Posted on 07/29/2013 6:24:46 AM PDT by kimtom
“Ideally, handguns, which account for more than half of all homicides in the United States, should be banned completely, but we recognize that this is not currently politically feasible,” wrote Dr. Karl P. Adler in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA). For years, the confiscationist left have fought a losing battle in their attempt to repeal the rights of 100 million American gun owners. Even with the benefit of what dedicated gun grabbers undoubtedly considered a God-send–the brutal murder of 20 children in Newtown, Conn.–the right to keep and bear arms has been so jealously guarded, and the intentions of gun control advocates so mistrusted that no significant legislation could be passed.
For this reason, Barack Obama has decided to remove 2nd Amendment rights from the realm of politics and constitutional guarantee by transforming the question of gun violence into an issue of public health.
On January 26th, Obama issued Exec Order # 14, a “Presidential Memorandum directing the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) to research the causes and prevention of gun violence.” Why does the president believe a public health approach will undermine the right to keep and bear arms? “Anything that unnecessarily contributes to human disease, injury, or death is a proper concern of public health, including firearm deaths,” writes Nicholas Johnson in the American Journal of Preventive Medicine. “Public health’s role is to reduce these ......
(Excerpt) Read more at westernjournalism.com ...
What are the lefty maggots doing about the other “half” of homicides being committed in the U.S.?
The other nagging little thing is your huge underestimated count of gun ownwers know that these are God given rights and are not for you or Obamby to debate. So F*#k your repeals and so called laws. I will not be legislated to the trashbin of history. Especially by those whom choose to ignore our laws when convenient to them, I have those same rights.
“2) Blacks commit 75% of all murders in the US.
It’s 50%, not 75%”
OK, thanks for the correction. Still, 13% cause 50% of murders? Something’s way wrong with that in my book.
Those pesky handguns are responsible? How absurd.
Missouri Poised To Override Democratic Governor’s Veto Of Nullification Bill
Posted by Philip Hodges in 2nd Amendment, Constitution, Email Featured, Gun Control, State Laws | 149 Comments
A couple months ago, we told you about the Missouri legislature passing a federal gun control nullification bill. They’re calling it the Second Amendment Preservation Act. The Associated Press summarized the contents of the bill:
“The legislation would make it a misdemeanor for federal agents to attempt to enforce any federal gun regulations that ‘infringe on the people’s right to keep and bear arms.’ The same criminal charges would apply to journalists who publish any identifying information about gun owners. The charge would be punishable by up to a year in jail and a $1,000 fine.”
It passed the house and the senate with a veto-proof majority. So, in the event that Democratic Governor Jay Nixon vetoes the measure, the same representatives who initially backed the proposal would be enough to override the Governor’s veto and make the provision state law.
Well, that time has come. The Governor has vetoed the measure, stating that it violates the Supremacy Clause and also 1st Amendment rights of the press. The stipulation of the law that makes it a crime to publish any identifying information about gun-owners was probably inspired by the Journal-News in New York that published a map of known gun-owners that caused an outrage in the 2nd Amendment community. In defense, proponents of the “gun map” said that they had 1st Amendment rights to publish whatever they wanted to. Governor Nixon apparently sides with the “gun map” people.
The AP reported that Republicans even have the support of some Democrats in overriding Nixon’s veto:
And we all know what comes next.
Note also the age and gender components of crime statistics. For murder, young men are the primary culprits. The statistic I've heard is that young black men make up only 3% of the population and they are responsible for about 50% of the murders.
Profiling. You have to be an idiot it you don't do it. The numbers are very clear.
EXPECT non complience.
All of which IMHO demonstrates the futility of banning guns as a practical means of reducing a nation's murder rate. However, here in the US we aren't dealing with people who are simply attempting to reduce our murder rate, we're dealing with people who either have a pathological hatred for firearms and firearms owners, or who are deliberately trying to disarm ordinary American civilians in order to impose a socialist political system on the American people by force if that goal can't be achieved at the ballot box.
All the data gathered by the professors shows that if Obozo, or another like him, succeeds in their efforts to ban guns the overall US murder rate will not be significantly reduced. Actually, it's more likely that the overall murder rate will go higher due to the inability of unarmed people to defend themselves from armed criminals who will have guns no matter how severely guns are restricted or entirely banned for law abiding people.
As for murders committed by people who are not part of the criminal element of American society, many, if not most, of those murders are committed with improvised weapons and common implements other than firearms. Murders committed by strangulation, beating, poisons, flammable liquids, etc, are also a significant segment of the overall murder rate in all nations including the US.
All of which begs the question, why aren't the anti gunners trying to ban or restrict possession of kitchen knives, hockey sticks, carpentry tools, plumbing tools, auto mechanic tools, metal rods, baseball bats, poisonous household chemicals, ropes, bare hands, etc, etc? Could it be that their ultimate goal is a radical American government that would impose their socialistic pipe dreams on the people by force of arms if they can't achieve that goal by way of the ballot box?
Over 99% of the violent deaths of innocent victims over the Twentieth Century occurred as a result of government excess/oppression. When one considers the 75 million murdered by Mao, 50 million by Stalin, 25 million by Hitler, not to mention Pol Pot, Castro,etc., it becomes apparent that homicides by individual shooters are a negligible occurrence statistically.
So what safeguard against such government violence protects the individual? Fortunately, the US Constitution provides for such protection in our 2nd Amendment.
Screw the whole lot of ‘em.
They are welcome to try. I realize I won’t survive such an encounter. Question is, how many of them are willing to die to take my weapons....
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.