PDA

View Full Version : The Right To Bear Arms


angelus
07-07-2003, 11:39 AM
The Right to Bear Arms

The second amendment of the Constitution has drawn much criticism from the Left over the years. The Left has long proclaimed that guns are dangerous, evil, killing machines. It is of no surprise, of course, that they conveniently forget that it takes a person to pull the trigger. The Left never admits that guns have been used to save lives, as well. A criminal’s greatest fear is not that he or she will be arrested. It is that he or she will try to victimize someone who has a sense of self-preservation and a concealed weapon, such as a gun.

It was just three years ago, in fact, that the Left orchestrated one of their greatest victories against guns, in the event dubbed as “The Million Mom March”. We all know what it is, I presume. It was little more than a gathering of second-amendment foes to try and rally against the cause of self-defense under the guise of having less deaths in the country.

However, the Left is comprised of little more than modern-day Pharisees and hypocrites. But perhaps calling them Pharisees is a bit unfair. I mean, even the Pharisees strictly obeyed laws of God and their own. The Left won’t even do that. I should, therefore, simply settle on the term of hypocrites.

A prime example of this is Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY). He is the Senate’s leading gun control advocate. Yet, he travels with an armed bodyguard. I suppose he is simply unwilling to lead by example. Either that, or he thinks that gun control applies only to those not under his employ. I couldn’t begin to venture a guess either way.

What I can do, however, is point out the hypocrisy. He wants gun control, meaning that law-abiding citizens can have less access to guns, until that day when the Left calls, in all their glory, the end of gun ownership in America. Of course, the gangsters who already go to the black market will still go there to get guns. And as such, even though the bumper sticker is simple, it is accurate:

If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

That is, criminals will no longer fear stealing from an armed person, because there will be no armed people left in this country. The Left awaits this day eagerly. For what better populace to control than an unarmed populace?

Ah, but the Left has had some setbacks. One of the most laughable happened just last week, when the aforementioned Million Mom March managed to draw a walloping crowd of . . . Four people! That’s right, only four people showed up to support the cause of gun control.

Apparently, in this new age of awareness on terrorism (for terrorism has been around forever, and 9-11 was our wake-up call to be aware of it), people are thinking twice about giving up their right to bear arms. Apparently people are finding that the Constitution isn’t as out-dated and idiotic as they once thought it was.

Gun ownership is not the cause of such crimes that we have seen in Colorado and Jonesboro. In the 19 years that states were passing right-to-carry laws, the number of multiple-victim public shootings dropped by 84%, death from such shootings plummeted by 90%, injuries by 82%.(Study by the University of Chicago School of Law, "More Guns, Less Crime," Prof. John Lott) Higher arrest rates and more liberal use of the death penalty don't account for such improvement in crime statistics in states that allow citizens to carry guns. *

Even Florida, where ballot-punching is an advanced task (no offense to Floridians), the right to bear concealed weapons has been granted (or more accurately, not infringed upon), and just after a year of that legislation, the assault rate has dropped 60%, or thereabouts, and has continued to fall since then, as well. *So, with statistics like these, it is a wonder that the Left wants to ban guns the way they do. However, I’m not surprised, as the Left abandoned both common sense and common decency a long, long time ago. I personally own no guns. However, someday I may wish to own a gun. And I want that right to be still around, and I want those gun owners of today to have the right to own guns.

If the right to bear arms is eliminated, then not only will criminals have an easier time looting and murdering, but our government will have an easier time telling us what to do. Sure, a pistol against the government is nothing. But then again, a few men with muskets was nothing against the British army in 1776, too. And we know how that turned out. Tyranny comes fastest to those who will not, or cannot, stand up for themselves.

Tony Lemaster

stormy
07-07-2003, 12:45 PM
Great article, Tony--I love the way you put things so even http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/granny.gif ies can understand everything! It's obvious you have done a lot of research! You young people never cease to amaze me! Keep up the great work.

Stormy

pRIMrose
07-07-2003, 02:14 PM
http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/yelclap.gif angelus. Ya "done" good. http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif History verifies that taking the guns away from the people leads to genocide and tyranny.

Just posted something by Paul Harvey (http://gopusa.com/cgi-bin/ib3/ikonboard.pl?act=ST; f=19;t=4747;r=1;&#top) in the Firing Line forum. It proves what happens when you take away the right of the people to protect themselves.

ALLEN L. WELLS
07-07-2003, 02:35 PM
http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/biggrin.gif ANGELUS - THIS IS A WELL WRITTEN AND THOUGHT OUT ARTICLE THAT COVERS ALL THE NUMBERS. *NICE JOB!

