"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." For the first time in 70 years, the Supreme Court is hearing what could be a far-reaching case addressing 2nd ammendment rights. The primary argument of the opposition is that the second amendment is only one clause- essentially, that the issuance or allowance of arms is only for the intent of an organized militia. (No private ownership/use was meant to be allowed). This is a dangerous sentiment that could have national implications if the Court assents to this argument. They would essentially be holding that the District of Columbia (and other states if they wished to follow suit) could Constitutionally ban the ownership of previously legally owned firearms. The GOOD NEWS: For the most part, so far it seems that the Justices lean toward the "Individual Rights" and that's a good sign. Audio of the Oral Argument can be heard at:
http://www.oyez.org/cases/2000-2009/2007/2007_07_290/argument/
The transcript of Oral Argument can be read at:
http://www.supremecourtus.gov/oral_arguments/argument_transcripts/07-290.pdf
Socially, it's my opinion that the majority of Americans that are in favor of stricter gun control laws aren't aware that the legal ownership of firearms by responsible gun owners is actually BENEFICIAL to their safety.
Politically, it's my opinion that we need to be well aware of these issues as they come up.
Mafia turncoat, Sammy "the Bull" Gravano: "Gun control? It's the best thing you can do for crooks and gangsters. I want you to have nothing. If I'm a bad guy, I'm always gonna have a gun..."
Just ask the Australians- after a MASSIVE gun ban in 1998, the one-year statistics showed an INCREASE in crime- Homicides up 3.2% overall, assaults up 8.6%, armed-robberies up 44%. (yes, FORTY-FOUR PERCENT), homicides involving firearms up 300%
This after Australia had previously seen a steady, 25 year DECREASE in armed robberies and gun-related homicides. These are just a few of the statistics after just a year of their gun ban.
Wednesday, May 21, 2008
Gun Nut
I sent an email to some friends a while back, because I like the Constitution and the rights it affords Americans- call me a gun nut if you will. I don't think I could dispute that.
I like the idea of hunting my own food- I can almost guarantee you that the way an animal dies in that circumstance is more humane than the way your slab of cow died in the slaughterhouse... Inflammatory? Maybe. True? It depends on the slaughterhouse, but in the vast majority of circumstances- yes.
There is nothing to fear from the responsible, legal gun owners that value safety, sport, and work with various agencies to ensure conservation and population control of various species.
What IS scary is the stance on gun control of one current presidential candidate in particular. Obama: As a state legislator in Illinois, Obama supported banning the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic firearms. You have GOT to be kidding me. This would prohibit a .22 pistol for target shooting. It would prohibit nearly EVERY modern handgun kept in safes around the nation for personal/home protection. That legislation in its original form (read: written by people who know nothing about firearms) could have prohibited sidearms carried by members of some law enforcement agencies.
In any case (no pun intended), the subsequent post is my brief email to friends re: the 2nd amendment case currently under advisement in the U.S. Supreme Court.
I like the idea of hunting my own food- I can almost guarantee you that the way an animal dies in that circumstance is more humane than the way your slab of cow died in the slaughterhouse... Inflammatory? Maybe. True? It depends on the slaughterhouse, but in the vast majority of circumstances- yes.
There is nothing to fear from the responsible, legal gun owners that value safety, sport, and work with various agencies to ensure conservation and population control of various species.
What IS scary is the stance on gun control of one current presidential candidate in particular. Obama: As a state legislator in Illinois, Obama supported banning the sale or transfer of all forms of semi-automatic firearms. You have GOT to be kidding me. This would prohibit a .22 pistol for target shooting. It would prohibit nearly EVERY modern handgun kept in safes around the nation for personal/home protection. That legislation in its original form (read: written by people who know nothing about firearms) could have prohibited sidearms carried by members of some law enforcement agencies.
In any case (no pun intended), the subsequent post is my brief email to friends re: the 2nd amendment case currently under advisement in the U.S. Supreme Court.
"Unjustified" Police Shooting
My rant for the day:
http://www.9news.com/rss/printarticle.aspx?storyid=92047
1. "There was no reason for anyone to kill him. A good person like him shouldn't have gotten killed the way he got killed,"
If someone’s charging me with a knife, I’m going to defend myself. I think that’s a pretty good reason. Law enforcement has even more of a right to do so- protecting not only themselves, but the public.
2. "Why didn't they shoot him in the foot instead of his body? If he had a knife, they could have just shot him in the foot, maybe an arm…
Are you defective? 50,000 volts and a pepperball didn’t stop this guy. It didn’t even make him drop the knife and you think a flesh wound to the foot would?? Do you know anything about adrenaline and the human body, much less an adrenaline/alcohol combination? Also, how easy do you think it is to hit the foot of a moving target as opposed to the torso?
