Last weekend, the New York Times ran a front page editorial demanding gun confiscation. Their plan has historic precedent.
Middlesboro Daily News – Google News Archive Search
Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Ellen Flees To The UK
- HUD Climate Advisor
- Causes Of Increased Storminess
- Scientist Kamala Harris
- The End Of Polar Bears
- Cats And Hamsters Cause Hurricanes
- Democrats’ Campaign Of Joy
- New BBC Climate Expert
- 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- “the United States has suffered a “precipitous increase” in hurricane strikes”
- Thing Of The Past Returns
- “Impossible Heatwaves”
- Billion Dollar Electric Chargers
- “Not A Mandate”
- Up Is Down
- The Clean Energy Boom
- Climate Change In Spain
- The Clock Is Ticking
- “hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- “Peace, Relief, And Recovery”
- “Earth’s hottest weather in 120,000 years”
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Michael Mann Hurricane Update
- Making Themselves Irrelevant
- Michael Mann Predicts The Demise Of X
Recent Comments
- William on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Gordon Vigurs on 21st Century Toddlers Discuss Climate Change
- Gordon Vigurs on Ellen Flees To The UK
- arn on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Gordon Vigurs on Cats And Hamsters Cause Hurricanes
- Gordon Vigurs on Cats And Hamsters Cause Hurricanes
- Greg in NZ on Ellen Flees To The UK
- Disillusioned on Scientist Kamala Harris
- czechlist on Scientist Kamala Harris
- Dave Burton on Scientist Kamala Harris
Just saw a Harvard study indicating the more guns in the hands of civilians, the less violent crime and robberies. Sorry, I didn’t save the link but it’s out there.
An armed society is a polite society.
GUN CONTROL
http://accurateshooter.net/Blog/norway1502.jpg
http://accurateshooter.net/Blog/girl1502.jpg
http://files.harrispublications.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/6/2014/12/5-amazing-races-competitive-shooting-4.jpg
http://duboisriflepistol.org/wp-content/uploads/2010/11/Target-150×150.png
(Right now I am listenning to the shotguns going off next door…..)
Just placed my 12ga back in the safe. Only one homocide in my county in 15 years, a mentally disturbed man who killed his father.
EVERYONE FORGETS The Second Amnendment has NOTHING to do with crime or self protection. The reason for the Amendment was to prevent TYRANNY as Tony is trying to show.
The Second Amnendments purpose is to allow the citizens to CONTROL the government and protect their God given right instead of the ‘state’ control the citizens.
Crime Stats are nothing but a strawman argument.
You want stats on ‘gun control’?
Here they are:
Look at the countries that have disarmed their citizens: Turkey – 1911, Soviet Union – 1929, Germany – 1938, China – 1935, Guatemala – 1964, Uganda – 1970. Now look at Switzerland, issues a gun to every household, teaches them to shoot, lowest gun-related crime rate in the civilized world.
DEMOCIDE: Death by Government, murdered 6 times more people than died in combat in all the foreign and internal wars of the century
**************************************************
1,883,000 Murdered: Turkey’s Genocidal Purges ( 1900 to 1923)
61,911,000 Murdered: The Soviet Gulag State (1922 – 1991)
20,946,000 Murdered: The Nazi Genocide State (1933 – 1945)
38,000,000 Murdered: The Communist Chinese Ant Hill (1947 to present)
2,035,000 Murdered: The Khmer Rouge Hell State (1975 – 1977)
1,670,000 Murdered: The Vietnamese War State
1,585,000 Murdered: Poland’s Ethnic Cleansing
1,503,000 Murdered: The Pakistani Cutthroat State
1,072,000 Murdered: Tito’s Slaughterhouse
1,663,000 Murdered? Orwellian North Korea
******************************************************
The 20th century total of citizens killed by their own government = 262,000,000 people “… tortured or beaten to death, hung, shot, and buried alive, burned or starved to death, stabbed or chopped into pieces, and murdered in all the other ways creative and imaginative human beings can devise, I have never been so happy to conclude a project. I have not found it easy to read time and time again about the horrors innocent people have been forced to suffer. What has kept me at this was the belief, as preliminary research seemed to suggest, that there was a positive solution to all this killing and a clear course of political action and policy to end it. And the results verify this. The problem is Power. The solution is democracy. The course of action is to foster freedom.” – Dr R.J. Rummel
People want to know why we want to keep our guns?
“If all these people, killed by their own government were laid head to toe, with the average height being 5 feet, then they would circle the earth ten times.”
That is a pretty damn good reason to tell the totalitarian enablers to stuff their gun control where the sun don’t shine.
Hey Gail! Great comment, and as far as I am concerned an absolutely irrefutable justification for an armed populace.
“That is a pretty damn good reason to tell the totalitarian enablers to stuff their gun control where the sun don’t shine.”
Yep. That is pretty much the conclusion that I have reached as well. No more compromises.
The usual modi operandi of Progressives is to use a strawman and divert the argument. The CAGW scam is a classic. It is and never has been about climate. It is all about totalitarian control of the world by an unelected diplomatically immune bunch of bureaucrats.
At least the 2nd Amendment is pretty clear but the Progressives STILL will drag it back to crime and gun control. I tried the argument out on a ditzy brainwashed socialist a few days ago. It took me forever to get her to answer the question of what was the purpose of the 2nd Amendment and even then she zoomed back to whining about the need for gun control because of the murder rate.
I think I may start carrying those Death by Government stats from Dr Rummel to shove under peoples faces.
“Now look at Switzerland, issues a gun to every household, teaches them to shoot, lowest gun-related crime rate in the civilized world.”
A couple of interesting pieces on this from the BBC a few years apart
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/4755143.stm
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-21379912
They don’t issue a gun to every household, not sure where you picked that up from and gun related crime rate as a claim is pretty nebulous claim. Better to pin it down more on deaths and injuries per 100 000 population from firearms.
Andy
This is where I got the information on the Swiss from:
From the same site
The similarity between Nazi gun laws and the 1968 US gun legislation was not accidental.
http://jpfo.org/filegen-a-m/GCA_68.htm
And those Gun Laws sure have helped curb crime here in the USA haven’t they?
http://www.sentencingproject.org/images/photo/1_US_prison_pop_1925-2013.png
One of the ugly legacies of the ill conceived War on Drugs.
The other problem was Kennedy’s laws closing down mental institutions and county homes. When I grew up there were no ‘street people’ If you didn’t have a home you were picked up by the police,, evaluated and taken to the country home or otherwise helped. (The churches did a lot more back in those days)
Now we have the mentally ill left on the streets to fend for themselves so the Progressives have something to whine and winge about (but never fix).
Insitutionalization would have likely prevented the only homicide in my county in 15 years (actually it could be longer, the online stats only go back to 2000), and we have had zero drug related homicides.
http://facweb.knowlton.ohio-state.edu/pviton/courses/crp8703/plassman_whitley.pdf
There’s the link.
By the way, how you define “crime” will affect how guns “cause” less crime. Back in the 19th Century it was illegal to sell Indians guns because the Red Man was slated for extermination. Deer are harder to slaughter when Bambi shoots back! Later, the Native American remnants were “assimilated” but were not afforded citizenship until 1924, and even then there was no political equality. The ‘true crimes’ of the American Indian were occupying valuable real estate, failure as a slave labor force, and breathing the air. Gun control was an important factor in dealing with the Indian Problem.
Today we are all Native Americans.
Corsair, then the next “gun laws” were in the south which prevented blacks from having guns to enforce Democrat KKK and segregation laws and the laws were brutally enforced. They were the first Non-Indian guns laws and provided for strict prohibition, not just restrictions.
