Posted on 10/15/2009 5:03:46 AM PDT by marktwain
It has become increasingly politically incorrect to be a firearms owner. This is because trends tend to be set by the fashionable and the media-connected in metropolitan environments. Gun ownership per capita is well under 50% in urban areas of this country. Nationwide, it is estimated that one half of all homes contain at least one firearm. As the demographics move into rural areas, gun ownership well exceeds that 50% margin, and on the frontiers and in the true backwoods home, gun ownership will generally be found to reach the 90th percentile of the population.
When your beliefs and values are challenged, you want ready answers. The following have worked for me when debating the civil rights of gun owners in this country.
* Isn’t the Second Amendment about the National Guard?
Frankly, no. Serious legal scholars have almost universally agreed that the Second Amendment speaks to the rights of the citizens, not the rights of the states or other communities. Doesn’t it seem incongruous that the Framers would have written one states’ rights amendment into a Bill of Rights that otherwise speaks entirely to the rights of individuals?
Besides, consider that the document in question was written at a time when the gunfire of the American Revolution was still ringing in the ears of the Framers. A “national guard” of the period would have been Tories loyal to King George, hardly an entity the freedom fighters who wrote the Bill of Rights would have wanted to empower.
Historically, you’ll also find that the constitutions written by the separate colonies prior to the Declaration of Independence and the Bill of Rights spoke of firearms ownership specifically as an individual right encompassing personal protection, and not just a tool to facilitate state militias.
(Excerpt) Read more at backwoodshome.com ...
Good post.....
—good article, but I generally disagree with the first sentence—
Make sure (everyone that enters the thread) to read the article, Massad makes good points as always. They are the usual tired old arguments and stupid questions that he patiently answers. I guess that is necessary, to just keep answering them but it sure gets old after awhile.
Fine, he answers the “questions” that anti-gunners have.
IE, the excuses they give for their emotionally arrived at conclusions.
Folks need to understand this about leftists. They arrive at their conclusions about various issues in order to support their worldview. They didn’t arrive at those conclusions through the erroneous points & wrongly answered questions that they put forth as justification post-conclusion.
It’s much simpler than he makes it:
- I’m NOT obligated to set myself up for victim status.
- I have the right of self-defense.
- Gun free zones have higher violent crime rates.
- Cities and States that relax gun control laws ALWAYS see a drop in violent crime.
Massad is always helpful,but check this:
http://www.facebook.com/note.php?note_id=29695674542
It has become increasingly politically incorrect to be a firearms owner.
I agree on both points – it's a good article and the comment about being ‘un-PC’ as a gun owner.
The past almost 11 months have shown a tremendous increase in the sales of firearms and ammunition. It can't all be going to people who already owned firearms before the ‘Zero era’.
The more people that own them, the more mainstream it becomes.
Good article to Bookmark.
Massad is making a pivotal mistake in assuming anti-2A types will listen to rational, logical, well researched arguments. The vast majority are self destructive lemmings who demand everyone else join them in jumping off the cliff. If you refuse they see nothing wrong w/ the govt shooting you because of it. Hows that for ‘logic’?
—and somewhere recently, I saw an article which expounded on the thesis that the “assault weapons” hoo-rah over the last twenty years or so has “mainstreamed” them, as it were, with which I totally agree also—
Massad is an excellent teacher.
A: If it was, no man would ever have bought one with a two inch barrel.I must have laughed for two minutes over that one!
As someone else observed, "Logic will not get a person out of a position that logic did not get them into".
When the crap hits the fan and civil war breaks out, where will the anti-gun people go for shelter?
The Constitution speaks directly to the subject of militias.
Article I Section 8. The Congress shall have power ...
To provide for calling forth the militia to execute the laws of the union, suppress insurrections and repel invasions;
To provide for organizing, arming, and disciplining, the militia, and for governing such part of them as may be employed in the service of the United States, reserving to the states respectively, the appointment of the officers, and the authority of training the militia according to the discipline prescribed by Congress;
Yeah it’s about, what, 17 years out of date?
All the good momentum is our way, has been for a while now. Push more.
That’s true MrB, I’ve dealt with this anti-hunting, fishing, anti-gun crowd for many years. Logic has no bearing whatsoever.
Another erroneous belief is that “oh surely we can all get along and ‘debate’ the issues like reasonable people”. Nope. There is no reasoning with that crowd, nor is there “debate”, only surrender and I don’t feel like surrendering...
There is no reasoning with someone that insists on your enslavement and submission.
Libs are SO like Muslims in this regard.
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.