Cause guys like me will shoot you if you try to make me register my guns or give up my SUR's... the great loss of life that would result would be much more than anything happening now.

America’s Revolutionary War did [b]not[/b] begin over taxation without representation, high tariffs, corrupt British judges, or even quartering troops among the colonists. Although all of these (and more) are enumerated in our Declaration of Independence among the many grievances against the British Crown, it was not these abuses that triggered that “shot heard ‘round the world.” The Revolutionary War began when British troops were sent to Lexington and Concord to confiscate the Americans’ firearms. Gun confiscation was the match that lit our War for Independence.

Do our representatives in Washington DC think that the same people who fought in the freezing cold mountains of Korea, the steaming hot rice patties of Viet Nam or the burning desert tundra of Desert Storm will not react as they did some 230 years ago? Maybe not. The American people have sat by as the Clinton administration led us though the theft of hundreds of FBI files, sexual scandals in the White House, fund raising violations, lost nuclear secrets, sold missile secrets to the Chinese and blatant outright infringements on the people’s Second Amendment rights. The Republicans virtually sat on their hands as the Clinton administration was brought to impeachment. These politicians may be right in thinking that they can do whatever they feel is best, Constitution be damned, the people’s will be damned too. [i]Or they may be wrong.[/i]

Are we so ignorant not to know that in every instance where gun registration has been enacted, gun confiscation soon followed? Will we peacefully surrender that which our forefathers sacrificed their lives and fortunes to secure? These questions nag at the patriotic feelings inside of thousands of good honest, law abiding and hardworking men and women in this country. People vilified by the popular media as right wing wackos, patriots and extremist. I suppose an earlier press was saying the same thing about that small minority rich white land and slave owners - men like Thomas Jefferson, Thomas Paine, John Adams, George Washington and Benjamin Franklin who were discontent with similar issues to those we face today from a government. A morally corrupt government which fails to be “of the people, for the people and by the people”.

I am convinced that the fundamental freedoms that we now enjoy the last tastes of will have disappeared within the next American generation. Do children raised by the state even know of or have read the Constitution or Bill of Rights? [b]Words mean something.[/b] What to the words [i]“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.”[/i] mean to you? If you’re Congresswoman Diane Finestein (D) from California it means that she is free to “well regulate” your rights. She fails to even complete the whole sentence to read the final clause “shall not be infringed”. They are her rights and she is free to meter them out to you subjects as she feels free to do so at the time.

These are not stupid people. They read well. They have read both the Constitution and Bill of Rights yet they continuously and actively conspire against our freedoms and liberties. They mask their true intentions behind feelings and cries that “it’s for the children”. Our children deserve the rights guaranteed in our Constitution more than life itself. To paraphrase the patriot Patrick Henry “Give them liberty or you are surely giving them death.”  

First off I have a right to own such firearms and when we start talking about how one feels about my need to a right, things get very dangerous very fast. One never has to justify a right. See, I don’t feel that you have a need for a car that travels faster than 65 miles per hour, a video camera that can make child pornography, a church, temple or synagogue different than mine, access to books that I don’t feel good about, or to have more children, the need to vote ... can you see where this all leads? Secondly, I don’t hunt and neither does the argument that the Second Amendment is about hunting. Don’t be so stupid to think that the Constitution guarantees our right to hunt, it instead gives us the tools to keep our government in balance.

Thomas Jefferson, quoting Cesare Beccaria, [i]“Laws that forbid the carrying of arms... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes... Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”[/i]

Taking a rifle from my safe will not prevent some doped up gang banger from doing yet another drive by shooting over drug territory using a gun bought illegally. There are some pretty clear laws prohibiting murder yet it continues so why continue to pass more gun laws attempting to prevent murder? The number one weapon of choice (by a wide margin) continues to be hands and feet (FBI crime statistics) yet the media’s major focus is on so called “assault weapons”, which according to the FBI facts are used in less than one percent of killings.

Quite clearly the Founding Fathers were most strongly for law abiding citizens owning military firearms. To quote James Madison [i]“The Constitution preserved the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation .... (where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms”. [/i]

Again quoting one of the patriots who risked everything throwing off an oppressive governement: [i]“The Constitution shall never be construed to authorize Congress to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms.”[/i] Samuel Adams

Words mean something and despite the best efforts of some to change their meanings or to completely ignore them in some cases the Constitution is still the supreme law of the land. The loss of a single child is a tragic - the loss of the freedom to suppress a tyrannical government is a tragedy on a much larger scale.

The question that continues to nag at me day after day is why liberal politicians continue to push gun control as an answer to criminal control when clearly guns laws absolute do not reduce crime.

