Call me crazy, but I am a dyed flaming redheaded conservative, alternative rock-loving, tattooed, Sinead O'Connor fan who knows every song from the '50's and '60's, and card carrying member of the Republican party.
Call me crazy, but I often wonder if Americans really understand the intention behind the second amendment. The exact wording of this amendment reads:

Amendment II

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

All historical documents are inherently open to wide interpretation, and this amendment has seen many vast incarnations. Another blogger interpreted it to mean the right for target shooting and hunting; harmless enough. Of course the wackos in the world think it means they can stockpile weapons for their racist, religous causes; not so harmless.

In order to understand the true intention behind this amendment, one must look back, like all historical documents, to the climate in which it was written. We had just waged a revolutionary war against England. King George called us 'rabble in arms.' We were citizens in arms against tyranny and taxation without representation. Our revolution began when the British sent Redcoats door to door to confiscate the peoples' guns.

To this day, whether you choose to own a gun or not, you have this inalienable right. It is a safety net to protect us from oppression. It provides us with a way of rising up against our government should we feel oppressed. If the leaders took away our right to bear arms, we would have no recourse for fighting a corrupt government. There's been no shortage of dictators, in many countries. Hitler, Mussolini, Stalin, Mao, Idi Amin, Castro, Pol Pot. All these monsters began by confiscating private arms, then literally soaking the earth with the blood of tens and tens of millions of their people. The German people could not stage a coupe and fight Hitler with sticks.

Will this amendment be abused by evildoers and serial killers? Of course, but no law would stop them. There will always be evil in this world. Evil men do not follow rules. And if one should become our leader, we have the right to bear arms.""

Comments (Page 3)
3 Pages1 2 3 
on Nov 23, 2004
The bottom line to me is that if you ban guns the only people that will have them are criminals and the government. Two things which I inherently distrust. Also, when does it end? Do we move on to knives and other sharp objects? Guns don't kill people all by themselves. A gun is just a tool. It's like saying a shovel is responsible for digging a ditch. I understand the point about family arguments becoming deadly because of access to a gun but thats just a nother nasty part of life we have do deal with. Thousands of people use cars irresponsibly every year through drunk driving or other unsafe actions. Yet, we don't run around trying to ban the car. Just because a minute percentage of gun owners act irresponsibly doesn't mean the rest of us should have to give up our right to bear arms. My last point is that when someone breaks into your house and is threatening you, your family, and your property all the safeguards of a lawful society have failed you. The law, the govt., the police, your security systems, your dogs, and your neighbors. I just don't feel comfortable taking away anyone's right to a last defense and leaving someone at the mercy of a criminal.
on Nov 23, 2004
The bottom line to me is that if you ban guns the only people that will have them are criminals and the government. Two things which I inherently distrust. Also, when does it end? Do we move on to knives and other sharp objects? Guns don't kill people all by themselves. A gun is just a tool. It's like saying a shovel is responsible for digging a ditch. I understand the point about family arguments becoming deadly because of access to a gun but thats just a nother nasty part of life we have do deal with. Thousands of people use cars irresponsibly every year through drunk driving or other unsafe actions. Yet, we don't run around trying to ban the car. Just because a minute percentage of gun owners act irresponsibly doesn't mean the rest of us should have to give up our right to bear arms. My last point is that when someone breaks into your house and is threatening you, your family, and your property all the safeguards of a lawful society have failed you. The law, the govt., the police, your security systems, your dogs, and your neighbors. I just don't feel comfortable taking away anyone's right to a last defense and leaving someone at the mercy of a criminal.


Ditto, right on, wtg. Exactly!
on Nov 23, 2004
The bottom line to me is that if you ban guns the only people that will have them are criminals and the government. Two things which I inherently distrust. Also, when does it end? Do we move on to knives and other sharp objects? Guns don't kill people all by themselves. A gun is just a tool.


Did you read what I wrote?
on Nov 23, 2004
Did you read what I wrote?


I did, Tex.
on Nov 23, 2004
I don't think Daniel really read my comments.
on Nov 23, 2004
I don't think Daniel really read my comments.


Me either, or maybe he was just agreeing with you and reiterating?
on Nov 23, 2004
maybe he was just agreeing with you and reiterating?


I hope that's the case . . .
on Nov 24, 2004

Reply #21 By: dharmagrl - 11/23/2004 8:27:36 PM
I have a gun. My husband has a gun. Our kids have a gun. We go shooting together (used to, anyway). My husband carries a gun at work, as did I. We were both trained by police departments, and we pass on that knowledge to our children.


THIS is the key for having guns around children! It's called education and it starts at home.
3 Pages1 2 3