Again, as in all gun laws they were designed to prevent the population from fighting back to the power elite.
Anyone that thinks the people like Feinstein, Obama, Bloomberg and their like are one bit concerned about violence are not looking closely enough. These people are looking at the long term of little by little, chip by chip, of Obama’s “fundamental change”, of the liberal “elitist”, big government outlook that they are so right, so smart, and the population so dumb and stupid (watch the Gruber tapes) the people must be told what they need, what they must do, what they cannot do, for their own good, by those very smart elitist ones. And to prevent a revolt of those stupid people you cannot have them running around with a bunch of guns.
That is the long term goal. Master state government of the elite. But need to get rid of the guns and convince enough “sheeple” that that is what they really want have them vote in their own laws and destruction.
a more compelling Harvard study found that LESS gun ownership (world wide, including the US) translates to MORE deaths and that countries with more restrictive gun laws are in fact less safe.
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
I don’t find that very compelling at all considering there is no abstract to the piece, I don’t see any peer review and also the fact I see the words STUDENTS in the URL link. Are they practicing or such?
Also apparently the United Kingdom doesn’t exist according to their tables of European stats. Maybe UK low death rates from firearms due to lack of firearms upset their pre-conceived notions so they just blanked us out 😀
Nice work.
I do have to laugh at this load of bollox they wrote
“In the late 1990s, England moved from stringent controls to a
complete ban of all handguns and many types of long guns.
Hundreds of thousands of guns were confiscated from those
owners law?abiding enough to turn them in to authorities.
Without suggesting this caused violence, the ban’s ineffective?
ness was such that by the year 2000 violent crime had so in?
creased that England and Wales had Europe’s highest violent
crime rate, far surpassing even the United States”
Lol, what a load of baloney ! It’s become so bad over here even our dear old police still don’t want to be armed en masse.
We ain’t got an armed police force, we ain’t got an armed public. We are happy. Whoever wrote that shit in that piece ought to be shot. Not by us of course.
Andy
Andy, do you imagine such outcomes frequently? If so, what triggers it? Have you talked to a professional therapist about it?
Andy, you might check your facts before commenting…
These peer reviewed publications offer invaluable practical experience in legal writing, editing, and scholarship.
List of HLS Journals
Harvard Business Law Review
Civil Rights-Civil Liberties Law Review
Environmental Law Review
Human Rights Journal
Harvard International Law Journal
Journal of Law & Gender
Journal of Law and Public Policy
Journal of Law and Technology
Harvard Journal on Racial and Ethnic Justice
http://hls.harvard.edu/dept/dos/student-journals/journals-and-publications/
So who peer reviewed this Gator? Was it other students as they are their peers?
It’s still a load of rubbish.
Andy
It’s still a load of rubbish.
That is your opinion Andy. You gave an earlier “opinion” that was incorrect, and I corrected it for you, you are welcome.
It wasn’t an opinion Gator, it was me stating that I had not seen any peer review process. You mentioned they do have peer review process so thanks for that. Peer review by other students you would assume?
It’s still a load of rubbish. Yes that’s my opinion given their comments. If you want to defend it then feel free.
In the last 15 years more criminals in the UK are using fake firearms due to them being easier to obtain, and if they get caught less penalty. Souce is UK government crime stats. So is the UK more dangerous now that criminals are moving to fake arms?
I don’t think so.
These Harvard papers are ” practice ” ones aren’t they from younger people?
Andy
Thanks for your opinions Andy. I prefer to use a real gun when defending myself and family, you guys can keep the fake ones.
Do you go out to work Gator? How do you protect you family when you are not at home or with them? I protect my family by living in a society where when I go to work and leave my family at home the nearest gun is likely to be about 3 miles away and not owned by the next door neighbour.
Most US people killed by firearms are not from criminals attacking a family, it’s by the very same family, the neighbour, the co-worker, the person who saw the red mist. All previously law abiding. Or even your pet dog
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/27/a-dog-shoots-a-person-almost-every-year-in-america/
Statistically you are more likely to be shot dead than me tonight even though you have a real gun over in the USA than in the UK.
Good night.
Andy
Your statistics are shit Andy. They do not take demographics into account, among many other things.
The county in which I live is armed to the teeth, virtually every household has guns. And we all hunt, and we shoot for recreation as well. This same county has had only one homicide in over 15 years. Just 20 miles away as the crow flies, they have almost daily murders, and strict gun control laws resulting in most households being unarmed.
Live in your world Andy, and I will live in mine. I prefer to be prepared for the worst, and not having any regrets of being gun-phobic in my final moments.
As for my family, they have their own guns.
Here in the USA women and children also learn to handle guns safely. I shot my first shotgun at age 4. My brother at age 16 held a bunch of Mifia enforcers from NYC at gunpoint until the police arrived. (They were looking for a deserted road to kill the guy and dump the body.) Dad wasn’t at home.
We have hunters (L.C. Hunting Club) lease our land and the kids all are well drilled in gun safety. Best thing we ever did was agree to continue leasing the land to the hunt club when we moved down from New England. If we want help they are always willing with advice, recommendations or even hands on.
Gun control. The guns causing havoc are under control.By criminals,
who ,by their actions, demonstrate that laws can be broken by anyone.
There are about 20,000 gun laws on the books. Will a few more stop
what proponents of gun control are upset about?? HOW??? The only
effect these proposed laws will have, will take guns away from law-abiding
people. They are not the problem. So it seems that the real agenda is
to disarm law abiding citizens. That is disturbing.Criminals who accept
death as a probable outcome and still commit the crime laugh at a gun
control law. Logic tells me that gun control proponents know this and
have another agenda in mind. And it ain’t pretty.
Are people really that stupid they believe criminals give a damn about the law ?
Most US people killed by guns are people killed by non criminals.
It’s a fact.
Andy
So the killings were legal?
ONLY when you count suicides in the total. The vast majority of homicides involving firearms are committed by persons with a criminal record according to the FBI stats.
And how many of those killed by non criminals were criminals ? Do those non criminals include police officers?
US people, eh? Is the word you were hunting for “Americans”?
Most US people killed by guns are people killed by non criminals.
It’s a fact.
Andy
===
Are you saying our legal system is too lenient?
Andy, homicide rates went way up right after the gun bans in the UK…only recently came down..people still found a way to kill without guns
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-DJ-KA2WhhLo/UNZr8agpVqI/AAAAAAAAFH4/f6rrTVN7q6I/s1600/Screen+Shot+2012-12-22+at++Saturday,+December+22,+9.26+PM.png
Andy, unless the victim dies before they are shot, they die from an unlawful act,
since shooting a person is not allowed by law. Actually, pointing a gun at a person,
planning to shoot them, are also criminal acts, making the killer a criminal before
pulling the trigger.Ask a police officer what happens to someone who points a
gun at them.
@richard – I have no idea what Andy was trying to say, but your comment is also inaccurate. There are many circumstances where pointing a firearm at someone or even shooting them would not be a criminal act.
What the hell is Richard talking about? Is he delusional? What information is he reading. Most gun deaths are committed by “non-criminals”. Chicago, DC, Baltimore. My god, this man needs treatment.
From the FBI:
Felony circumstances (rape, robbery, burglary, etc.) accounted for 23.1 percent of murders. Circumstances were unknown for 38.0 percent of reported homicides. That is 61.1% so you are making numbers up Andy.
Law enforcement reported 653 justifiable homicides in 2011. Of those, law enforcement officers justifiably killed 393 felons, and private citizens justifiably killed 260 people during the commission of a crime.