From an American’s First Freedom article: [i]“Strap an electric collar onto a dog. Shock him when he doesn’t obey, then shock him again when he does obey. If you teach him that the rules are ever-changing and that punishment comes without cause, you’ll get one of two outcomes: Either he’ll surrender to punishment as the inescapable outcome, with downturned head and withers trembling – or he’ll rebel against that authority, hackles raises and snarling and disobey every rule.”[/i]

The state of California has been for more than ten years constantly changing the rules obviously in outright violation of the Constitution’s Bill of Right’s Second Amendment which clearly prohibits States from infringing on the right of the people to keep and bear arms. Those rights in the US Constitution are reserved for the federal government; those not enunciated are free for the states to populate. If the state of California passed a law that suddenly allowed the US Army to quarter it’s troops in your home this would be declared un-Constitutional and overthrown by the US Supreme Court. Yet in California handguns are banned because they are too small, not expensive enough, or have their magazine in the politically incorrect position. Purchases of handguns are rationed to one per month. Rifles are banned by looks, use of detachable magazines, pistol grips, muzzle devices and a dozen other bizarre and seemingly random characteristics. Even toy guns are now regulated by color. The US Supreme Court will step in and overturn these Constitutional violations sooner or later, I just hope it occurs before firearms owners have their forearms tattooed.

I have been shooting and collecting various firearms for many years and at the same time have been studying the recent movement to prohibit law-abiding citizens from ownership of them. The politicians who press though each knee-jerk restriction to the latest workplace or schoolyard shooting know perfectly well that the additional regulation will have no effect on the criminal behavior. What bigger taboo is there in today’s society than the taking of another’s life? Very few indeed. So they are trying to legislate a behavior to someone who has already decided to murder one or more humans. Do you honestly think that the killer is going to be slowed down for one second by a regulation prohibiting the use of a rifle with a pistol grip that protrudes below the trigger? It has been long said that you cannot legislate morality yet this is exactly what the liberals are attempting to do.

Firearms in the hands of law-abiding citizens are a clear deterrent against crime. When criminals are polled in prison they state that residents with firearms are a bigger crime deterrent than the police. Also according to statistics, police shoot the wrong person more often than the common citizen with a firearm. If you haven’t sat down and figured it out yet the police respond to crime rather than actively prevent crime. They will come to your home after the murder, rape or robbery to attempt to find the criminal afterwards. I don’t plan on waiting to be murdered, have my wife raped or get robbed too many times without taking my own protection into my own hands. And that’s what the politicians want to prevent. When three large men are beating at your door threatening to do harm to your family would you rather have a telephone or a rifle in your hand? A murder takes place in seconds, police response time in measured in tens of minutes. Certainly call the police but until they arrive your protection is in your hands.

The same politicians that pass laws that make it impossible to legally carry a concealed weapon have their own tax dollar paid for armed security guards and sleep in a state guarded mansion with a comprehensive security system. What makes them think for one tiny slice of a single second that their life is anymore valuable that mine or yours? They may think that their elected office makes them special but the laws apply to them as well, or does it? Have they made themselves a secret handshake society above us lowly subjects? Why are they taking the proven best tool for our own protection away from us?

Remember that the armed criminal is bothered less with getting arrested killing, raping or in an armed robbery then running into an armed victim. Then why are politicians so busy making us into victims? This bothered me for years and years, what was the motive? Not being of the victim mindset I found it nearly impossible to think like one. Until just recently I couldn’t find insight into the thinking of the liberal right-restricting politicians. Until I looked at what makes politicians into politicians: the use of other people’s money and the power it brings them. By catering to the “sheep”, those citizens who choose to be victims, the politicians gain their votes and with it the power to tax and take our life energy for their own use. Those ”sheep” have an irrational rage against those who choose not to be victims.

The “sheep” feel that they are too weak to survive without assistance from an all-knowing, all-powerful central government. They raise the professional politician to the level of a flawless king who can do no harm – look at what former President Clinton got away with as an example of a man that is worshiped by the [i]“sheep”[/i]. Clinton was a man with hypocrisy seemingly without limit. The [i]“sheep”[/i] raise their chosen leader to a God-like status and worship him or her asking them for protection, prosperity and wisdom to solve their mere human problems. Sorry, if you haven’t noticed the Savior hasn’t made himself visible to us yet and I doubt that he’ll choose to do it as a womanizing lying politician when he does.

The [i]“sheep”[/i] need to wake up and take responsibility for their own lives. They need to make their own decisions and live with the self-esteem that comes from making success from standing up on their own two feet rather than supported and coddled from the cradle to the grave. I am afraid that the independent spirit that gave our forefathers the strength to throw off the burden of the King of England is gone. Rather they actually seek the comfort of an all giving government. Those people in this republic of states that want a strong central federal government are in the majority. The “sheep” are actively are seeking to overthrow our Constitutional form of government by centralizing all power into the Administrative branch and therefore removing the effective system of checks and balances that had been the law as set down in the US Constitution and it’s Bill of Rights. Key to seizing this power is the disarming of the population as a whole. Our Founding Fathers knew of the danger of a strong central government and gave us citizens the means to equalize the equation. Look at their writings yourself if you doubt me.