Quote[/b] ] A prime example of this is Sen. Charles Schumer (D-NY). He is the Senate’s leading gun control advocate.

http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/jacka.gif ANGELUS - I THINK SENATOR SCHUMER'S CONCERN ABOUT GUNS COMES A LITTLE CLOSER TO HOME. *I THINK HE MIGHT BE WORRIED THAT HE MIGHT BE A TARGET OF THE TYRANNY OUR FOREFATHERS DESCRIBED IN THE CONSTITUTION. *HIS HYPOCRISY IS CLEARLY DEMONSTATED BY THE FACT THAT HE TRAVELS WITH ARMED BODYGUARD.

azwhitewolf
07-07-2003, 02:45 PM
http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/yelclap.gif BRAVO! http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/yelclap.gif

That study by John Lott in Chicago is very fascinating. I've read it more than once, and the information debunks anything that Brady, or any of the other dipsticks want to put in there.
Quote[/b] ]Apparently people are finding that the Constitution isn’t as out-dated and idiotic as they once thought it was.
Imagine that!
Quote[/b] ]I personally own no guns. However, someday I may wish to own a gun. And I want that right to be still around, and I want those gun owners of today to have the right to own guns.
Jump in, buddy. The water's warm! http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

FreeNdeed
07-07-2003, 04:51 PM
Quote[/b] (angelus @ July 07, 2003 -- 10:39 am)]

If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

Tony Lemaster


The bumber sticker says it all. Think I might get me one.
Wonder what that one 'll get me. Since the lone "I stand behind President Bush" sticker has earned me "FACIST" written across my back window when I came out of Wall Mart while in Columbia MO. Guess it doesn't help that I drive an SUV. But hey, I just thought to myself, they elected a dead man why should I care what they think! http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

Ole Chuck sure is a sneaky weasel http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sneaky2.gif

NWGOPMom
07-07-2003, 05:21 PM
Quote[/b] (azwhitewolf @ July 07, 2003 -- 11:45 am)]http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/yelclap.gif BRAVO! http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/yelclap.gif

Quote[/b] ]I personally own no guns. However, someday I may wish to own a gun. And I want that right to be still around, and I want those gun owners of today to have the right to own guns.

Jump in, buddy. *The water's warm! * http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif
Yeppers. The water's warm. We personally own a few. No handguns but a couple of rifles and a couple of shotguns. Wouldn't have it any other way. Waaaaaay back in my liberal days, I did not want a gun in the house. Did not want to be around them. Now, if someone took away my right to own one, I would be P*SSED. (oh, the ladlylike way is ANGRY).

See how things change when you get older? A little more conservative, a little more protective, a little more defensive of our constitutional rights.

Der Alte
07-07-2003, 09:38 PM
Good article, Angelus. Not being like Schumer, I don't have an armed bodyguard, but I do carry a gun just about everywhere I go. If you decide to get a hand gun, let me reccomend a Beretta - very reliable and very safe. If I were to be the victim of a home invasion, they would first meet my three dogs who run from 80 to 96 pounds, then they would meet me and my Beretta. The only reason they would meet the dogs first is, they are much faster than I am.

A_Texian
07-07-2003, 10:31 PM
Quote[/b] (FreeNdeed @ July 07, 2003 -- 3:51 pm)]Quote[/b] (angelus @ July 07, 2003 -- 10:39 am)]

If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

Tony Lemaster


The bumber sticker says it all. Think I might get me one.
Wonder what that one 'll get me. Since the lone "I stand behind President Bush" sticker has earned me "FACIST" written across my back window when I came out of Wall Mart while in Columbia MO. Guess it doesn't help that I drive an SUV. But hey, I just thought to myself, they elected a dead man why should I care what they think! http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/tounge.gif

Ole Chuck sure is a sneaky weasel http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/sneaky2.gif
.....and there's another'n out there that maybe some of the whiney liberals, who so seem to enjoy screaming "FIRST AMMENDMENT RIGHTS!!", should take to heart:

THE SECOND PROTECTS THE FIRST!

http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/cool.gif

FreeNdeed
07-09-2003, 02:09 PM
Quote[/b] ]THE SECOND PROTECTS THE FIRST!

Like that one too!! http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/usflag22.gif

azwhitewolf
07-10-2003, 12:09 AM
Quote[/b] ]THE SECOND PROTECTS THE FIRST!
It's so great to see a group of people who "Get it". http://gopusa.com/iB_html/non-cgi/emoticons/twothumbsup.gif

noPEACEwithoutJUSTICE
07-15-2003, 04:52 PM
Leftists disagree with the use of guns on many levels, including the level that hunters use them to hunt with. *

It's the Bambi-loving, shutes-and-leaves eating liberals who also wouldn't have a problem if the camou-wearing among us were to suffer simultaneous accidental shootings.

Which begs the question...why are they so concerned about gun ownership if they think we who own them are constantly killing ourselves off? *Is it that they have so much concern for Conservatives that they don't want us to kill ourselves with our own guns? *Or is there <<GASP>> an ulterior motive?

Their "mock" concern for the safety of gun owners and their progeny is laughable.

"Gun Control" is the most accurately named program of the liberals--much more literally accurate than Pro-Choice, for instance. *It is about "Control", though the "gun" qualifier is really not needed--it would be even more accurately stated as "Conservative Control."

As for all those liberals who employ gun-toting security, their hypocrisy is only overshadowed by their egos, as their exaggerated self-worth explodes with the notion that we even give a damm what they think.