When considering 5- and 10-year trends, the 2014 estimated violent crime total was 6.9 percent below the 2010 level and 16.2 percent below the 2005 level.
Murder fell from 14,722 (9,199 guns) in 2010 to 14,249 (8,454 guns) in 2014.
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2014/crime-in-the-u.s.-2014/figs/violent-crime.jpg
https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/expanded/11murderbyrelate.gif
To be clear Gail, just because someone is known or a relative does not mean they are not a criminal or breaking a restraining order or other such legal restraint on their action.
wizzum,
I am well aware of that since I have a brother who has offed several (at least 8) relatives after convincing them to make a will in his favor. In the case of rape it is often a relative or family ‘friend’ same goes for a lot of theft. However those numbers I cited were clean and unambiguous.
The other problem is a lack of a sheet does not mean there is no crime, just that the person has not been caught. Since much of the murder is in the inner cities, the chances of the murderer having committed previous crimes, on drugs or alcohol is great.
Another factor is the blasted schools and doctors forcing ritalin and prozac on kids as young as THREE! The Center for Disease Control show that the ADHD diagnosis had been made in 15 percent of high school-age children, (mainly boys) and that the number of children on medication for the disorder had soared to 3.5 million from 600,000 in 1990.
That is just the tip of the iceberg.
Violence in Schools? It’s the Prozac and Ritalin Stupid! by Lawrence Wilson, MD
The following do not include those who committed suicide.
From one commenter: ….see 4000 more such incidents between 2009-2011 at http://ssristories.com/index.php?sort=date&p
The rest of the comments are good.
Sorry Gail, my comment was more for Piers….errr. Andy’s benefit rather than yours.
No problem wizzum, so was mine.
I’m going to call bullshit Piers…I mean Andy (oops, 1 ignorant Pom is the same as another to me). Please put up your facts.
Gun control isn’t just about controlling guns. Censorship follows because guns are easy for an educated person to make. In America’s shameful past, gun control has been used for economic exploitation and political domination over “minority” ethnic and political groups starting before the American Revolution. Here’s an example from Japan:
http://www.geektime.com/2014/10/28/hype-and-punishment-why-the-media-went-hysterical-over-3d-printed-guns-in-japan/
Basically, opportunistic American libertarians are using a new technology to make gun control politicians and their constituents hysterical, which is about as challenging as getting a labrador retriever to eat spam. 3D printing aficionados are taking advantage of the hysteria to promote their pet technology. A Japanese nerd working in an educational shop got carried away and not only printed a “gun,” but showed it off to the whole world on YouTube. After viewing the video, the Japanese justice system (not known for its fuzzy and gentle demeanor) used him as a convenient example of why you shouldn’t flaunt illegal activity in Japan.
The truth is that 3D printing is not a mature technology. It is very valuable in a limited number of applications, with small parts, high variance between parts and high costs. Making firearms is not one of those applications.
Because of the political agendas of the gun rights advocates and the anti-gun lobby, and the hype-driven nature of tech media, 3D printing has been uncomfortably shoehorned into the debate, where it now sits awkwardly.
Regulating personal 3D printing is about as intelligent and feasible as regulating power tools or sharp objects.
Spot on; the first autoloader was built in a prison machine shop.
( Remember the James Stewart movie)??
I believe that Maxim and Browning designed and SOLD auto-loading firearms before Williams produced the mechanism that was used in the M1 Carbine of World War Two fame.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiram_Maxim
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Browning
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/David_Marshall_Williams
If I can believe Wikipedia, the two older gents were making automatic loading weapons before Marsh Williams was a gleam in Pappy Williams’ eye.
Considering the NYT -article I just wonder why most of those pro-gun-confiscation -guys
in the past decades were and are jewish?
The Jewish contingent in the US has been pretty much owned by the Democrats for decades.
The Democrats have been pretty much owned by The Jewish banking world.
Perhaps rather than impersonate the Nazi’s the US can impersonate the UK after Churchill for the last 70 years? Our last spree killing that caused outrage was back in 2010.
When was the last US one?
Andy
[SG : Europe has killed about 100 million people over the past 150 years. But thanks for the mindless BS]
Yes it would have to post Churchill since during the time when Churchill first became PM the fact that the UK had practically already disarmed it’s law abiding citizens was rather inconvenient wasn’t it?
http://www.americanrifleman.org/articles/2012/8/23/the-hession-rifle/
http://nramuseum.org/the-museum/the-galleries/wwii,-korea,-vietnam-and-beyond/case-64-world-war-ii-us/major-john-w-hession's-springfield-03-rifle.aspx
Besides many of us Yanks tend to distrust our government more than the majority of you Brits seem to. This is true story:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U5ut6yPrObw
It’s also good to remind people that Paul Cantrell and the members of his corrupt political machine were Democrats.
Considering that the US has five times the population of the UK, I don’t see your point.
There’s also the legal definition of “murder” to take in to account. Americans pretty much list every suspicious death as a murder, then pull them off the list if other reasons are found. The idea of an unrecorded murder here is almost unthinkable. Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I’ve heard that the British government doesn’t count a death as a murder unless someone has already been convicted of it.
Andy, how much time have you spent in the U.S.?
He should try the Virgin Islands, where they have strict gun control laws, and the third highest murder rate in the world.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate
They also have strict gun control.
The U.S. Virgin Islands have a stringent and restrictive licensing process to purchase or carry a firearm. A person must be 21 to get a non-carry weapons license, along with several other requirements. Applicants must pay $75 licensing fee, submit a signed application, be fingerprinted and photographed, and be of good moral character. That process is just for a permit to purchase firearms to store in a residence or business, and not for a concealed carry permit.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_laws_in_the_United_States_Virgin_Islands
So why is it that the Virgin Islands have 14 times the murder rate of the US?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Demographics_of_the_United_States_Virgin_Islands#Ethnicity_and_religion
Leftist’s like to ignorte inconvenient truths like the Sun, and demographics.
1,883,000 Murdered: Turkey’s Genocidal Purges ( 1900 to 1923)
20,946,000 Murdered: The Nazi Germany Genocide State (1933 – 1945)
1,585,000 Murdered: Poland’s Ethnic Cleansing
24,414,000 people murdered by their own government in Europe during the 20th century.
Don’t forget the staged famines in the Soviet Union. At least another 3 million, with some estimates going much higher. There was, in fact, plenty of food. The Soviets merely starved their people until they agreed to agricultural collectivization.
Gun control nuts never count the murders that follow civilian disarmament, even if the victims are shot. After all, those were “official” executions. They also do not count the starvations, the gassings, the beating-to-death, etc., etc. No, the only murders that count are the civilian shootings.
The gun control nuts are like black shoe nuts. Suppose that the majority of rapes are committed by men wearing black shoes — which is entirely possible in view of how popular black shoes are. “We need to do something about black-shoe-rape! Ban black shoes!” OK, so you ban black shoes and the incidence of black-shoe-rape goes down. Sure, there are just as many rapes as before — but black-shoe-rape is down. “Hurray! We fixed the black-shoe-rape problem! Kumbaya!”
Jason, I think someone could make a very good argument that crime goes up because people are no longer able to defend themselves….
https://i0.wp.com/2.bp.blogspot.com/-DJ-KA2WhhLo/UNZr8agpVqI/AAAAAAAAFH4/f6rrTVN7q6I/s1600/Screen+Shot+2012-12-22+at++Saturday,+December+22,+9.26+PM.png
Latitude, a huge factor in Britain’s murder rate is how they classify murder–it was exposed recently and there was a big stink (actually it was exposed about a lot of crimes and how they were categorized much lower than they actually were to make the stats look good)
Anyway, police in England only count a murder as a murder if the person dies at the scene or in the ER. If they die later after being admitted to the hospital it declared a natural death, not a murder or at a later time after leaving the hospital due to complications from the injury it is not a murder–thus low murder rate.
