Showing posts with label 2nd Amendment. Show all posts
Showing posts with label 2nd Amendment. Show all posts

Friday, December 28, 2012

Why Gun Control Doesn't Work



The gun control debate in our country is in full swing as Democrats and Republicans use the Sandy Hook Elementary School shooting for their own political purposes. Diane Feinstein has already proposed a bill which will ban certain “firearm characteristics” such as semi-automatics, certain rifles, and even some hand guns. The purpose of which is to try to lower the amount of violent gun crimes. 



Of course this has the right-wingers up in arms, who believe that in order to stop events like Sandy Hook from happening again we need to place armed guards in our schools to protect our children.



Both sides are showing their claws on this one, with Republicans claiming that Democrats are attacking the constitution and the Second Amendment. Whereas Democrats are saying that those guns are killing people and they must be regulated more heavily.



Both sides are on TV as well, debating whether or not armed guards are the answer or gun bans. This is sort of interesting seeing as how the fiscal cliff is looming over our heads like a soggy diaper full of economic slavery and the media is focused on gun control, so my guess is Sandy Hook happened at just the right time so politicians can distract us from the real issues at hand.



I don’t think armed guards are the answer, nor do I think gun control is the answer. But with this new proposal being made I just have to get up and say something about this. As Americans we really need to focus on the real issues at hand, and whereas this issue of school shootings is a real thing that needs focus we must never forget what else is going on in our country.



So buckle up people, because I’m going to smash the gun control argument and talk about the violent over throw of the United States government, Reno style.



First off, let’s talk about the Second Amendment and the right to bare arms. There seems to be a lot of confusion over this amendment, both sides claiming that it actually means this or actually means that. But why is it we can’t understand this amendment? It’s all over one little comma. Let’s take a look at the Second Amendment.



“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.”



OK, a militia to protect the state…so a military, that makes sense. And let’s see here…the right of the people to bare arms shall not be infringed. Seems to be pretty straight forward to me, but the debate that gun control proponents try to use lies within that little comma that’s separating the militia part from the people part, saying it’s just a slight…pause…to catch your breath. Let’s read the amendment one more time.



“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.”



You see it’s not the right of the militia to keep and bare arms that shall not be infringed; it’s the right of the people. That’s the PEOPLE as opposed to the MILITIA, two completely separate things which are clearly worded in this amendment. That’s really all there is to the Second Amendment. There aren’t many words at all, just very specific ones.



And why would the Founding Fathers put this in the Bill of Rights? Because the PEOPLE just got done fighting a war, for two years, against a tyrannical state MILITIA that tried to disarm them and make them submit. They knew that the time would come again for the America people to rise against the government, and they wanted the PEOPLE to be prepared for the next revolution by arming themselves. This idea is still very real today, as we are Americans and it is our duty as Americans to pick up our guns and revolt against the government when it’s not doing what we want it to...but unfortunately it’s a duty we have seemed to forgotten. A democracy can only be a true democracy when the PEOPLE have the power to overthrow their rulers and their MILITIA when it’s needed.



Funny, these gun control proponents can’t seem to point out any other places where these hack framers fucked up the wording.



All gun control really does is take the gun out of the law abiding citizens hand and put it into the criminal’s hands. Criminals, who have no regard for the law, will go out and buy these illegal weapons for the specific intent of committing a crime and hurting someone. A law abiding citizen, someone who does have respect for the laws, would not be buying these weapons to commit crimes or hurt people on purpose. So why are we taking the guns out of the good guys hands, essentially disarming the law abiding public?



A lot of people make the argument that there are millions of guns and that everyone has to have a gun because there are so many of them. So if that’s the case then why don’t we see these types of events all the time in the news? No, not everyone owns a gun, but a lot of people do, and if guns make people crazy and do bad things then why haven’t we wiped ourselves off the face of the planet yet? It’s because most people are good hearted folks and they don’t want to break the law or hurt anyone else.



Many pro-gun control folks say it’s because we don’t need these types of weapons, as if we may never have to rise up against a despotic government ever again. Many want guns completely banned, so no one can legally own a gun, believing that true law abiding citizens don’t arm themselves, they call the police. But disarming the public and allowing only the police and military to have firearms is a terrible idea. Think about it, who are you going to call against the police? Better yet how can you rise against your despotic government when the military has all of the power? You can’t, and that’s why we have the Second Amendment.



