Posted on 08/24/2007 10:53:27 AM PDT by gc4nra
Anti-gun interests keep taking potshots at your intellect. And safety.
_________________________________________________________
I'm getting so tired of the anti-gun, anti-family organizations running out of both steam and money, and then blaming it on the Gun Lobby. The Brady Center's website Second Amendment Fantasy and The Center's remarks praising Virginia Tech's anti-student panel ruling refuse to accept the smarts of American citizens – and their rights.
Has anybody seen the latest instalment of The Power Of 10?
The week of August 20th, 2007, Host Drew Carey posed a question about gun control to the contestant: what percentage of Americans believe that Americans should be allowed to own automatic weapons?
The answer was 41%. I watched the show and the audience applauded. If, as Drew notes from time to time, that the Poll was conducted of New Yorkers, man, am I impressed! The significance is that on the question of ‘automatic weapons', the finding is not 1 or 2 percent or even 10 or 20 percent, but a thriving 41%.
And Drew, thank you for your service. I didn't know you are a Marine.
So much for the big, bad gun lobby.
Let's not forget that there is an anti-gun lobby. Where your right to own and carry a gun is a civil right – you might say your right to choose – can you imagine a lobby that legally operates against a civil right, thinking up all sorts of arguments against you? Yes, you.
If this is how Americans believe in fellow citizens on the issue of automatic weapons, I'd love to learn more about how they poll out on home self-defense, defense away from home, concealed carry and Castle Doctrine. Judging by the majority of states which affirm concealed carry of weapons, including reciprocity among states, I'd say we already have that answer, and this makes the Brady Center not only out of step with American values, but also irrelevant.
Of course, one might observe that 59% of that Poll disagree, but you have to ask how many of those polled knew that police have no duty to protect individuals, and never have; that citizens are possessed of all legal authority to use up to lethal force when facing grave danger, and how many knew that, tactically, the target is the first line of defense for both person and community? Or campus.
These are truths the anti-gun movement leaves out, and this is what makes them anti-liberty and anti-family. Heads of household and loved ones are killed across this country because they are talked out of their liberty – talked out of it – by anti-family organizations who compel them to walk defenseless while thugs roam armed.
It's what they don't tell you in their crusade to take away the force which backs all citizen authority in this country - again Crime's being used as a wedge issue. They need people to get hurt in order to sustain their emotional arguments.
One of the beauties of concealed carry is in the number of people who do not get hurt, because the armed citizen de-escalates a crime in progress with authority and superior force without discharging the weapon; about 2.5 million times a year according to the FBI. That kicks the stuffings out of the idea of an honest citizen not owning and carrying superior force. You have the authority, but this is obfuscated. Why?
And get this: Zogby International Poll contemporaneous with this [August 21, PR Newswire] finds that 66% of Voters say ‘No' to more gun laws. Big bad gun lobby.
2008 Candidates, call your offices.
As I very carefully point out, we won't stop the next school or workplace shooting by psychoanalyzing or profiling the next shooter, or by disarming students or employees – we'll stop the next shooting by preparing the students and workers to de-escalate it in progress (just as it's done 2.5 million times a year when first responders are not available).
Victims don't become victims because they fight back – they die because they didn't. Why obfuscate this individual authority? Why punish self-defense? Why characterize facing grave danger as settling a dispute in anger?
For every school shooting, an Administration forced students to choose between felony or funeral, and, for some students, now deceased, it obviously chose for them. This is a very resentful concept. Every campus which disarms students another hour shares the blame for the actions of the next shooter.
More citizens are becoming aware of their authority to act without permission from bureaucrats – their authority hidden or punished in being forced to choose every day between felony or funeral. These constituents see a third choice – freedom without having to get permission, and, in fact, instructing officials.
The solution is, of course, to repeal all gun laws and respect citizen authority.
That would be most refreshing. It would be a good stump issue. It would be good for the country.
____________________________
John Longenecker is author of The Case For Nationwide Concealed Carry Of Handguns. See www.TransferOfWealth.net
Have at it, Folks
“The answer was 41%. I watched the show and the audience applauded. If, as Drew notes from time to time, that the Poll was conducted of New Yorkers, man, am I impressed! The significance is that on the question of ‘automatic weapons’, the finding is not 1 or 2 percent or even 10 or 20 percent, but a thriving 41%.”
WOW! 41 percent of New Yorkers. Too bad they don’t poll Southerners and MidWesterners.
ping!
I am really just tired of the endless arguement!
“The prospect of tyranny may not grab the headlines the way vivid stories of gun crime routinely do. But few saw the Third Reich coming until it was too late. The Second Amendment is a doomsday provision, one designed for those exceptionally rare circumstances where all other rights have failed—where the government refuses to stand for reelection and silences those who protest; where courts have lost the courage to oppose, or can find no one to enforce their decrees. However improbable these contingencies may seem today, facing them unprepared is a mistake a free people get to make only once”.
Judge Alex Kozinsky
Joe, could you please ping your gun list?
Drew Carey (b.1958)served in the USMCR from 1981-1986. Carey’s comedy reflects an appreciation for the trials of everyday life as well as a devilish sense of the absurd. Mr. Carey still supports the troops, and does overseas touring with the USO.
“I think if I did not have such a great break, I would still be in the military,” said Carey. “I still wear my hair short and have the glasses. Also, I enjoyed the regimen and camaraderie. I knew that once I left the Reserves, I would give back to the military, so I teamed up with the USO.”
Drew is “the real deal”
How he survives in Hollywierd is a testament to his SERE training I suppose........
Once a Marine, always a Marine.
The fact that he even had the guts to ask this question on the “Power of Ten” proves he’s the real deal.
I bet the anti’s are fuming!
I was puzzled by that question also. I didn't think it was a proper question since it is everyones right to bear arms, automatic "sub machine guns" or otherwize.
They should have asked what percentage of American's (in New york)know what the term "sub machine gun" means? (The answer is clearly- none)
Pinging the “Got Bloat? (+)” list...
They could have asked what percentage of Americans (in New York) know how much it costs to fire one on full auto.
Same answer.
Thanks, HH.
“I didn’t think it was a proper question since it is everyones right to bear arms, automatic “sub machine guns” or otherwize.”
I disagree, it is a proper question because the 2A is not taught in schools and this brings light to that fact.
The fact that the percentage is so high in NY is amazing.
You’re the man, Joe!
The question didn’t ask “automatic weapons” it asked how many thought Americans should be allowed to have “machine guns”.
The term “machine gun” actually means the same thing, but in peoples minds it means a military type of fully automatic weapon.
Everybody already can own “automatic weapons”, or at least are supposed to be able to.
Probably better numbers than polling FreeRepublic....sadly to say.
Just because the poll shows 41% think we should be able to own machine guns, doesn't mean that those same people know that we CAN own machine guns.
It also means 59% think we shouldn't be "allowed" to own machine guns, as if it's not already a constitutional right.
Not necessarily, that 59% could also include those that are “not sure”, “only certain people”, or have “no comment”. Those against could conceivable only be 40% or less.
Did not know that about him. Cool.
No problem. It’s the least I can do. Happy Friday. :-)
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.