Also, they only count it as a murder in final stats if they get a conviction of the perpetrator. If no arrest is ever made or the bad guy is acquitted it is not a murder.
Every single one of these instances are murders in the US. Want to keep your violence down, don’t count it.
England and the US are two very different places. Just as it is appropriate for US citizens to be armed, it is appropriate for English subjects to be disarmed.
Time will likely prove that assertion false.
Maybe David, but I think it will take a very long time for the US not to be armed.
Andy
Andy-
You plainly don’t understand Americans. This country will cease to exist before it’s unarmed. If nothing else the act of disarmament will end it. If federal agents went door to door, forcibly collecting the millions weapons that Americans would refuse to voluntarily hand over, what do you think would happen? You appear to believe that we Americans are trigger happy. Do you think we’d become less so, just because a government we despise told us to stop? Loss of life would be enormous. How many people would the government have to kill, to reduce our killings of each other? And who would be those people the government would kill? Most would be safe, honest, random people, who’ve never posed a threat to anyone. Those people would die, in effect, to save the lives of far less desirable people. Here’s the dirty little secret of American murder rates, and why we tolerate them as well as we do. Most of the victims are thugs themselves. Certainly not everyone who’s shot deserved it. But the solid majority of firearm murders in this country consist of one gang banger killing another, for whatever gang related reasons they come up with. Total confiscation of guns in this country would mean the almost certain deaths of Gator, Gail, Rah, Myself, and countless other peaceful citizens, in order to hopefully save the lives of a group mainly consisting of violent criminals. Countries don’t survive trades like that.
Beyond that, lets just look at the situation on the ground. Let’s set aside all the politics, personal beliefs, desires, and fears, and look to reality for a moment. Most estimates today suggest that there’s slightly more than one firearm for every living resident of this country. How do you propose we remove those weapons? There are over 300 MILLION guns in America, roughly 100 million having no record of their most recent sale. No one knows where those guns are. A very conservative estimate for the number of bullets sitting in American homes right now is about 50-100 BILLION. The American public could, very comfortably, fight WWII from that stockpile. Almost none of that ammunition came with any paper trail at all. The government doesn’t have the slightest idea where it is, or even how much there is. How do you round that all up? How do you put the Genie back in the bottle? It doesn’t matter how we got here. We can’t change the past. We’re here now. What do you propose we do about it?
Ted, Andy doesn’t realize that our countries are coming from two different places too…
socialism is a step up for them…
..it’s a step down for us
Ted,
There are also the reloaders like a preacher here in town. We can make our own bullets.
Caves have lots of saltpeter ( potassium nitrate) one of the ingredients for the making of gun powder so do manure piles.
I also have a reloader, and it works like a champ.
Let’s not forget 3-D printers.
Guns are very simple devices. You can literally make a 12 gauge shotgun with a length of 3/4″ steel pipe, a cap, a hand drill, and a nail. I’d strongly recommend welding the cap, but I’ve seen one hold together with just the threads.
And of course, I have my own machine shop. I could make functional copies of pretty much any small arm, without any trouble at all. (no, I’m not offering) As the saying goes, parts is parts. There’s certainly nothing in a Glock that’s more complex than the parts I’ve made that are currently in orbit. And there are roughly a million people in this country with access to equivalent machinery.
Free men have every right to be armed and to protect themselves with their weapons of choice. Those who allow themselves to be slaves and subjects have lost that right. It is appropriate that people such as myself, gator, Ted and Gail be armed. It is not appropriate for Andy to be armed. Andy even agrees that it is inappropriate for him to be armed. Far be it from me to dispute his own judgement of himself and his fellows.
In times series data, the number of guns per capital in the US has massively increased at the same time violent crimes per capita like murder have fallen from the mid 1990s. FBI has good data. However, you need to be careful if you see handgun deaths versus homicides or murders since a lot of handgun deaths are suicides and some homicides are justifiable by people defending themselves or police (it is easy to be misleading with what data set is chosen). Also, while guns per capita is a widely cited figure both for time series and cross-section, less cited data for US shows that the percent of the US population owning guns has fallen. Thus we have more guns per person, but fewer people are guns owners – this means less people own guns in the US over time, but the average gun owner now has more guns. The marginal impact on crime or deterrence thwarting crime is likely insignificant if a gun owner say has 6 guns versus 3 guns.
If you look at the highest murder rates in the US, it negatively correlates with gun ownership, places like DC,Maryland or Baltimore have low gun ownership, but super high murder rates, opposite for places with high gun ownership. However, if you do a better statistical analysis of gun ownership and murder rates in the cross-section by US states and add things with multivariate analysis like population density, demographics by age, race, and ethnicity, percent religious, then gun ownership rates fall out as an insignificant variable (1.13 t-ratio) to explain murder rates, or does not matter if 50% population has a gun or 5%, other things are much more correlated and significant, and also politically incorrect.
Beware the man with one gun because he probably knows how to use it.
I agree, on margin, ten men or women each with a gun, is probably more formidable than one person with ten guns, abet vast majority of murders are committed by men, most in 20s or 30s, high testosterone, drops off significantly with age. Please do not accuse me of a microaggression by gender/age bias.
In any case, did the statistical analysis in cross section by states, insignificant or no correlation with per capita murder rate and percent gun ownership rate (ignored per capita guns) if add a few likely suspects, but should do F-tests. Sky high murder rate in some downtown areas in US has noting to do with guns. Let’s see 339 murders so far in Bmore with 600,000 living here, more than NYC with 8 million – think if 339 people standing in front of you all Xed (victims usually/mostly thugs if you look up criminal records also), but has nothing to do with gun ownership. I feel sorry for those living in high crime areas subject to progressive/statist/liberal take away gun laws.
“….vast majority of murders are committed by men, most in 20s or 30s, high testosterone, drops off significantly with age. Please do not accuse me of a microaggression by gender/age bias….”
THAT is the reason we castrate equines, goats, sheep and cows. The sooner the better. Like at less than one week for all but horses. For horses as soon as they descend.
I saw a movie once where only the police and military had guns. It was called the Sound of Music.
Andy
Kill the Wabbit
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=UHP49lJEkiM
Piers, the Von Trapp family ran away to Switzerlannd to get away from the Nazi’s and their horrors….What is your point?
AND the Von Trapp family now lives in Vermont. Maria von Trapp died at 99 in 2014.
Gail, you have it right about ritalin and prozac. Personal family experience.
Is the gender a factor?? I only know of boys being “treated”.
Yes, they ran away to Switzerland where people keep REAL assault rifles in their closet and where competitive shooting is perhaps the most popular sport.
I also saw a movie where only the police and the military had guns. It was called Schindler’s List.
“….vast majority of murders are committed by men, most in 20s or 30s, high testosterone, drops off significantly with age. Please do not accuse me of a microaggression by gender/age bias….”
“n re your comment
“THAT is the reason we castrate equines, goats, sheep and cows. The sooner the better. Like at less than one week for all but horses. For horses as soon as they descend. “
That is interesting Gail, did not know that, the gun murder rate by animals is down to about one per year, mostly by dogs. https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/10/27/a-dog-shoots-a-person-almost-every-year-in-america/
But the testosterone levels of dogs is also down considerable due to 100,000 years of breeding versus wolf ancestors.