Let’s talk about school shootings…again. One of the ideas is that gun control will help prevent future school shootings from ever happening, but this can’t be further from the truth. Take Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold for example. According to gun control proponents the shooting at Columbine high school could have never happened. Colorado had an assault weapons ban law on the books, a law that was meant to prevent bad people from getting a hold of powerful firearms and using them to commit crimes. Harris and Klebold both had illegal high powered assault weapons that used to commit their terrible act, killing a dozen and injuring more than twenty.

Crazy People 1 : Gun Control 0



The very idea that banning guns or limiting guns or any of that bullshit is to stop violent crimes from occurring, but when a crazy person wants to do something crazy he will find a way to do it, and no law will be able to stop him. Even if you were to outlaw guns completely they are still a very easy weapon to make, and if I can’t find one on the black market then I’m sure my pro-gun buddy who owns the metal shop could fashion one for me. Then I’ll go right up to you with it and shoot you in the face and you’re the only one who has paid the price.

Crazy People 2 : Gun Control 0



The fact is that these people have already broken gun control laws that were already in place. Gun Control laws with the specific intent to prevent these kinds of violent crimes from happening. That worked well, didn’t it? The odds of getting killed in a school shooting are 1/3,000,000. Holy shit, you have a better chance of being stuck by lightening for Christ’s sake!



Let’s talk about armed guards now. I don’t think we need them, because the whole idea of us having to place armed guards in our schools to protect our kids against gun violence when the odds are 1/3,000,000 is just alarmist bullshit. Your kids are just as safe in school today as they were before Columbine happened and before school shootings became a media hit.



But I do think that more states should allow conceal and carry laws so that the average citizen can own and carry their gun (hidden on their body) in public. I think this will in fact make violent crime rates go down, because you won’t know who’s packing.



Little experiment I got from Penn & Teller’s Bullshit show about gun control; let’s say every woman in the United States is issued a gun. They can do whatever they want with it, leave it at home, take it shopping with them, sell it, or give it away. Let’s say that only 50% of woman decide to keep their gun with them, are you really still going to risk mugging or raping a woman when you know there is a 50% chance that she’s got a gun?



So no we don’t need armed guards, we just need more people who are gun enthusiasts, and good law abiding people who have conceal and carry permits. It’s our duty to protect each other, and how can we do that when we aren’t armed and the criminals are?



I have to say that with these new gun control proposals I’m not really sure what the right to bare arms means any more. “You have the right to bare arms, but only the ones that we say you can have.” That does not sound like freedom to me at all. That sounds like the government telling me once again that I have the freedom to do something only if they like it. Is it right to allow the government to mandate that shit? Isn’t that kind of like the government telling you who you can or can’t marry, or forcing you to immunize your kids?



This is the exact reason the Second Amendment exists, to stop the government doing exactly this type of thing.



Think rationally folks, we don’t need armed guards in our schools, we don’t need more bullshit gun control laws, we just need more guns in the right hands, because when we make gun control laws we take guns out of the right hands and put them into the wrong hands. We can’t count on the government or the police or the military to get things done right, we can only count on ourselves.



The government says it is trying to make us safer by limiting our rights, and the scary part is that we are letting them. We allow email spying, wire tapping, freedom of speech violations, unlawful detentions, all kinds of crazy shit. Those were rights that people died fighting for so that we can have them and we’re just going to give them all away? We need to get back on the right track now. 



Thursday, December 27, 2012

Piers Morgan Deportation Petition



Ah, the shit has really hit the fan now! People are pissed and they want Piers Morgan out of the country. His constant and reckless concern for this nation’s bill of rights is what is forcing the American people’s hand to creating a petition to have him deported from the United States of America.

So what did he do? He must have told people they can’t sing Christmas Carols, or maybe he broke up a tea party rally and violated their free speech, or maybe he wants to get rid of the second amendment completely and have all of our guns taken away. Wait…he doesn’t?

Piers Morgan is under fire by the right-wing because of comments he made on his show about gun control. Morgan has always been a proponent of gun control and is verbal about it on his CNN news show. He had a guest on his show who made some good points about guns, those being that guns are here, they are an 18th century technology, and they last several human life times with minimal maintenance. And that is why he believes that guns should be in schools…

OK I’m not all about this idea to put armed guards in our schools because it’s alarmist bullshit. School shootings happen, yes, and they will continue to happen. Think of it as 7-11; more 7-11’s get robbed than schools get shot up in America each year. Do we need an armed guard in every god damn 7-11? I understand this is to protect the children, and their lives are worth more then whatever a cash register holds at a convenience mart. But really, do we need to be putting armed guards in every school to make sure our kids our safe?

I’m also not for what Piers Morgan says either. Doing the exact opposite and limiting the amount of guns or banning certain guns, or banning certain ammunition clips, is not going to solve the problem.

But this petition bullshit is just straight right-winged non-sense. Basically the petition was created because of comments Morgan made about gun control, so the right-wing blasted him saying that he has “engaged in a hostile attack against the US Constitution by targeting the second amendment.”  

I’m still not sure as to how asking for gun control is a hostile attack against the US, I certainly don’t think gun control does shit, but is asking for gun control an attack against the Constitution? Nah, I don’t think so.

It will become an attack when politicians work to repeal the second amendment. If an all out ban on guns is ever conceived then that should be when we rise up to say ‘Oh hell no’.

Now if Morgan had his way would the whole world be gun free? Yes. And why the fuck not, if you could enlighten every fucking human on earth, and we all got rid of our weapons that would be awesome. To bad it’s a pipe dream, but hey, is it really that bad of an idea? Is it really such a dangerous idea that someone should be deported for it?

I think Americans need to start thinking a little more rationally then be on the party lines, if you know what I mean. Sure, there are a lot of parts of life that really are black and white, but there is a whole lot of gray in between.

It’s like pro-life or pro-choice; EVERYBODY is for pro-life AND pro-choice, but the issue is whether you are for or against abortion. But when you think along party lines it is very easy for these distinctions to get blurred. Gun control doesn’t exactly mean the ban of all firearms to the public just like the Constitution doesn’t say that everyone needs to own a gun.

Just because Morgan shares a completely different view on gun control than I do doesn’t mean he is attacking my rights. No, he won’t be doing that until he tries to forcefully take my guns away by either making it law or trying to physically take it (the latter of which is not a bright idea).

So calm down you Mitt Romney voting, right-winged gun-nuts. Morgan may have a different opinion than you, one that you may completely disagree with and think he is a moron for even having, but he has a right to say it, and it would be really bad if you took away his Constitutional right to say it because you assumed he was trying to take away your Constitutional right to fire it.

Wednesday, December 19, 2012

Obama Demands Gun Control Debate

(What do you think about the gun control debate after the events in Newtown, Connecticut? Comment below with your thoughts.)



So the war against the Westboro Baptist Church is raging on. The victims of the Sandy Hook shooting are trying to bury their loved ones but are being harassed by the church. Anonymous has been putting on the pressure as their Operation Westboro (#OpWestboro, #OpWBC) is in full swing.



The shootings occurred last Friday in Newtown Connecticut when a crazed gun man named Adam Lanza forced his way into an elementary school where he opened fire and killed twenty children and six adults. Lanza acquired the guns through his mother, who was an avid gun enthusiast, by stealing them from her and killing her with one.



This terrible tragedy has invoked the gun control debate by politicians of course, and President Obama himself is demanding action on gun control by creating a task force. Yes, a task force…but what does that mean exactly?

From the Article:

"This time, the words need to lead to action," said Obama, who set a January deadline for the recommendations. He vowed to push for their implementation without delay.



I’m not surprised by this at all. It was my first thought when the shootings occurred that the politicians would be offering us empty promises and sympathy with no solution other than to debate and enact new gun laws. Being an avid proponent of firearms and the 2nd Amendment I am against this.



Obama says that he is for the 2nd Amendment, but he does believe that certain gun control laws/restrictions would decrease the amount of shooting deaths in the United States. Even some congress members who are pro gun rights are starting to consider legislation to control firearms. But aren’t firearms already being controlled?



Obama plans to create new gun control policies such as stricter background checks and limit high capacity ammunition clips, but also says that he wants improved focus on mental health as well. Which will actually happen, or come first? I’m sure it will be the stricter gun control laws. Obama’s ‘deadline’ for gun control proposals is January 2013.



The President says he encourages all people from all types of political backgrounds to come together and have these discussions about what type of control should be enacted.

From the Article:

"The fact that this problem is complex can no longer be an excuse for doing nothing," Obama said. "The fact that we can't prevent every act of violence doesn't mean we can't steadily reduce the violence."

I have to say that I’m tired of politicians using every chance they can at furthering their own agenda and not the American citizens who voted them into office



Guns do not kill people, people kill people. And the very fact that politicians are using this event to try to take or curb our usage of firearms just goes to show how afraid they are of the American citizens being armed.



The 2nd Amendment has some very specific wording:

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.

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. It’s the Militia Vs. The People. It’s not saying “the right of the militia to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. It says THE PEOPLE. And why did the founding fathers write this? Because THE PEOPLE just got done fighting a war, for two years, against a tyrannical state MILITIA, who tried to take their rights and disarm them.



