Posted on 07/09/2008 10:36:38 AM PDT by neverdem
With the recent Supreme Court decision on the Second Amendment in the Heller vs. District of Columbia case, it seems like a good time to collect my thoughts on guns, crime, self-protection and human behavior.
I am a faithful National Rifle Association member, and I own a legal, properly stored handgun. In fact, it has engraved on the barrel "Made in the 200th Year of American Liberty." It was a gift from my wife during the Bi-Centennial celebration in 1976. And during the month that we celebrate Independence Day, our nation is trying to reconcile the wisdom of our Founding Fathers in the Constitution and Bill of Rights with current needs of society.
The founders were absolutely right in that individuals need to keep and bear arms in their homes and if needed on their person to protect their lives, family and property. And given the events that shaped our nation (which most of us seem to forget), we also may need them to protect us from the tyranny of our own government.
The District of Columbia and, closer to home, Chicago have had handgun bans in place for more than 25 years, yet both cities sadly continue to have some of the highest murder rates among major U.S. cities. There already are laws against robbery, rape and murder. Why would anyone think that a law against owning a gun suddenly would change the behavior of the thugs who have no qualms about breaking these more serious laws?
Common sense among politicians seems in steep decline. Several candidates and big-city mayors have made statements recently implying that while certain forms of gun ownership may be OK for places like Wyoming and Montana, gun ownership has no place in large metropolitan areas. While there may be some need to defend against angry gangs of elk in the West, there would seem to be a need for more legal guns in the hands of trained owners in our largest cities because that's where the bad guys are preying on the poor and defenseless every day.
More common sense: While most people think that law enforcement is going to be there to protect them in the case of a life-threatening event, the sad fact is that most law enforcement functions involve investigating a crime after the fact. Law-abiding citizens must be allowed to carry a gun if they so choose in order to react immediately to mortal danger.
Lack of common sense: You simply cannot erase guns by declaring "gun-free" cities like the District of Columbia or Chicago or other locations such as Columbine High School, Virginia Tech University or the Westroads Mall in Omaha, Neb.
Common sense: The knowledge that a citizen may be carrying a legally concealed gun or may have a legal gun properly accessible in his home will do more to stop the bad guys than any new "uncommon sense" laws that our politicians likely are drafting at this moment.
It makes sense to me.
Allan J. Knepper of Pewaukee is a retired automotive industry manager. E-mail ajk283@aol.com
“implying that while certain forms of gun ownership may be OK for places like Wyoming and Montana, gun ownership has no place in large metropolitan areas”
I live in a very rural area and I only feel compelled to carry (I’m licensed to do so) when I’m in the city. Crime statistics tell us we’re in much more danger from violent crime in the large metropolitan areas.
--both it and the Madison garbagewraps have been surprisingly silent on the gun issue the last few weeks--
Ha! Metro areas are where the dangerous animals roam
My new guns will be engraved: “The right to bear arms” SCOTUS 2008.
Why should I, for my 2nd amendment right?
While there may be some need to defend against angry gangs of elk in the West, there would seem to be a need for more legal guns in the hands of trained owners in our largest cities because that's where the bad guys are preying on the poor and defenseless every day.
Yep. Animals. Dangerous ones.
STOP MAKING SENSE!!!
Washington Post v. Heller
The Washington Post, one of the leading proponents of gun control, is apoplectic over the recent Supreme Court decision affirming an individual right to possess a weapon that declared the District of Columbia gun ban unconstitutional. The newspaper’s reporters and columnists are taking turns criticizing the Second Amendment ruling, hoping to convince the cowed citizenry in the murder capital of the United States that it should acquiece to restrictive regulations now being developed.
Courtland Milloy has a clever column, Killer Ideas For Selling Guns in D.C. , in which the writer suggests names for gun shops. Clearly, Milloy is a gun-control advocate, but his piece is witty. So much in fact, that I had to write him:
Congratulations on a very clever column. I’m a ten-year resident of the District of Columbia and I must say that, “for the first time in my adult lifetime I am really proud of my city. And not just because the Supreme Court has done well, but because I think people are hungry for self-defense.”
Smith & Wesson - firepower we can believe in!
from www.jeffgannon.com
I read most of Scalia’s opinion, and it is my opinion that when the gunsmoke clears, more then just liberal gun laws will bite the dust. It is so brilliantly written, that constitutional lawyers will find ammunition in it to attack other unconstitutional laws effecting many other parts of our constitutional rights.
Scalia’s opinion belongs in the Smithsonian institute as an example of how to write opinions. Not since the founding fathers wrote the federalist papers to the local news papers,(to explain the Constitution to the masses) have we had such a work of art produced.
Like a great pastor explaining a verse in the Bible, Scalia took every American, willing to read it, to class and gave them a lesson in one piece of paper, as to the intentions in the minds of the founding fathers of the greatest country this world has ever seen.
Just like schools of fish that turn simultaneously and flash a different shade, all of the post-Heller talking points have used the word “urban”, as in “SCOTUS shouldn’t tell urban areas what laws thay can pass”. Presumably, this means they have given up on shoving gun control down everyone’s throat, and are now fighting a rear-guard action from their support bases; the urban cesspools.
This is Plantation Politics at its worst, and blatantly racist. I am glad to see the article skewer this line of thinking.
I agree, AS’s opinion is informative, historically-based and easy to read and understand. They should have kids read it in schools - as if the government schools will ever let that opinion in the door.
“SCOTUS shouldn’t tell urban areas what laws thay can pass”.
Hmm, all of a sudden the authoritarian left has discovered federalism?
Same here -- but I'm glad I was armed last Friday morning (the fourth) out in the boonies -- when my HK P7 dispatched an aggressive, 4', 13-rattle, bigger-around-than-my-fist rattler that was uncomfortably close -- and headed my way!
“Common sense among politicians seems in steep decline.”
I disagree with this statement. How could their commen sense level go lower than “zero”?
“Hmm, all of a sudden the authoritarian left has discovered federalism?”
Why not? With a straight face, they can claim Heller is the product of an activist judiciary.
Wow. He’ll probably be raked over the coals pretty good in the letters to the editor section in the coming weeks.
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.