Seems castration working against sex offenders …
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2105035/Germany-rejects-demand-stop-castrating-sex-criminals-punishment.html
” … a 1997 study that tracked the history of 104 sexual offenders ‘who subjected themselves to castration in the decade between 1970 and 1980. Their reoffending rate was three per cent,’ the German authorities explained, ‘as opposed to 46 per cent for a control group.’ ”
The second element is could cleaning the gene pool, testosterone levels are partly genetic in addition to gender and age. People may forget, but in the 1940s and 50s it was common to get the death penalty for rape in the US. Those days over. Accused as too “racist” since convicted offenders and executees were more often black.
But I do not think society would go for castration of young boys as a pseudo WMD pre-emptive doctrine to get down murder rates, but could see medication for first time offenders as “voluntary” “option” to get out of a prison term sometime in future. Also as far as gene pool, after Ferguson and Freddie Gray in Baltimore, police have called it quits to a degree, why risk a lawsuit, unfairly accused of racism, put life in danger to protect, cut back on putting neck out going out for call, it is obvious, and then just let thugs kill each other off. We have had surge in murder rates this year. What I am getting at is that the murder victims are not all innocent victims. I look up the last week’s murder victims names whose bodies show up with bullet holes and stabbings on the streets here in Baltimore via MD Judiciary Search, the majority have multiple felony offences, assault, drug possession, handgun violations, burglaries, trespass, car jacking offenders, drug dealing, etc., wonder why some are not locked up. You see someone who shows up murdered last night with 20 prior felonies under belt and in and out of prison whole life, makes you wonder, maybe some percentage say tried to rip someone else off in a late night drug deal and were shot while trying, shows up as murder statistic while would be justifiable homicide in other setting by legal definition. Police sitting back to a degree and letting it go.
You are suffering from the Bambi Syndrone
My vet recently told me he watch a stallion kill its owner, a man, when it reared and struck him in the head with his front hooves. The deadliest animal to humans is the horse. A strike is lightning fast and VERY accurate. I had a mare knock a syringe out of my hand without touching my hand with a strike. (She did not want to hurt me.)
A horse striking at another horse.
http://sielearning.tafensw.edu.au/MPR/8131G/equine/Behaviour/Normal/images/pl9.jpg
This move and the capriole
http://www.ridingart.com/images/temp_cap.jpg
were trained war maneuvers (dressage) that turned a stallion into a military weapon.
Two people, a man and wife were killed here in North Carolina a few years ago by a ram (male sheep). One of my neighbors had their two year old daughter eaten by a boar (male pig). All they found were her shoes.
Animals do not need guns to kill or injure people. A farmer/rancher is more likely to be killed than a police officer. Farmers are number nine on the list at 21.3 per 100,000 employed. Police do not even make the top ten.
http://tftppull.freethoughtllc.netdna-cdn.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/chart-3.jpg
“But I do not think society would go for castration of young boys as a pseudo WMD pre-emptive doctrine to get down murder rates…”
DON’T GIVE THEM ANY IDEAS!!!!!!!
I am all for castration on the third offence.
Want to see the crime rate drop fast? Threaten a guys balls.
https://media2.stickersmalin.com/produit/100/stickers-devil-smile-R1-143760-2.png
Fourth offense everything comes off.
The Second Amendment does not protect an individual’s right to own a firearm. This narrative was developed by the National Rifle Association in the late 1970s, out of fear that further gun control laws would eliminate private ownership of firearms altogether.
For 200 years following the ratification of the Second Amendment, federal judges understood that the Second Amendment safeguarded the right to keep and bear arms when serving in a state militia. This view was widely held until the 1980s when pro-gun organizations began claiming that federal regulation of the individual use of firearms violated Americans’ Second Amendment rights.
Initially, the National Rifle Association dealt more with sport than politics. “I do not believe in the general promiscuous toting of guns,” said Former NRA President Karl Frederick in 1934. “I think it should be sharply restricted and only under licenses.”
In response to increasing crime, a 1968 federal law prohibited interstate firearms transfers except among licensed manufacturers, dealers, and importers. The NRA became scared that more restrictions would ultimately result in government seizure of all personal guns. That’s when, in 1977, the group reorganized to launch an aggressive anti-gun control movement based on a fabricated understanding of the Second Amendment. Those who invoke the Second Amendment as an absolute reason why the United States can’t act like Great Britain, Australia, Japan and other countries to reduce staggering gun violence don’t understand the amendment at all.
When the thirteen colonies broke away from tyrannical Great Britain to form the United States of America, the concern that this new government would become corrupt was very real. The ultimate check on a tyrannical government, the Framers of the Constitution believed, was an armed population.
The Second Amendment reads, “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.” Since militias are made up of citizens bearing arms, gun proponents argue that the right to keep and bear arms naturally extends to each citizen, who may use a firearm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home.
For the first time in history, this perspective was supported in the 2008 Supreme Court case District of Columbia v. Heller. A civilian, the Court ruled, has a constitutional right to keep a handgun in his or her home for purposes of self-defense.
Nowhere in the text, however, is it stated that an individual right to keep and bear arms is preserved. More overtly, the text refers to the collection of people who would make up a militia if the federal government were to abuse its power.
For Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens, the Second Amendment defends only the right to possess and carry a firearm in connection with military activities. Individuals do not have the right to keep and bear arms or to use weapons outside the context of service in a well-regulated militia.
“Different language surely would have been used to protect nonmilitary use and possession of weapons from regulation if such an intent had played any role in the drafting of the Amendment,” Stevens wrote in the dissenting opinion to the case.
What’s more, the Framers’ primary motivation, he clarified, was not to reinforce the already common-law right of self-defense. A common-law right is established either by previous legal cases or by custom. Thus, defendants in criminal proceedings in each state already have the right to self-defense.
When Stevens joined the Supreme Court in 1975, there was no doubt among the Court of the Second Amendment’s connotation being military, rather than personal. “Emotional claims that the right to possess deadly weapons is so important that it is protected by the federal Constitution distort intelligent debate about the wisdom of particular aspects of proposed legislation designed to minimize the slaughter caused by the prevalence of guns in private hands,” he observed.
Five years after his retirement in 1986, former Chief Supreme Court Justice Warren Burger, a conservative, explained that “The very language of the Second Amendment refutes any argument that it was intended to guarantee every citizen an unfettered right to any kind of weapon he or she desires.” The notion that the Second Amendment preserves an individual right to own a gun, he added, is “one of the greatest pieces of fraud… on the American public by special interest groups that I’ve ever seen in my lifetime.”
If the Second Amendment doesn’t protect an individual right to own a gun, we don’t need to repeal or amend it in order to establish major gun control laws. We must remember that this tale is the NRA’s doing, not the Founders of the Constitution, and that it is rooted in fear. This fear is why the NRA staunchly opposes even minor firearms regulations today. We can and should move forward in enacting exactly what the pro-gun lobby is afraid of. We can’t hide behind the Second Amendment anymore.http://www.huffingtonpost.com/samantha-paige-rosen/stop-hiding-behind-the-se_b_8845634.html
The constitutions of most of our States assert, that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves, … or they may act by representatives, freely and equally chosen; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed; that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press.
-Thomas Jefferson
No freeman shall ever be debarred the use of arms.
-Thomas Jefferson
Here every private person is authorized to arm himself, and on the strength of this authority, I do not deny the inhabitants had a right to arm themselves at that time, for their defense, not for offence.
