13 replies [Last post]
CVC
CVC's picture
Offline
Grand Slam Challenge Winner!
Location: Kansas
Joined: 03/04/2006
Posts: 3586
2nd Amendment

I was in the library and decided to get some reading on Constitutional law. I spied a series of books on the amendments so I checked out one on the 2nd amendment.

I was amazed at the anti-gun bias contained in the book. I guess I expected it to be simply factual. The book is The American Heritage History of the Bill of Rights by Joan C. Hawxhurst.

What intrigues me is the thought that citizens no longer need to protect themselves. I think that the need for not only self-defense, but national defense by citizens is at its highest peak in years.

Consider that we are fighting a war against terrorism. Terrorist know no bounds, set no limits on targets and move among the general populace to create death and destruction. I think that as citizens of this country we have not only the right to defend ourselves, but also the obligation to bear arms against the enemy.

And, the threat of an oppressive government exists as long as government exists. History is fraught with examples of governments ignoring the rights of the people. Sure, some may say that it won't happen in the modern world, but who would have thought that in the "modern" world one country would invade another for no reason other than to conquer it? Iraq v Kuwait.

Offline
Joined: 07/31/2007
Posts: 635
2nd Amendment

Did you see the new gun law they want to pass? To own a handgun or automatic weapon, you would need a certified license. You would need to carry this on you when ever you left the house with your firearm. You would also need to carry this license in order to have that firearm in YOUR home. Now that is nuts. Just plain nuts.

Offline
Location: Maui, Hawaii
Joined: 05/03/2006
Posts: 100
2nd Amendment

I wonder if all those anti-gunners will ever catch on that the legal system is a reactionary process. It does not come into play until after the event. I bet we would see a lot let women raped if they all would learn to use and pack a piece. I do not understand the prevalent mentality in this country that its the other guys responsibility. I too believe that we do have an obligation to our families to protect them and our property.

I used to think in terms of the 2nd ammendment as curbing my hunting priveliges, however, I now believe as you do - the ammendments exists so that the populace can protect itself from the government.

CVC
CVC's picture
Offline
Grand Slam Challenge Winner!
Location: Kansas
Joined: 03/04/2006
Posts: 3586
2nd Amendment
haiku_rodney wrote:
I wonder if all those anti-gunners will ever catch on that the legal system is a reactionary process. It does not come into play until after the event. I.

Exactly! A few weeks back the house alarm went off in the middle of the night. The alarm company didn't call like they normally do so my wife called 911. I grabbed my pistol.

I was scared, but I wasn't going to sit there like some lamb. I searched the entire house but no one was there. It was a false alarm.

About 10 minutes after I cleared the house the cops showed up - probably about 20 minutes after the call to 911.

Had it been a real event they would have arrived just in time to right a report.

Can you ever think of a situation where the cops prevented a crime? I can't.

Offline
Joined: 07/31/2007
Posts: 635
2nd Amendment

If someone wants to break into your home, they'll do it. There is no way to prevent it, just deter it with such things as alarms. Makes self defense a very important issue.

WesternHunter's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/05/2006
Posts: 2368
2nd Amendment

Contrary to popular belief, cops are not there to protect you or save your life, and nor are they legally required to do so. That task falls on you and you alone.

That is why you and all gun owners need to fight fanatically for your gun rights. If we don't, well our 2nd amendment will still be there flashing in our face, however, law makers will make it so difficult and cost prohibitive for you and I to keep and bear arms for our lawful needs. This countries lawmakers have been using the excuse of "homeland security" and "war on terrorism" to slowly take away our freedoms. I've seen it happen little by little since 9/11. Yet all the laws and restrictions they enact are all "window dressing", stuff made to look like they are protecting us, yet we are no safer now than we were before 9/11. All they have done is make it more diffucult and inconvenient for lawful citizens to do anything.

Protect your gun rights. ALL lawful gun owners should be NRA members, especially in todays world where our rights are constantly under fire. Stand up for your 2nd Amendment rights, protect your freedoms. Join the NRA and vote wisely. Every time you vote for something think long and hard about what that piece of legislation will do for you or to you later down the road and over time.

