs on to others because they think they can or they think they are smarter than the ones they are preaching to.
I am not a hunter , I stopped hunting back in ’68, and am not really a person that wants or needs to have a collection of firearms, but I also believe if a person ( man or woman) wants to hunt or own a collection of firearms, including an AR15, NO ONE, including the president of the USA, should be able to deny that to any American–although i guess i should chasnge that to deny criminals that right– but already the laws deny criminals that right –and yet the laws do not work in that respect-we all know the laws are follwed and respected by the folks that are the law abiding folks–
February 21, 2013 @ 11:44 am
to whodunit–
yes i was around when the Communists were trying to takeover the world–we had them here in the US and evidently we still have them here –I worked with a man that escaped form Checkoslavkia, when the Communist controlled that country–what he told me about that and how the people were controlled everyday , was not a life i’d want–and anyione in their right minds would not want –just what the Berlin wall caused to happen to Germans should tell anyone that Communism is a deadend society—take a look at Cuba , look at North Korea–then look at South Korea for the difference in the 2 halves of that peninsula—-China has adopted some of the Captalist ways , so they are doing better –but the people are still contolled—
Anyone that wants to live in a Communist country has no brains or any smarts at all –
February 21, 2013 @ 12:26 pm
One question the left-wingers in this country can NEVER answer satisfactorily is, if all those “workers’ paradises” in Communist Russia and Germany were so great, how come they had to build WALLS and BARBED-WIRE FENCES to keep their people IN? They used dogs to patrol the “no man’s land” between the Berlin wall and freedom, but they didn’t feed them very well. The dogs discovered if they went over to the OTHER side, they would be fed, and lo, the PATROL DOGS started to defect–much to the chagrin of the Communist side of the Berlin wall.
I am quite sure this is the reason the current crop of Commie scum work so hard at ignoring history–because history offers NO DEFENSE for what they want to foist on the rest of us–indeed, history speaks VOLUMES for why their “philosophy” is NOT a good idea. I guess that’s why they stopped teaching it in schools, or else “sanitized and rewrote it” to fit their agenda, like Orwell predicted in “1984″.
February 21, 2013 @ 12:15 pm
(Putting up white flag) I was wrong. I thought, wrongly, the more education/training/registering/background checks would keep the mentally ill and disturbed individuals from attaining a gun…problem with that thought..the word is ‘legally’. When have any of the most present history bad guys attained any of their guns legally? Answer: None. So, I admit, I was wrong. Thank you all for educating me and seeing the error in that logical thought process, when in fact those in charge are not using logic…they are using Jack Boot power and using these recent horrific tragedies as a line in the sand..it’s all hogwash!
If I want 15 guns, with unlimited ammo…I should, as a citizen of these United States, be able to buy them legally and attain whatever weapon I choose to purchase on a open market. It makes me uneasy to know some bureaucrat has a list of my information and what guns I may have and what ammo I need for those guns…just so they can write laws to take away the ability to use said weapons. It’s a sneaky little side to be sure…but it’s what Washington wants and is trying to do.
So add one more to the troupe… this has now become not a conversation of ‘what if’, but a conversation of ‘when’. That, more than anything else, scares me.
Bad guys are never going to follow the law. There is no way to stop said bad guys with laws. Laws are only their for the post active feat of cleaning up judicial responsibility and sentencing…not protecting the citizenry of this great Nation. “We the People” have the ability to protect ourselves as needed and warranted by said bad guys actions. Our most present news cycle has proven this out again and again and again. (at least 6 stories in just a two week period of time shows a gun protection of lives from said bad guys.)
Perhaps the action of law abiding citizen who protect themselves will sink into the subconsciousness of said bad guys..and will reduced by necessity that actions of said bad guys? I am betting a well armed and trained populace is a better deterrent than some ink to paper law.
I’m on board… and again, thank you for setting my head right on the topic. Love this forum!
~M
February 21, 2013 @ 12:32 pm
To Mystic: It was NEVER about safety and security–that is just the “carrot” they dangle in front of the low-information public to win approval for their violation of the Constitution. It’s not about “gun control” at all–it’s about getting POWER over other people by removing their means to resist being tyrannized. Once you understand that, everything they are doing makes PERFECT sense.
February 21, 2013 @ 2:25 pm
Liberals do not believe in the Constitution. They believe it to be something that is to be circumvented.
If they really, really wanted to change the 2nd Amendment, there is a Constitutionally acceptable way of doing it. They know they don’t have the votes to do it the Constitutional way so they attempt to circumvent it by trickery and fancy foot work. It is to no avail.
Liberals…stop complaining! If you think you have 2/3rds of the states who believe as you do….attempt to pass an amendment which disables the 2nd Amendment. Until then, stop wasting everyone’s time.