-John Adams
[W]hen the resolution of enslaving America was formed in Great Britain, the British Parliament was advised by an artful man, who was governor of Pennsylvania, to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually.
-George Mason
I ask, who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor.
-George Mason
[W]here and when did freedom exist when the power of the sword and purse were given up from the people?
-Patrick Henry
The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.
-Alexander Hamilton
Why is it that you leftists are constantly trying to rerwrite history?
I don’t think the moron knows who these men were. The only significance of his repost is documenting that the global warming campaign is a Leftist project. Show me a warmist and I will show you a hater of individual liberty and a lover of oppressive goverments.
But you knew that …
I’m a humanist, a Buddhist, a Christian, a strong advocate of individual liberty and a strong believer that oppressive governments should be removed by force, after political means have failed.
I was wrong about your sense of humor. You are funny.
You are definitely an Idiot, you cannot be a Christian and a Buddhist, their belief systems are totally different.
So what happens after this life for you Marty, will you be rewarded with everlasting life in the kingdom of heaven with your one of two true gods or be reborn as a goose or some other higher form of life?
Those are all important quotes, but none of them is in the Constitution.
Actually Marty, many of those same words and phrases are indeed in the Constitution. And the quotes come directly from those who actually wrote the Constitution, one of them being known as ther “Father of the Bill of Rights”. On top of that, these quotes were from their deliberations on the Bill of Rights, and its meaning.
Your leftist propaganda is not found anywhere in the Constitution, and was written by people with a leftist/progressive agendas 200 years later.
You lose.
No, gator, nothing like any of those quotes is in the Constitution. The point of the article is that the 2nd amendment refers to service in a well-regulated militia.
that they are entitled to freedom of person, freedom of religion, freedom of property, and freedom of the press.
Sorry Marty, but you are wrong again. And again, these were the deliberations of the authors of the Bill of Rights (separate from the Constitution, it was added later, time for you to go back to school), and not some leftist/progressive attempt at a rewrite.
Why is it you freaks are so afraid of original script and original data? Oh yeah, the agenda thingy.
militia.- a military force that is raised from the civil population to supplement a regular army in an emergency.
That has nothing to do with bearing arms, gator. In fact, the government saw that there was nothing in the Constitution that guaranteed the right to bear arms, so they added it a couple years later. And when they added it, they specified that the right to bear arms is for participating in a well-regulated militia. So, not only does it require membership in a militia, burt it says the activity of the militia must be well-regulated, which really does mean rational gun control, like in Australia and Norway, for two examples, is allowed in the US. So that’s what we will do.
Liar.
I ask, who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers. But I cannot say who will be the militia of the future day. If that paper on the table gets no alteration, the militia of the future day may not consist of all classes, high and low, and rich and poor.
-George Mason
Marty, Go read the Federalist Papers and then get back to us.
Link to the papers: http://thomas.loc.gov/home/histdox/fedpapers.html
Among others:
The Alleged Danger From the Powers of the Union to the State Governments Considered Madison argues in favor of a federal military. After suffering at the hands of the Brits, many were frighten/opposed to the Federal Government being given the power to create a standing army and navy. So why ever would you think these people would want to give up away their rights to own weapons to that same Federal Government or even to the states???
The Federalist Papers Org.The Founding Fathers and the Right to Bear Arms
Also read DEMOCIDE: Death by Government by Dr. R.J. Rummel, Hawaii Univ.
For the REASON the right to have arms is so important to the welfare of the masses.
Good stuff!! I read the second amendment simply; they could have just
written ” the right to keep and bear arms, SHALL not be infringed”. But
they knew some retarded people could not get it. So they “lawered”
it up and included an example, the militia. Buy that inclusion, they thought
that the unsaid phrase” including but NOT LIMITED TO, THE MILITIA” was
understood. The 10th also is being deliberately misconstrued.IMHO.
richard
Sorry!! BY instead of BUY. Holidays spending got me!
But they didn’t write that, Richard. They wrote something quite different, and what they wrote allows regulation of the right to bear arms.
Hey Marty, when you gibe up your gun can I have it? I bet it’s never been fired. Nice.
give
The English language has certain, specific forms, used to convey messages. It’s not just a collection of words. You can’t take a single word, or even a phrase, and claim that it represents the entire passage. The passage must be read as a whole, for the meaning to be found. So what’s the meaning of the second amendment, when taken as a whole?
http://www.constitution.org/2ll/schol/2amd_grammar.htm
And let’s not forget, the NINTH amendment also clearly, explicitly, forbids the federal government from banning guns, (or drugs, or CO2, or pretty much anything else) as does Article I, section 8, of the original text.
Funny that you should mention the National Recovery Act–or did you mean the National Rifle Association? Your history is deficient. Go back to the hearings on the National Firearms Act of 1934. Attorney General Homer Cummings was convinced that the Second Amendment protected the individual citizen’s right to own firearms, so he based his proposed handgun ban on the power to tax handguns out of existence. The National Rifle Association and the United States Revolver Association were on-board for national registration of all legal handguns and national licensing of all legal handgun owners; neither organization at the time “believed in the Second Amendment.” Had AG Cummings went along with the proposed $5 tax rate and not publically insisted that he was going to tax “murder weapons out of existence” then handguns today would be licensed just like machine guns, like firearm suppressors (silencers), like cannon and grenades and bazookas–and like those handgun substitutes, short barreled rifles and sawed off shotguns. The original bill limited magazine capacity to 12 rounds and any
“auto-loading” (semi-automatic action) was regarded as a machine gun, too.
The $200 tax in 1934 along with waiting periods of six months and more for the transfer to take effect and getting permission from corrupt local and state officials before getting the federal bureaucracy to okay the sale or gift of a handgun was just a bit much. In 2015 dollars, $200 “1934” dollars has the buying power of $3558 “2015” dollars. The federal transfer stamp fee hasn’t increased.
What the National Rifle Association had to do was counter the “salami slicing strategy,” incremental infringements. “Be reasonable. I’m only trimming your toe nails. Now that the toe nails are gone, you don’t really need that toe. Now we cut off your legs. Next…” Gun control measures including confiscation are just “the first step.”
And if Homer Cummings had overcame his own hubris, he would have achieved three of the “minimum achievements” of today’s gun ban fanatics:
All legal handguns registered at the federal level (if not properly registered, it’s a felony with a severe fine and long prison term)
All legal handgun possessors (not just owners) licensed at the federal level, holding their handguns ONLY with the permission of the Secretary of the Treasury (again, touch a handgun under that scheme and get a heavy fine and go to prison for a long time)
With these flaming hoops in place, the number of legal handguns and legal handgun owners would be only a few million, and those would be “politically reliable” Party minions.
That’s without further restrictions and rules–such as machine gun owners have to have “secure storage” and are subject to announced annual inspections. There are also provisions for unannounced inspections (read “legal detention and search without warrant”) of legal, registered machine gun owners by Treasury agents. Being a registered machine gun owner means that the Treasury department may legally sneak up on your home during the hours of darkness, shoot your dogs (standard World War Two commando tactics that made it into standard police tactics for police raids), blast your doors, windows and walls to gain entry, use any force they deem necessary to “subdue those resisting arrest,” hold you for a “reasonable” amount of time in conditions that would be inhumane torture if inflicted upon America’s declared enemies, tear your house apart “assuring compliance” with storage regulations, all without the need for even “Probable Cause” or “Reasonable Articulate Suspicion” because part of your agreement for having a licensed machine gun is compliance with unannounced inspections. Look over the rules of evidence again–anything found during a legal search (or compliance inspection) is admissible evidence. During a “compliance inspection” you have no right to legal counsel–and you are not “under arrest” but you may be held at gunpoint and in chains until the inspection has been completed. So far, this Orwellian nightmare hasn’t occurred because the backlash against the government would be swift and severe.