CVC, in response to your situation I can tell you that I am good friends with three police officers in my city. They have all agreed that many crimes against people and property have been foiled and prevented long before the cops were called simply because the victim had access to a firearm. They often respond to take the police report. They have said that this happens more often than most people would care to hear about or admit. The reason why the media rarely reports it is because no one gets killed or injured. Because some good was actually done with a firearm.

expatriate's picture
Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 10/26/2002
Posts: 3207
2nd Amendment

There are a number of reasons why violent crimes are most likely to be over before the cops arrive. Fear of being caught is only one of them. Principles of warfare apply just as effectively to violent crime as they do to combat. Speed, surprise, and force also serve to disorient a defender and get him/her to capitulate quickly. Have an objective, overwhelm your opponent, go in and get it quick.

Cops may be able to figure it out afterward, but won't stop it from happening unless by pure luck.

bitmasher's picture
Offline
Moderator
Location: Colorado
Joined: 02/27/2002
Posts: 2973
Re: 2nd Amendment
CVC wrote:
What intrigues me is the thought that citizens no longer need to protect themselves.

What is also interesting is that this belief seems to be higher in urban areas even though there are fewer per-capita cops and violent crime is higher. It sets up the illogical result that people turn against guns (on average) when there is more crime and fewer cops on a per-capita basis.

WesternHunter's picture
Offline
Joined: 05/05/2006
Posts: 2368
2nd Amendment

We also have to remember the brainwashing affect on people of how bad guns are being portaid in the media, TV, and the movies today. They don't cast a very good light on firearms, the industry, or private ownership of them.

Tom Selleck is the only actor of recent that I've ever heard say anything in praise of gun ownership and proper usage in a TV show that was aired a couple years ago. I'm sure he had a lot to do with that being wriiten into the script, him being an NRA member and one-time NRA spokesman and all.

Everyone else is too busy demonizing guns and gun ownership. Gun bashing wasn't even so prevelent as recent as 30 years ago. Even the NRA claims that political involement and lobbying is a fairly new responsability of theirs. In the past they never had to worry about such threats to our rights.

expatriate's picture
Offline
Location: Arizona
Joined: 10/26/2002
Posts: 3207
2nd Amendment

Years ago, the media (to include the entertainment industry) realized the power it had to shape public opinion, rather than simply reflect it. That kind of power can be pretty intoxicating, and its exercise has become increasingly blatant. What we see in the media is not a reflection of American society. It's an interpreted version seen through the eyes of whoever's shooting and editing the tape. The vast majority of Americans don't realize that distinction.

I used to work in TV news back in the 80s. One of my assignments was to interview a guy who had worked with the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. I had roughly 60 seconds of airtime to tell this guy's story. Based on the raw data and tape from the interview, I could make the guy out to be a sinner or saint. Both versions would be true in the sense that I wouldn't be fabricating anything. But the choice was up to me and my views of what I thought was important.

All news is spin, because it's filtered through the values of the reporter. In recent years, competition has eroded ethics to the point that those in the media are increasingly comfortable with editorializing via the way they present or omit information. More and more, you hear slogans saying that they don't just report the news -- they tell you what's important, or even say they shape the news. Make no mistake about it; the media believes its mission is to perform a public service -- and that service includes enlightening the American people, educating them, teaching them what's important, and molding society into what they think it should be. It's no different than any other industry,-- why react to what your customers want when you can teach your customers values that serve your interest? The only difference is that the media sells ideas, rather than cars, golf clubs, or electronics.

bitmasher's picture
Offline
Moderator
Location: Colorado
Joined: 02/27/2002
Posts: 2973
2nd Amendment
WesternHunter wrote:
Everyone else is too busy demonizing guns and gun ownership.

No one profits more from negative gun glorification than Hollywood. Movie after movie shows bad boys using bad guns in bad ways. Audiences love it and hollywood profits. Unfortunately many non-gun owners form their opinions about guns and gun ownership from movies, largely because on average they don't know anyone that is a responsible gun owner.

Then Hollywood in the form of cash and star power habitually supports anti-gun candidates. I can only assume that Hollywood hopes that guns are completely banned so it increases the mystique of guns.

Related Forum Threads You Might Like