“Gun violence” is just violence. We don’t have a gun problem, we have a morality problem in this country. Restricting firearms in certain areas only makes them soft targets. Hence why a recent evil shooter chose a school with little security. You can’t legislate evil from existence.
Prior to the gun regulations, everyone either owned a firearm or knew someone that did. "Gun violence" has escalated in recent years *because of regulations* that hamper ownership by responsible and upstanding citizens and place illegal weapons directly into the hands of criminals and crazies.
This is another spoke in the wheel of the Great Agenda that was orchestrated to excuse even stricter regulations - to disarm the public, at large.
I think the issue of escalating violence is two-fold:
- regulations making it more difficult for individuals to protect themselves
- societal decline
That second is a broad-brush to cover poor parenting, a loss of objective morality, and a loss of respect for human life. If a mother is willing to pay for the murder of her own baby in her own womb, what does that say about how society values life in general? When society at large glorifies degeneracy and mental disorder, what does that say about objective morality? When teachers are afraid of students (in my day, students were afraid of going to the principal's office to get paddled), when we are ok with infanticide and child genital mutilation but want to outlaw spanking, when we take away objective standards for success and replace them with entitlement-thinking and handouts, where is society going to end up?
Yes, regulation is a problem - EVERY gun law is a violation of the Second Amendment (sorry, not sorry), but there is certainly more to the story when it comes to the violence and crime in our society.
As you well know, I firmly believe that the downward spiral of depravity in this country took it's first turn into the abis in the late 60s into the 70s. By the mid 80s we were well into the pull of the vacuum.
The bleeding heart liberals were SOOOO concerned about putting labels that could "stigmatize" people in particular categories (mentally unstable/ill), and the list kept growing to the ridiculous level we are witnessing today.
Telling someone that is mentally defective that it is "OKAY" to be mentally depraved does NOT help them, or society in general. Not treating the illness only creates MORE ISSUES for the afflicted. Thus putting society in MORE danger than ever.
And, as i stated in my earlier comment, ALL gun restrictions are UNCONSTITUTIONAL and should NEVER exist. The ONLY people who follow those regulations are the law abiding citizens. Criminals actually like more laws because they can victimize more people because they are not able to protect themselves from the criminal element.
Sometimes I wish the Second Amendment was more blunt and said something like:
Police can not protect the individual, it is each individual's responsibility to protect themselves.
Tyranny can only be held in check if the people have more power than the government .
Thus the only conclusion is that our government must not restrict the rights of the population to arm themselves in any manner they see fit.
(naturally having never considered such a development as the atomic bomb or the possibility that private individuals could obtain one, nor considering the problems of biological weapons)
Where it comes to WMDs and so forth... As my grandmother always said, "Just cause you can don't mean you should."
Thing is, bad actors that intend to do harm with those kinds of weapons are going to find a way no matter what obstacles or laws you put in their way. Same goes for these mentally ill fools that are committing these "mass shootings" across the country. It doesn't matter what you do to try to stop them. If they are determined to do harm they WILL find a way to make it happen.
Morality has gone to hell in this country....LITERALLY.
This is a very important point. Laws are not obeyed by criminals. So canceling the 2nd amendment, or making a bunch of gun control laws, is not going to improve anything but would put our overall freedom at greater risk if we have no counter to government tyranny!
Just look at all the citizens around the world that envy our 2nd Amendment.
"Just look at all the citizens around the world that envy our 2nd Amendment."
Ain't that the truth! I think it's hilarious to hear the commie leftists complain about how "HORRIBLE the US is", while they refuse to leave to go to a society that already has the kinds of government they say they want in place.
They refuse to hear or listen to the fact that people are fleeing those places to come HERE because of the HORRIBLE living conditions those policies have made in their home countries. Just about EVERY Central and Southern American country has people doing everything they can to ESCAPE. And I use that word because it is the one I have heard coming from those wanting to come HERE. They have to ESCAPE in order to be FREE.
Honestly, I would GLADLY trade the leftist commies we have here for those that WANT to come here and be a part of this country and be active, productive members of our society.
That's not blunt. That provides too much language, which provides too many opportunities to parse the language. THIS is blunt. THIS is what 2A should say IMO:
"The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
No explanations why are necessary, no qualifying language that can be argued, nothing verbose or unnecessary. It is a RIGHT and it SHALL NOT be infringed. Full stop.
Still a great article, and just as true today as the first time you published it.
My belief is and has been for several (5) decades. That is that ALL gun laws are an infringement and are UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
It truly is laughable that creepy uncle joe says in one breath that an AR-15 is useless against the military. Then inthe next breath he calls them "weapons of war." Make up your mind old man (if that is possible now), you can't have it both ways. Or EITHER WAY for that matter.
"Therefore, the amendment begins with the phrase, "a well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State.""
Why was that beginning phrase necessary? Why clutter up the Amendment's language? Why not - manifestly simply and beyond any misinterpretation or misunderstanding - "The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"? Period.
“Gun violence” is just violence. We don’t have a gun problem, we have a morality problem in this country. Restricting firearms in certain areas only makes them soft targets. Hence why a recent evil shooter chose a school with little security. You can’t legislate evil from existence.
Bingo! We have today's winner!
Prior to the gun regulations, everyone either owned a firearm or knew someone that did. "Gun violence" has escalated in recent years *because of regulations* that hamper ownership by responsible and upstanding citizens and place illegal weapons directly into the hands of criminals and crazies.
This is another spoke in the wheel of the Great Agenda that was orchestrated to excuse even stricter regulations - to disarm the public, at large.
I think the issue of escalating violence is two-fold:
- regulations making it more difficult for individuals to protect themselves
- societal decline
That second is a broad-brush to cover poor parenting, a loss of objective morality, and a loss of respect for human life. If a mother is willing to pay for the murder of her own baby in her own womb, what does that say about how society values life in general? When society at large glorifies degeneracy and mental disorder, what does that say about objective morality? When teachers are afraid of students (in my day, students were afraid of going to the principal's office to get paddled), when we are ok with infanticide and child genital mutilation but want to outlaw spanking, when we take away objective standards for success and replace them with entitlement-thinking and handouts, where is society going to end up?
Yes, regulation is a problem - EVERY gun law is a violation of the Second Amendment (sorry, not sorry), but there is certainly more to the story when it comes to the violence and crime in our society.
As you well know, I firmly believe that the downward spiral of depravity in this country took it's first turn into the abis in the late 60s into the 70s. By the mid 80s we were well into the pull of the vacuum.
The bleeding heart liberals were SOOOO concerned about putting labels that could "stigmatize" people in particular categories (mentally unstable/ill), and the list kept growing to the ridiculous level we are witnessing today.
Telling someone that is mentally defective that it is "OKAY" to be mentally depraved does NOT help them, or society in general. Not treating the illness only creates MORE ISSUES for the afflicted. Thus putting society in MORE danger than ever.
And, as i stated in my earlier comment, ALL gun restrictions are UNCONSTITUTIONAL and should NEVER exist. The ONLY people who follow those regulations are the law abiding citizens. Criminals actually like more laws because they can victimize more people because they are not able to protect themselves from the criminal element.
Sometimes I wish the Second Amendment was more blunt and said something like:
Police can not protect the individual, it is each individual's responsibility to protect themselves.
Tyranny can only be held in check if the people have more power than the government .
Thus the only conclusion is that our government must not restrict the rights of the population to arm themselves in any manner they see fit.
(naturally having never considered such a development as the atomic bomb or the possibility that private individuals could obtain one, nor considering the problems of biological weapons)
Where it comes to WMDs and so forth... As my grandmother always said, "Just cause you can don't mean you should."
Thing is, bad actors that intend to do harm with those kinds of weapons are going to find a way no matter what obstacles or laws you put in their way. Same goes for these mentally ill fools that are committing these "mass shootings" across the country. It doesn't matter what you do to try to stop them. If they are determined to do harm they WILL find a way to make it happen.
Morality has gone to hell in this country....LITERALLY.
This is a very important point. Laws are not obeyed by criminals. So canceling the 2nd amendment, or making a bunch of gun control laws, is not going to improve anything but would put our overall freedom at greater risk if we have no counter to government tyranny!
Just look at all the citizens around the world that envy our 2nd Amendment.
"Just look at all the citizens around the world that envy our 2nd Amendment."
Ain't that the truth! I think it's hilarious to hear the commie leftists complain about how "HORRIBLE the US is", while they refuse to leave to go to a society that already has the kinds of government they say they want in place.
They refuse to hear or listen to the fact that people are fleeing those places to come HERE because of the HORRIBLE living conditions those policies have made in their home countries. Just about EVERY Central and Southern American country has people doing everything they can to ESCAPE. And I use that word because it is the one I have heard coming from those wanting to come HERE. They have to ESCAPE in order to be FREE.
Honestly, I would GLADLY trade the leftist commies we have here for those that WANT to come here and be a part of this country and be active, productive members of our society.
That's not blunt. That provides too much language, which provides too many opportunities to parse the language. THIS is blunt. THIS is what 2A should say IMO:
"The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed."
No explanations why are necessary, no qualifying language that can be argued, nothing verbose or unnecessary. It is a RIGHT and it SHALL NOT be infringed. Full stop.
Still a great article, and just as true today as the first time you published it.
My belief is and has been for several (5) decades. That is that ALL gun laws are an infringement and are UNCONSTITUTIONAL.
It truly is laughable that creepy uncle joe says in one breath that an AR-15 is useless against the military. Then inthe next breath he calls them "weapons of war." Make up your mind old man (if that is possible now), you can't have it both ways. Or EITHER WAY for that matter.
Here's what I don't get:
"Therefore, the amendment begins with the phrase, "a well-regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State.""
Why was that beginning phrase necessary? Why clutter up the Amendment's language? Why not - manifestly simply and beyond any misinterpretation or misunderstanding - "The right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"? Period.