If we are going to talk about things that people kill with lets talk about knives and cars and doctors. I can kill someone just as easily with a car. “But Reno, the government regulates cars and doctors!” Pssh…what’s going to stop me? I don’t have a license or a car, but what’s stopping me from stealing someone else’s car and waiting for children to get out of school so I can run them down? Not some law, that’s for sure.



The fact is that when we talk about these types of tragedies we wonder about how we could have prevented it and the number one thing that comes up all the time is more gun control. But the truth is that these shooters break the laws anyway. In the case of Columbine the shooters, and the person who sold them the guns and ammo, broke the laws already in place. Adam Lanza also broke the law when he STOLE his mother’s guns. Guns which did not belong to him in the first place, and of course maybe if Nancy Lanza kept her guns locked up this would have never happened. But Nancy was an older woman who had an older son, one that should have been able to tell right from wrong and know that it would not be wise of him to touch his mother’s weapons.



Really though, this is just what politicians were waiting for, a moment to bring up the gun control debate again so they can disarm the American people and have nothing to fear anymore. In fact when you think about it by limited guns of banning guns they are actually involving fear within the people of the USA. When ordinary law abiding citizens cannot obtain fire arms that doesn’t mean criminals, people who break the laws, won’t be able to get their hands on them. And when they do they can unleash terror upon ordinary people who will not be packing because they are good citizens who obey the law. The fact is that you can’t stop an insane person from doing insane things with insane laws…that’s insane!



Many people from other countries scoff at us because we Americans clutch our guns so tightly. They scratch their heads and wonder why we cling to such destructive weapons. But they don’t understand simply because they are not Americans. We Americans are rebellious spirits who want our government to know they can’t fuck with us, and the way we do that is by arming ourselves. We fought a war against the British (yeah so what it was over two-hundred years ago) because they tried to force us to borrow money from the British national banking establishment and when we revolted they tried to take our weapons so that we could not put up a fight.



Now yes, that was a long time ago, but that spirit still remains and the idea still remains. We may one day have to do our duty as Americans and arm ourselves to stand up to our own government.



Thomas Jefferson once said that for there to be true freedom an armed rebellion against the government should take place once every twenty years. He also wrote, “What country can preserve its liberties if their rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms; let’s signify a few lives lost in a century or two. The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants; it is its natural manure.”  



Guns don’t have a brain. They cannot pick themselves up and pull the trigger. Humans do have a brain however, and it is our choices that shape the world around us. Thankfully most of us are sane people and we know right from wrong, but unfortunately some of us are not. It doesn’t take a gun to hurt someone; it takes someone who wants to hurt someone, regardless of how they do it.



A lot of us don’t have much experience with guns. A lot of the exposure to guns we get comes from negative exposure from TV and movie. They strike fear into us, make us think how scary shit is and that any moment now some armed gun man can break into your home and kill you.



Fear is the politician’s companion, with enough fear legislators can walk right into congress and pass all kinds of crazy laws with the necessary steps. Politicians even create the hysteria themselves by passing gun control laws, such as the Brady Bill, which has actually been rather ineffective in keeping guns in the wrong hands.  



One of these crazy laws is the creation of the gun free zone. The gun free zone has to be the biggest pile of shit law I have heard of. Basically if you get caught with a gun while in a gun free zone your fines and punishments are increased. But we look at all of the shootings that have occurred and they all happen in ‘gun free zones’. Sandy Hook Elementary is a gun free zone, so how can this type of tragic event happen in a gun free zone?



If the number of guns in the hands of citizens truly is the problem then why don’t we see this type of violence at NRA conventions or gun shows? Surely, a place like that where tons of people are in possession of tons of guns, there must be hundreds of tragedies at these events, right? Wrong. The number of guns in the hands of the people doesn’t increase the number of violent crimes. The number of guns in the wrong hands DOES increase crime.



So how do we keep the guns out of the wrong hands? Well with all the gun laws on the books (which exceed over 20,000) you would think that criminals wouldn’t be able to get there hands on firearms. But alas, just like the war one drugs if there is a law against something there is a black market for it.



None of these gun control laws on the books prevented Columbine, and none of them prevented Sandy Hook, and none of the existing laws or future laws will prevent terrible tragedies like this from occurring.



Don’t let the government fool you into giving up your rights because of some crazy kid who misused them. The government can only take away from us what we allow them to. 


(What do you think about the gun control debate after the events in Newtown, Connecticut? Comment below with your thoughts.)


SOURCE:




Twitter Tags: #Guncontrol #Obama #Sandyhook #Columbine #WBC #OpWBC #Anonymous