Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Congressman Ron Paul - Gun Control: Protecting Terrorists and Despots
Texas Straight Talk ^ | December 8, 2008 | Congressman Ron Paul

Posted on 12/08/2008 11:20:28 AM PST by SecAmndmt

Gun Control: Protecting Terrorists and Despots

Tragically, over the Thanksgiving holiday, the world was reminded how evil and cruel people can be. According to emerging accounts of the events in India, about a dozen well-armed and devastatingly well-trained terrorists laid siege on the city of Mumbai, killing almost two hundred people, and terrorizing thousands.

Regardless of the reasons, the indiscriminate shooting on masses of unarmed and defenseless people is chilling and reprehensible. How were these terrorists able to continue so long, relatively unchallenged, killing so many?

India’s gun laws are her business, of course. However, once the shock of these events and the initial reaction of fear passes, Americans should take away a valuable lesson about real homeland security and gun control from this tragedy.

Gun control advocates tell us that removing guns from society makes us safer. If that were the case why do the worst shootings happen in gun free zones, like schools? And while accidents do happen, aggressive, terroristic shootings like this are unheard of at gun and knife shows, or military bases. It bears repeating that an armed society truly is a polite society.

The fact is that firearm technology exists. It cannot be uninvented. As long as there is metalworking and welding capability, it matters not what gun laws are imposed upon law-abiding people. Those that wish to have guns, and disregard the law, will have guns. Gun control makes violence safer and more effective for the aggressive, whether the aggressor is a terrorist or a government.

History shows us that another tragedy of gun laws is genocide. Hitler, for example, knew well that in order to enact his “final solution,” disarmament was a necessary precursor. While it is not always the case that an unarmed populace WILL be killed by their government, if a government is going to kill its own people, it MUST disarm them first so they cannot fight back. Disarmament must happen at a time when overall trust in government is high, and under the guise of safety for the people, or perhaps the children. Knowing that any government, no matter how idealistically started, can become despotic, the Founding Fathers enabled the future freedom of Americans by enacting the second amendment.

In our own country, we should be ever vigilant against any attempts to disarm the people, especially in this economic downturn. I expect violent crime to rise sharply in the coming days, and as states and municipalities are even more financially strained, the police will be even less able or willing to respond to crime. In many areas, local police could become more and more absorbed with revenue generating activities, like minor traffic violations and the asset forfeiture opportunities of non-violent drug offenses. Your safety has always, ultimately been your own responsibility, but never more so than now. People have a natural right to defend themselves. Governments that take that away from their people should be highly suspect.


TOPICS: General Discussion; Issues
KEYWORDS: banglist; guncontrol; lp; ronpaul; secondamendment; selfdefense; tyranny
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-59 next last

1 posted on 12/08/2008 11:20:29 AM PST by SecAmndmt
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: djsherin; rabscuttle; BGHater

ping


2 posted on 12/08/2008 11:21:51 AM PST by SecAmndmt (Arm yourselves!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Gondring; rabscuttle385; bamahead

ping


3 posted on 12/08/2008 11:22:46 AM PST by djsherin (The federal government:: Because someone has to f*** things up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SecAmndmt

I heard some guy saying that if we didn’t have guns, we wouldn’t have the hundreds of accidental shootings and killing that happen to children and that those deaths out weigh the supposed (his words) benefits of an armed society. He failed to realize how many criminal attacks are stopped by the fact that someone produces a gun. It’s a huge deterrent and rarely does the gun need to actually be fired for the crime to be stopped.

Besides, there’s this thing called the 2nd Amendment.


4 posted on 12/08/2008 11:26:12 AM PST by djsherin (The federal government:: Because someone has to f*** things up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: djsherin; Abathar; Abcdefg; Abram; Abundy; akatel; albertp; AlexandriaDuke; Alexander Rubin; ...



Libertarian ping! Click here to get added or here to be removed or post a message here!
5 posted on 12/08/2008 11:34:01 AM PST by bamahead (Few men desire liberty; most men wish only for a just master. -- Sallust)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: SecAmndmt
In many areas, local police could become more and more absorbed with revenue generating activities, like minor traffic violations and the asset forfeiture opportunities of non-violent drug offenses. Your safety has always, ultimately been your own responsibility, but never more so than now. People have a natural right to defend themselves. Governments that take that away from their people should be highly suspect

Why how crazy. What a nut! Anyone who posts anything by Ron Paul should be banned for life < /sarcasm> (that is sarcasm for me, but not for a lot of so-called "conservative " freepers who stated those sentiments repeatedly in the last year or so.

6 posted on 12/08/2008 11:34:37 AM PST by from occupied ga (Your most dangerous enemy is your own government,)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: from occupied ga

I know, most of these so call small government didn’t support the only small government candidate. In fact, they called him crazy. I makes me think we will never get small government.


7 posted on 12/08/2008 11:47:21 AM PST by FightThePower! (Fight the powers that be!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: FightThePower!; from occupied ga

It certainly seems like we will never get limited government especially with the Hamiltonian worship I’ve seen recently. But it’ll be difficult to bash Paul on this subject. But I’ll bet someone will find a way...