After all, gun ban fanatics don’t see gun owners as humans. It’s okay to kick gun owners in the face and stomp their cats and club gun owner brats. Back in the day, the Native American was treated like that when they strayed off the reservation. American blacks were treated that way up through the 1960’s — and Black Lives Matter claim that is still the case. Muslim Americans fear being treated that way. Gun owners are regarded as lower life forms.
Why is that?
“… During a “compliance inspection” you have no right to legal counsel–and you are not “under arrest” but you may be held at gunpoint and in chains until the inspection has been completed. So far, this Orwellian nightmare hasn’t occurred because the backlash against the government would be swift and severe…..”
ERRRRrrrr, I hate to tell you but you are completely wrong on that.
….So, just for posterity…the USDA and their cohorts took over 7 months to end their command of our personal property. We, of course, must continue to pay our personal property taxes on land that we had no rights or access to. – Cindi Henshaw
Please note that Danny Henshaw is a former police officer who’d done undercover narcotics work. People who commented on the noNAIS website and lived nearby in NC and Virgina went to visit the Henshaws and found the US agents had left a royal mess including used toilet paper and human feces.
Walter has closed down his website so I am reproducing some of the comments/story here.
Source: http://nonais.org/2006/09/29/henshaw-incident/
(Has it really been ten years?)
The news article is still up Boar war
Not nearly as bad as Gail’s example, but I was once personally held at gunpoint for over an hour for a “compliance inspection”. I had a single .45 caliber round, in a magazine. I needed it for measurements, for an art project I was working on, (bullet shaped valve caps) and I thought that would be the safest way to carry it. Apparently, I was wrong. I got stopped for not having a headlight on my bike, about 20 minutes after sunset. (the day after daylight savings, they were literally out looking for people to ticket who’d forgotten to prepare for the early sunset) In Santa Barbara, the official policy is that failure to consent to a voluntary search constitutes probable cause for an involuntary search. The fifth amendment doesn’t exist here, either. During the search that I’d explicitly refused consent for, they found the ENTIRELY LEGAL magazine in my backpack. They immediately threw me to the ground, pulled their guns, and started screaming, “WHERE F**K IS IT?” over and over. It took me 3-4 minutes to get them to even tell me what was going on. One cop spent the next hour doing an utterly incompetent search, while the other kept his gun pointed at my chest. Since I didn’t, in fact, have a gun on me, (I’ve never even fired a .45, I just needed to measure the round) they let me go with a warning. They were very clear that they were warning me, and that I’d go to jail if they caught me doing it again, but they couldn’t tell me what the “it” was. They completely conceded that I’d done nothing at all wrong, with respect to the bullet and magazine. But I’d better never do it again.
On the plus side, they did feel bad about the whole thing, so they cut the headlight ticket down to a fit-it ticket. Of course, by then I had to ride the rest of the way home in pitch black darkness, instead of the twilight they’d stopped me in.
Where’s Obi Wan when you need him?
“These are not the pigs you’re looking for. Move along. Have a nice day.”
Martin-
The United States Library of Congress disagrees with your interpretation:
http://www.loc.gov/law/help/second-amendment.php
The United States supreme court has explicitly stated that the right to keep and bear arms IS an individual right.
You got that right Ted. Anyone that says otherwise has a reading comprehension problem because after all it does say “the right of the people”. Nor do they know our nations history or can understand the context of the Bill of Rights. For some reason leftist idiots believe that the 2nd amendment and the 2nd amendment ONLY out of the 10 in the BILL OF RIGHTS was written to limit or deny an individual right. I mean how really stupid is that idea?
Martin says, “Nowhere in the text, however, is it stated that an individual right to keep and bear arms is preserved.”
Really? How about where it says in the main clause of the sentence, “the right of the people to keep and bear Arms shall not be infringed.” Remember, that part is the main part of the sentence; the other parts are dependent clauses.
Consider another sentence with a parallel structure. “Well informed voters, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and read books shall not be infringed.” Question— does that sentence only protect the right of voters to have books, or does it protect the right of the people to have books? If you say it only protects the rights of voters, I suggest that you go back and study grammar more closely.
And then there was https://www.law.cornell.edu/supct/html/07-290.ZS.html
In a 5-4 decision, DC v Heller decided that the Second Amendment was an individual right. Ignoring this 2008 Supreme Court decision is not okay. You may, of course, point out the partisan politics behind the decision, that if those nasty Republicans were never allowed to appoint Supreme Court justices, only the policies of the DNC would get the Supreme Court stamp of approval.
Be sure to mention this other inconvenient fact–you correctly quoted the National Rifle Association mindset of the 1930’s as voiced by its leaders was that the Second Amendment didn’t allow individual citizens to own guns and carry them about (keep and bear arms). This did change over time–you correctly pointed out that in 1977 the National Rifle Association had a coup and the banner of the Second Amendment became a line in the sand–“NIE WIEDER!” But, as pointed out by Robert Sherrill in his 1973 “The Saturday Night Special” the National Rifle Association seriously mangled the National Firearms Act of 1934 and was regarded in the Beltway as a serious threat to political careers.
And FDR’s Attorney General, Homer Cummings, regarded the Second Amendment as the right of the individual to own firearms. He proposed to tax gun owners out of existence, just as poll taxes kept the “Negro voter” from casting a ballot. The poll tax was one model for Cummings’ National Firearm Act.
What they DID write was ” THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS, SHALL NOT
BE INFRINGED”. How do you explain the reason they wrote that???
Only Progressives bent on forming a totalitarian government and their would be slaves could misinterpret the 2nd Amendment.
“The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing.”
— Adolph Hitler, Hitler’s Secret Conversations 403 (Norman Cameron and R.H. Stevens trans., 1961)
Progressive and co-founder of the Fabian Socialist society, George Bernard Shaw defends Hitler and the killing of ‘useless eaters’
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hQvsf2MUKRQ
“…if raised, whether they could subdue a Nation of freemen, who know how to prize liberty, and who have arms in their hands?”
— Delegate Sedgwick, during the Massachusetts Convention, rhetorically asking if an oppressive standing army could prevail, Johnathan Elliot, ed., Debates in the Several State Conventions on the Adoption of the Federal Constitution, Vol.2 at 97 (2d ed., 1888)
“As civil rulers, not having their duty to the people before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as the military forces which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.”
— Tench Coxe, in `Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution’ under the Pseudonym `A Pennsylvanian’ in the Philadelphia Federal Gazette, June 18, 1789 at 2 col. 1).
“The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give to Congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretense by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.”
— William Rawle, A View of the Constitution 125-6 (2nd ed. 1829)
“I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials.”
— George Mason, in Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788
“Whereas civil-rulers, not having their duty to the people duly before them, may attempt to tyrannize, and as military forces, which must be occasionally raised to defend our country, might pervert their power to the injury of their fellow citizens, the people are confirmed by the article in their right to keep and bear their private arms.”
— Tench Coxe, in Remarks on the First Part of the Amendments to the Federal Constitution
“The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed.”
— Alexander Hamilton, The Federalist Papers at 184-188
If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual State. In a single State, if the persons entrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.
— Alexander Hamilton, Federalist No. 28
“That the said Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms … ”
— Samuel Adams, Debates and Proceedings in the Convention of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts, at 86-87 (Pierce & Hale, eds., Boston, 1850)
“[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation…(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”
–James Madison, The Federalist Papers, No. 46
“To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self-defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws.”
–John Adams, A Defense of the Constitutions of the United States 475 (1787-1788)
“Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States. A military force, at the command of Congress, can execute no laws, but such as the people perceive to be just and constitutional; for they will possess the power, and jealousy will instantly inspire the inclination, to resist the execution of a law which appears to them unjust and oppressive.”
–Noah Webster, An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution (Philadelphia 1787).
“Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves? Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man against his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American…[T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people.”
–Tenche Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
“Whereas, to preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them; nor does it follow from this, that all promiscuously must go into actual service on every occasion. The mind that aims at a select militia, must be influenced by a truly anti-republican principle; and when we see many men disposed to practice upon it, whenever they can prevail, no wonder true republicans are for carefully guarding against it.”
–Richard Henry Lee, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.
“What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.”
— Thomas Jefferson to William Stephens Smith, 1787. ME 6:373, Papers 12:356
“No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.”
— Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution, 1 T. Jefferson Papers, 334,[C.J. Boyd, Ed., 1950]
“The right of the people to keep and bear … arms shall not be infringed. A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country …”
— James Madison, I Annals of Congress 434, June 8, 1789
“What, Sir, is the use of a militia? It is to prevent the establishment of a standing army, the bane of liberty …. Whenever Governments mean to invade the rights and liberties of the people, they always attempt to destroy the militia, in order to raise an army upon their ruins.”
— Rep. Elbridge Gerry of Massachusetts, spoken during floor debate over the Second Amendment, I Annals of Congress at 750, August 17, 1789
” … to disarm the people – that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them.”
— George Mason, 3 Elliot, Debates at 380
” … but if circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people, while there is a large body of citizens, little if at all inferior to them in discipline and use of arms, who stand ready to defend their rights …”
— Alexander Hamilton speaking of standing armies in Federalist 29
“Are we at last brought to such humiliating and debasing degradation, that we cannot be trusted with arms for our defense? Where is the difference between having our arms in possession and under our direction, and having them under the management of Congress? If our defense be the real object of having those arms, in whose hands can they be trusted with more propriety, or equal safety to us, as in our own hands?”
— Patrick Henry, 3 J. Elliot, Debates in the Several State Conventions 45, 2d ed. Philadelphia, 1836
“The great object is, that every man be armed … Every one who is able may have a gun.”
— Patrick Henry, Elliot, p.3:386
“O sir, we should have fine times, indeed, if, to punish tyrants, it were only sufficient to assemble the people! Your arms, wherewith you could defend yourselves, are gone …”
— Patrick Henry, Elliot p. 3:50-53, in Virginia Ratifying Convention demanding a guarantee of the right to bear arms
“The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them.”
— Zachariah Johnson, delegate to Virginia Ratifying Convention, Elliot, 3:645-6
“Certainly one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of citizens to keep and bear arms … The right of citizens to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard, against the tyranny which now appears remote in America but which historically has proven to be always possible.”
— Hubert H. Humphrey, Senator, Vice President, 22 October 1959
“The militia is the natural defense of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpation of power by rulers. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of the republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally … enable the people to resist and triumph over them.”
— Joseph Story, Supreme Court Justice, Commentaries on the Constitution of the United States, p. 3:746-7, 1833
” … most attractive to Americans, the possession of arms is the distinction between a freeman and a slave, it being the ultimate means by which freedom was to be preserved.”
— James Burgh, 18th century English Libertarian writer, Shalhope, The Ideological Origins of the Second Amendment, p.604
“The right [to bear arms] is general. It may be supposed from the phraseology of this provision that the right to keep and bear arms was only guaranteed to the militia; but this would be an interpretation not warranted by the intent. The militia, as has been explained elsewhere, consists of those persons who, under the laws, are liable to the performance of military duty, and are officered and enrolled for service when called upon…. [I]f the right were limited to those enrolled, the purpose of the guarantee might be defeated altogether by the action or the neglect to act of the government it was meant to hold in check. The meaning of the provision undoubtedly is, that the people, from whom the militia must be taken, shall have the right to keep and bear arms, and they need no permission or regulation of law for the purpose. But this enables the government to have a well regulated militia; for to bear arms implies something more than mere keeping; it implies the learning to handle and use them in a way that makes those who keep them ready for their efficient use; in other words, it implies the right to meet for voluntary discipline in arms, observing in so doing the laws of public order.”
— Thomas M. Cooley, General Principles of Constitutional Law, Third Edition [1898]
“And that the said Constitution be never construed to authorize Congress … to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms…. “
–Samuel Adams
Let me demonstrate how uneducated gun control fanatics are with this simple statement: guns don’t kill people. It’s bullets, bullets, bullets fired by killers that kill people. I oversimplify for the simple-minded. Very few people are murdered by blunt impact of a gun used as a club or fatally choked out by the gun used as a tool to strangle. There are a few deaths per decade by means of pistol whipping. In the Marines and Army I was taught the art of bayonet fighting–and learned that even the M16 was effective as an impact weapon without the bayonet. However, the use of my issue service rifle as an impact weapon or as a bayonet platform was secondary to its use as a projectile launcher.
Bullets. Buckshot. Pellets. Slugs. Sometimes even the powder gases from blank (no bullet) cartridges can kill. The bullet after launching is lethal for an instant–and then it’s not. The majority of deaths listed as firearm homicides are from firearm projectile injury.
So the gun control fanatics prove their ignorance every time they moan and scream and cry “guns kill people!” We’re supposed to be EVOLVED primates. The gun can be fingered, licked, has substance and the bullet is a fleeting thing that becomes almost harmless after it runs out of steam. Guns don’t fire themselves. Bullets need expanding powder gasses to power them through the constricted barrel and out the bullet exit port in the direction of the bullet’s victim. A gun is a launcher and very few people are killed with the gun–it’s the projectile, dummy!
I can’t educate superstitious savages. They’ll keep lying about homicide by pistol whipping: “The mad gunman killed six with his handgun.” Six people just sat there while another savage pounded them to death with a handgun? Why a handgun and not a hammer? Cheaper, only one moving part, less likely to break.
Just remember–it’s bullets, bullets, bullets! Not guns, bullets!
LOL Love it.
Actually it is always the idiot controlling the implement. Nail guns shoot nails and those nails can kill too.
Gun control is NOT about stopping the murdering of civilians it is about facilitating totalitarian control. Individuals can always find a way to kill. — A friend stopped a maniac using an axe on a person in Boston. He shot and killed him with a gun. — The militarization of the American police force makes that VERY VERY clear when the US government is now treating American citizens as THE ENEMY.
http://www.dhs.gov/sites/default/files/styles/large/public/images/2011-04-05-ice-training-using-armored-vehicles.JPG?itok=fmMSA_1q
The Secret Government Rulebook For Labeling You a Terrorist
Militarized police overreach: “Oh, God, I thought they were going to shoot me next” —- Local law enforcement’s often using SWAT teams to do regular police work. The results are frightening — and deadly
National Network of Fusion Centers Fact Sheet
A few more links:
Secured Cities Conference
Why Is Homeland Security Taking Control of Local Police?
Who’s to Blame for Battlefield America?
US Police Have Killed Over 5,000 Civilians Since 9/11
Cops Kill 8 Times More Americans Than Terrorists Do
If guns made society dangerous then politicians would not demand to have dozens of men armed with guns there to surround them. If guns make society dangerous why on earth do we allow police to carry them everywhere?