Posted on 07/13/2006 12:51:11 AM PDT by neverdem
The public education system has tremendous influence in shaping the views of millions of young Americans. In many cases, the public school system is the only exposure that many children have to the Bill of the Rights. It is imperative, therefore, to ensure that our nation's teachers are enlightening our young people and teaching them correctly about our rights and the meaning behind them. Unfortunately, the overwhelming majority of educators in the United States appear to promote an anti-gun agenda or, at the very least, prefer not to teach the Second Amendment in its true light. We base this opinion, in part, on the fact that the United States Parent-Teacher Association and the National Education Association are both openly anti-gun organizations. We further base our opinion on the fact that the public education system at large seems aligned with the left-leaning socialist agenda that also dominates the dinosaur media and the Democractic Party. These are organizations and individuals who side with the enemy during wartime, attack Christian expression while simultaneously supporting public, other-than-Christian religious expression, and support the licensing and registration of guns while secretly conniving to confiscate every one of them.
These are the same people who try to deny that the Second Amendment applies to you and me, but applies to the National Guard instead. These are the same people who conjured up the term, "assault rifle" in an effort to ban semi-automatic rifles. They claim that when the Constitution was written, the Founding Fathers never intended it to apply to the types of firearm technology available today.
Any red-blooded, patriotic American who understands the true meaning of the Second Amendment is closer in spirit to our Founding Fathers than the sniveling, whiners who call themselves intellectuals. As such, we know that the right to keep and bear arms applies to the American people and is not restricted to muskets. We can further prove the intent of the Founding Fathers by observing how they lived and by reading many of the supporting articles and letters that outline their philosophy on the symbiotic relationship between an armed populace and a government that serves its people.
It is time to demand that our nation's education system duly recognize our Bill of Rights and teach the Second Amendment according to its true intent. You can start by talking to your child and asking them if they are learning about the Constitution in school. If so, take a look at their textbook and see if the Second Amendment is accurately reported. If there is a problem with the textbook or if the Second Amendment is not being taught at all, you may want to talk to your child's principal. You may also want to team up with other parents who share the same views. Teachers have a responsibility to our children and we have a responsibility to see that our nation's teachers are doing their jobs properly.
Jennifer Freeman is Executive Director and co-founder of Liberty Belles, a grass-roots organization dedicated to restoring and preserving the Second Amendment.
http://www.libertybelles.org
jennifer@libertybelles.org
Constitutional government isn't random, anarchy is.
Shot yourself in the foot again, America-hater.
You have no source for that either.
Exactly, not a free individual, a free people. Plural, collective.
They established a representative form of governemnt, which you have announced your hatred for.
Dead Corpse, the self-proclaimed anti-constitutional anarchist who couldn't shoot (or think) straight.
Commie troll. Go back to DU Roscoe.
People who live where they don't even deliver pizzas have no such illusions. It is apparent to me that no matter what I write, you are DETERMINED TO MISINTERPRET IT for the sake of being argumentative. You argue like a liberal. Give it a rest, allready, ROSCOE.
AS for data, here:
In the United States, about 35-36% of households have a gun and 22% have a handgun. Long guns are more commonly owned than handguns: 14% of households have only long guns; 6% have only handguns and 16% have both long guns and handguns. Twenty-four percent of respondents surveyed personally own a gun and 15% personally own a handgun. Men are much more likely to own guns than women: 41.7% of men and 28.5% of women report having a gun in the household, and 39.2% of men, but only 10.2% of women, personally own a gun. Rural households are much more likely than urban ones to have guns (65.2% vs. 21.7%). Household gun ownership ranges from 26% in the Northeast to 44.2% in the South.source
With three times as many armed households in rural areas, who has the tools to defend themselves? Connect the dots, roscoe.
Isn't it amazing... Just a dozen posts or so from roscoe/mojave, and the mods are involved.
>>>>>>>Crickets on #112, paulsen<<<<<<
Why don't the parents do it, then?
We the people of the United States, in order to form a more perfect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty to ourselves and our posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution for the United States of America.
You hatred of our union will die with you. America will live on.
You're begging the question.
Seen it before. It'll probably get worse before it gets better.
It already did get 'worse'. He's back to his obsessive 'begging the question' bit again.
He's like a chain-gun full of .22 bird shot.
You spelled sh*t wrong.
I know, but the Mods are already stirred up.
You could make the same silly claim about the "press". Congress never envisioned anything more modern than a simple Gutenburg press. How dare the press expect protection for high speed paper presses, radio, television or the internet?
I was sitting at lunch with a flaming liberal at a restaurant. He was spewing the virtues of the Constitution as a "living document". I explained how critical it is that the document is not a "living document". It must be interpreted precisely as written. He screwed up his face at that concept. I made it easier. I picked up the menu and asked if that should be a living document? Is it OK to update the price of your meal to 10 times the cost when you ordered it? Should you be required to pay a higher price even though you ordered it at the originally printed price? That was concrete enough for him to comprehend.
Run out of meaningful statements? Left with no argunment, you pursue cryptic nonsense. I have wasted far too much time and bandwidth on you already. Bye.
Presented with no argument to refute.
Run along now troll...
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.