3. “The punishment is for my kids, they took away their dad," said Valencia, through an interpreter.
No, the responsibility for that is SOLELY on the knife-wielding man that charged police. Don’t get me wrong- it’s a tragedy that these children will live without a father and I wouldn’t wish death nor the loss of a loved one on anyone. However, the law enforcement officers didn’t just pull up to these folks’ house one day, get out, and decide to pop a few rounds into an innocent party.
4. “A good person like him shouldn't have gotten killed the way he got killed...” Altagracia says she and Odiceo had been married for 24 years. They had separated two months ago…
... Valencia had a restraining order against him and was prohibited from being at the Dillon address, a home where Altagracia is currently living with her children.
“A good person like him…” If he was such a good person and there was no reason to fear him, why do YOU have a restraining order against him?
5. "Nothing is going to bring my husband back," said Valencia, through an interpreter. "But what they did to my husband they are going to continue to do. How many kids are they going to leave without their dads, because they are cops and have the right to kill?"
That’s right. Cops run around shooting people just because they have the right to kill. I’d like to see what this lady would do with a gun in her hands and a drunk guy running toward her with a knife …
There’s been some discussion that he was shot because he did not understand the instructions police were giving him in English, and spoke only Spanish. I've not been able to find anything substantiating whether or not there was a Spanish-speaking officer on scene. Whatever the case, for the sake of argument, I'm going to assume that's irrelevant because-
Let’s review: you have a knife in your hands and you’re threatening the lives of others. The police are yelling at you- eventually have to tase you and when that doesn’t work, they shoot pepper ball at you (essentially a paintball that hits with great force and delivers a blast of pepper spray).
Even if you don’t have much intelligence AND don’t speak the language, it takes even just rudimentary survival skills to know that the folks with the guns want you to put the knife down- not charge them with it.
http://www.9news.com/rss/printarticle.aspx?storyid=92047
1. "There was no reason for anyone to kill him. A good person like him shouldn't have gotten killed the way he got killed,"
If someone’s charging me with a knife, I’m going to defend myself. I think that’s a pretty good reason. Law enforcement has even more of a right to do so- protecting not only themselves, but the public.
2. "Why didn't they shoot him in the foot instead of his body? If he had a knife, they could have just shot him in the foot, maybe an arm…
Are you defective? 50,000 volts and a pepperball didn’t stop this guy. It didn’t even make him drop the knife and you think a flesh wound to the foot would?? Do you know anything about adrenaline and the human body, much less an adrenaline/alcohol combination? Also, how easy do you think it is to hit the foot of a moving target as opposed to the torso?
3. “The punishment is for my kids, they took away their dad," said Valencia, through an interpreter.
No, the responsibility for that is SOLELY on the knife-wielding man that charged police. Don’t get me wrong- it’s a tragedy that these children will live without a father and I wouldn’t wish death nor the loss of a loved one on anyone. However, the law enforcement officers didn’t just pull up to these folks’ house one day, get out, and decide to pop a few rounds into an innocent party.
4. “A good person like him shouldn't have gotten killed the way he got killed...” Altagracia says she and Odiceo had been married for 24 years. They had separated two months ago…
... Valencia had a restraining order against him and was prohibited from being at the Dillon address, a home where Altagracia is currently living with her children.
“A good person like him…” If he was such a good person and there was no reason to fear him, why do YOU have a restraining order against him?
5. "Nothing is going to bring my husband back," said Valencia, through an interpreter. "But what they did to my husband they are going to continue to do. How many kids are they going to leave without their dads, because they are cops and have the right to kill?"
That’s right. Cops run around shooting people just because they have the right to kill. I’d like to see what this lady would do with a gun in her hands and a drunk guy running toward her with a knife …
There’s been some discussion that he was shot because he did not understand the instructions police were giving him in English, and spoke only Spanish. I've not been able to find anything substantiating whether or not there was a Spanish-speaking officer on scene. Whatever the case, for the sake of argument, I'm going to assume that's irrelevant because-
Let’s review: you have a knife in your hands and you’re threatening the lives of others. The police are yelling at you- eventually have to tase you and when that doesn’t work, they shoot pepper ball at you (essentially a paintball that hits with great force and delivers a blast of pepper spray).
Even if you don’t have much intelligence AND don’t speak the language, it takes even just rudimentary survival skills to know that the folks with the guns want you to put the knife down- not charge them with it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)