There was, is and always will be criminals and there is no turning back the invention of guns. Since criminals will generally target the least protected, IMO, it is not rational to ban firearms.

Since guns are out-dated as defense against government corruption that leaves the alternative of protection with-in the system and it is the citizens’ responsibility to be involved. Use the privilege or lose it because there are those who have been and are working to take the privilege of citizen involvement away. This will leave the citizens unprotected and subject to abuse/control by the criminals with-in the system.

>>>

cw1865, martinscholes,… the fathers knew exactly what they were saying in that article and it is as relevant today as it was when they wrote it because… In our country today there are groups of people from Mexico who are on a "mission" to take back what they believe is their land. Forget the fact that the US purchased the land that has no meaning to them. They march in our streets waving their flag, chanting "Viva La Mexico".

They are mad, they have no respect for our laws or our people and it is this kind of threat to a states’ security for which that article was written. Don’t let the cunning talk of the elite who are trying to destroy the sovereignty of this nation fool you into thinking we don’t need to protect ourselves and that we should fear guns enough to give up our right to own then. Our generation just might see the day that we are going to need them.

>>>

Quote:

… put tougher restrictions on getting guns (legally) if one has a record of certain crimes. Not just gun crimes, but any history that shows a prone to violence or harrassment cases where possessing a gun could indicate a temptation to use it.

If men can’t brawl and get thrown into jail every once and awhile without losing the right to bear arms then the men might as well wear a dress and learn to knit. <smile>

IMO, the current restrictions for the mentally incompetent and convicted felons are fine. The keyword is convicted. Since harassment is dealt with by issuing restraining orders, it might be worth considering that some one in violation of the order may be subject to loss of gun rights determined by the details of the case, such as when physical abuse or life threats are found to be evident. Good thinking JT!

>>>

Why is it, that society allows alcohol at almost every corner gas station and in many homes but find it just too dangerous for homes to have a gun? Intoxication will cause people to harm others but we have found that prohibition leads to organized crime so we take responsibility for our actions, take our chances and prosecute justly. Oh and educate. LOL, gun class at school,… right after shop class where you learned to make it!... I think I am kidding.

>>>

Quote:

In a socially stable society, where even 'failed' people can afford a decent life, there is no much tendency towards extreme solutions.

Considering that violence is not limited to a certain class of people. I think I understand Activeco to mean, that if the middle class were eliminated then there would be more poor people which would result in more of the poor going to extremes.

This is why I support the officials who have proven, through their voting history, their compliance with the Constitution. Our Republic, supplied by the Constitution, offers a close resemblance of social stability when the articles are adhered to. This is evident by a large middle and upper class. The citizens’ accomplishments are also a testament of the social stability.

The middle class and upper class has proven its generosity and will “teach men to fish” and will generally support each other where as the government has proven its potential for greed and disrespect of the law by political figures to abuse the people. This is why the government was limited by the founding fathers.

Do a search to see how they treat the veterans. That is an example of what citizens can expect if government were in charge of heath care, or any other program. They strip the veteran’s benefits, and they increase their own pay and retirement.

It is the middle class, especially the gifted and talented standing up for the poor, which hinders the tyranny of the inconsiderate elite. This has been openly expressed by individuals who supported and practiced Eugenics and is found with a little research.

Government run socialistic programs take from the ones who have worked, sacrificed and earned, which causes resentment as if citizens had been held at gun point. Then the program gives very little of that amount to the poor, so add that with the frustration of dealing with the government bureaucracy and incompetence found with-in these programs and that is enough to cause someone to take extreme actions!

In a society where justice is for those who can afford it, does it seem unreasonable to think that most crimes would be committed by those who could afford to pay someone else to do the “dirty work” or just buy their way out of trouble? How many crimes would one commit if they were “above the law” and knew they could get away with it?

It is imperative that the candidates we vote into office have proven that they adhere to, and restrain from changing the very foundation which allowed this country to be called the greatest nation on Earth.


Right to Bear Arms
Limited Government