8 posted on 12/08/2008 12:05:36 PM PST by djsherin (The federal government:: Because someone has to f*** things up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: djsherin
"I heard some guy saying that if we didn’t have guns, we wouldn’t have the hundreds of accidental shootings and killing that happen to children and that those deaths out weigh the supposed (his words) benefits of an armed society."

I know that the book Freakonomics was not high on most Conservatives' reading list. However, there was example in Freakonomics on how statistics get misused and it referred to children and "having a gun in the house".

A parent refused to allow her child to visit one of her friends, because the friend's parents kept a gun in the house. The authors pointed out that the chances of their child or any child getting harmed by a parent's gun, were infinitesimally small. What the parent should have been asking about concerning the safety of her child, was whether or not the friend had a swimming pool at their house. Because the accidental child death rate from swimming pools was many times multiple of that from having a gun in the house!

9 posted on 12/08/2008 12:15:36 PM PST by Bokababe ( http://www.savekosovo.org)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SecAmndmt

As usual Ron Paul speaks the truth.


10 posted on 12/08/2008 12:21:53 PM PST by Redhd2
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Bokababe

And a swimming pool can’t save your life.

People will unfortunately always manipulate statistics but at the end of the day we have the Constitution on our side... although it’s rapidly becoming a dead letter. I’m still waiting for the day when a politician refuses to uphold the Constitution overtly rather than saying he will but not really doing it.


11 posted on 12/08/2008 12:36:23 PM PST by djsherin (The federal government:: Because someone has to f*** things up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: djsherin
"I heard some guy saying that if we didn’t have guns, we wouldn’t have the hundreds of accidental shootings and killing that happen to children and that those deaths out weigh the supposed (his words) benefits of an armed society."

I grew up in a house filled with loaded guns and weapons of all kinds - my dad was a state policeman. Not once did any of his 3 kids play with them. My dad taught firearm safety and scared the hell out of us in 2 ways - 1) showing what a 45 mag can do, and 2) promising to beat the hell out of us if we messed with them. But any time we wanted, he was always willing to take us out shooting under his supervision. That took the mystery out of guns and allowed him to keep them ready to fire when needed.

12 posted on 12/08/2008 12:37:09 PM PST by uncommonsense
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SecAmndmt

I couldn’t back RP because of some of his leanings, especially in the WoT, but on 2nd Amendment issues, he has never wavered in support of law-abiding gunowners.


13 posted on 12/08/2008 12:42:07 PM PST by Pistolshot ("Democrats don't show respect, they just demand respect " - ClearCase_guy)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pistolshot

We’ve been at war in Iraq for nearly 6 years.

Did Congress ever declare war as it should have?


14 posted on 12/08/2008 1:16:33 PM PST by Eagle Eye (Libs- If you don't have to play the rules then neither do we...THINK ABOUT IT!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: Redhd2
As usual Ron Paul speaks the truth

BTTT

15 posted on 12/08/2008 2:16:53 PM PST by murphE ("It is terrible to contemplate how few politicians are hanged." - GK Chesterton)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: djsherin

Those affiliated with the pediatric practice tell me they won’t own guns because of the accident statistics and because they have seen gunshot wounds in the ER. I always ask if car accident statistics and car accident victims make them question the wisdom of owning a car.

Conservatives are foolish to defend gun ownership using statistics or benefits to society. Those arguments have merits, but I think that sometimes we end up implicitly conceding that guns should not be possessed privately if the statistics are not in our favor.

It is far better to defend gun ownership on principle and as a matter of foundational law.


16 posted on 12/08/2008 2:55:56 PM PST by SecAmndmt (Arm yourselves!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: SecAmndmt

PAUL’S A KOOK! THAT MEANS 9/11 TRUTHERS AND ANTI-WAR PEACENIKS WILL HAVE ACCESS TO GUNS!


17 posted on 12/08/2008 2:58:20 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pistolshot
I couldn’t back RP because of some of his leanings, especially in the WoT

If the airlines HAD been armed instead of being under federal regulations that prohibited airline staff from being armed, 9/11 would have never happened.

Iraq is already a moot point because the deal was in the works for the troops to come home shortly regardless who would have been elected president.

The Republican Party completely screwed the pooch on Ron Paul and evidence exists that many of his supporters stayed home and swung the election to Obama.

18 posted on 12/08/2008 3:12:15 PM PST by Extremely Extreme Extremist
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: djsherin

“But it’ll be difficult to bash Paul on this subject. But I’ll bet someone will find a way...”

As you know, for devoted anti-RP folks, absolutely no justification is needed to bash RP.

If needed, some NRA “compromise” gun control bill which RP voted against can be brought up.

Never mind that the incredibly successful (/s) gun control compromise strategy supported by the NRA and Republicans has done nothing but move the Republic further down the road to disarmament.


19 posted on 12/08/2008 3:15:29 PM PST by SecAmndmt (Arm yourselves!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: SecAmndmt

I agree. I like to throw in both when I’m talking about gun control. And if principle and statistics fail (which they haven’t so far), I can always throw the Constitution into the argument (which I do anyway). Although I suppose principle and the Constitution are hard to keep separate.


20 posted on 12/08/2008 3:23:51 PM PST by djsherin (The federal government:: Because someone has to f*** things up!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first 1-2021-4041-59 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
RLC Liberty Caucus
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson