Saying no to disarming citizens

I have to wonder sometimes how some people reach the conclusions that they do. To be specific, let’s look at those who would say that we’d all have a safer society if only the government had guns. Right now it seems farfetched that anyone would agree to that. But the issue today is comprehensive gun owner registration and smaller clips. That nose under the tent now will easily lead to stricter rules when it is discovered, after another mass murder using legal arms, more restrictions will be necessary. Eventually only the government will have guns – much to the joy of those who think more government leads to a utopia. When one looks at statistics it reveals that governments all over the world are by far the most leading cause of 99.9% of deaths by firepower when the population is disarmed.

Now I know plenty of people who own guns. They take them out to go hunting and afterward they are returned to a lock safe. Some have merely inherited their arms and wouldn’t know even how to load them. Some enjoy hobby shooting and for those who do, I know none of them that have any desire to shoot anyone. One aspect of the concealed weapons course makes it plain that if you pull that trigger you will most likely pay a dear price even if you are defending a life. It’s a legal ride – civil or criminal – that you don’t want to get on. But do I want to limit anyone’s ability to defend themselves? Never! Will a criminal register a weapon? Will he use a seven round clip if a 30 round is available? They already have the most important advantage in their favor – the element of surprise.....

These are completely invalid arguments to defend our God-given 2a rights. I hunt. I have inherited arms. I like to shoot. I like to reload. I like to build ARs. I like to gunsmith, do trigger jobs, etc. Liking something isn't a right. F'n people on welfare like the taxes that I pay give them their benefits. They like their benefits. They like my tax dollar. But it isn't a God-given right.

This country is so screwed up that most people do not understand that the primary principle of the Bill of Rights was that rights do not come from government and rights should be incredibly difficult to be taken away be government. When government gives you something it is also something they can take away.

This dynamic was set up to limit government powers, and at a time when people would kill for their rights.

Notice that I wrote, "they would kill for their rights". The author of this piece misses that, because there are millions wiling to kill to defend their rights today. That is the correct attitude, as opposed to dying for their rights.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.