Removing firearms using the “death by a hundred cuts method” will allow the central federal government to seize unlimited power. For a people without the means to protect themselves both from the government and from each other will have to seek protection from those with the means. Unarmed people are always the victims. It’s has happened time and time in this world where a powerful government as killed off some portion of it’s unarmed population. Rather than a power that is derived from the consent of the governed we will have to trust that the absolute power given to the government’s Administrative branch will not corrupt absolutely. I am not a very trusting person and refuse to surrender my responsibilities for any reason, let alone an un-Constitutional law to an out-of-control State government. Words mean something and despite the best efforts of some the meaning of the words “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” has not changed.  These old words still mean that we, as law-abiding citizens, have a God given right and responsibility to own firearms – firearms with detachable magazines, pistol grips, bayonet lugs and flash suppressors. I am one dog who is rebelling against the authority and will continue to snarl and keep my hackle raised. [b]My spirit will not be soon broken.[/b]

From my web site [url]http://paul.223.tripod.com/Firearms/Interesting_Items/Opinions/opinions.html[/url]

Paul

GT: You can post all of the quotes of our forefathers that you want, but if they were important to the issue, they would have put it in the second amendment. Where did you get all these quotes, from old newspapers or something? Old newspapers are not the Constitution.
Paul: A simple read of the Constitution is a good start but often brings up questions. [I]"The Constitution admittedly has a few defects and blemishes, but it still seems a hell of a lot better than the system we have now." [/I] -- Robert Anton Wilson.  The wording of the Constitution is simple and elegant the writings of our Founding Fathers give some of the back ground into their feelings about The Bill of Rights. The quite clearly wanted us armed.

GT: Also, if guns are registered or outlawed, eventually criminals won't be able to get them either. Things will be safer for everyone.
Paul: The US Supreme Court has ruled that criminals are protected under the Fifth Amendment from registering their firearms. Have you noticed that we register sex offenders and gun owners? Remember that [I] It isn't about gun control, or even crime control, it's about people control, the gun prohibitionists feel that by outlawing armed self defense, they are defending civilization itself against the barbarians who refuse to subjugate their right to life to "civilization".[/I] Ron Burling, Judge of the Appellate Court Sault Ste. Marie Tribe of Chippewa Indians. And how about some words from “The Bull” [I] “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. Safety locks? You will pull the trigger with a lock on, and I'll pull the trigger. We'll see who wins.” [/I] Sammy "The Bull" Gravano

Any 13 year old girl should be able to walk into a hardware store and buy a machine gun with out any kind of background check or waiting period.

GT: And why do you think that you need guns to protect yourself against the government? Do you really think the government wants to do you harm? Even if they did, the great thing about our country is that we can vote for the people who have our best interests at heart. If we don't like our leaders, we can vote for new ones. Get it?

Paul: The supreme law of the land doesn’t change with the will of the President, the Congress, the media or even the people. The law, as stated in The Bill of Rights of these United States of America, clearly states that the [I]“…the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”[/I]

As scary as an AR-15 might be to you, you have no legal right to take one from my hands or any other law-abiding citizen. The law protects our rights equally and honestly can’t be changed from day-to-day to fit the politically correct feelings of the mood of those in charge.

There is a proper way to change the Untied States Constitution and that is by Amendment not by administrative rulings and regulations. Moral people have a duty to disobey immoral laws. Was Rosa Parks committing a crime when she refused to sit in the back of a public bus or were the people who wrote the immoral law committing the bigger crime?

Our Constitution has been amended many times for very good reasons throughout American history. Never before have the rights of the people been so usurped by our government. These are busy times and this is a complex issue, important issues like these take careful thought and study. To me it comes down to point that how can I trust, and continue to serve a government that doesn’t trust me to own the method to protect my family and myself?
Don’t be so confused with the emotions of the issue to think that gun control is crime control. Child pornography, drunk driving and arson are all terrible crimes but do you hear the government calling for bans on digital and instant cameras, cars or cigarette lighters and matches? It’s the misuse of the camera, car, and lighter that we control. We all agree to punish the user of these items for the misuse rather than controlling the ownership of them. Why are firearms any different? Because they scare urban social liberals who have never had an enjoyable experience with a firearm. One of my fondest childhood memories is going to Boy Scout camp and plinking (informal target shooting) with a .22 LR bolt action rifle.

Sure I know we license and regulate the use of automobiles on public highways but not their use on private lands. Nobody makes you wait three days, limits the shape and features or tells you what size of car you can buy now do they? If cars were only as safe as firearms we’d be much better off. According to the National Center for Health Statistics National Vital Statistics Report children are 12 times more likely to die in an automobile accident than from gun-related homicides or even legal interventions (like being shot by the police) if they are ages 0-14 years old. For the age group 0-24 years old the rate is still 8.6 times or 860% higher for cars.

There are so many myths about firearms that aren’t supported by the facts or the laws that entire web sights with links to the FBI, BATF, and the National Center for Health Statistics are available. I however am puzzled by a question that I have not yet been able to answer. Why are liberal politicians so bent on taking rifles from me and not putting criminals in jail or taking guns from their hands or even holding people accountable for their actions? What does the liberal public have to fear from lawful citizens owning firearms? That is the sixty-four thousand-dollar question.

[size=4][b] Remember “...that he right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” – is not just a part of the Constitution it’s good sense [;)]. [/size=4]

[red]As an [u]American citizen[/u] I will continue enjoy the Second Amendment one fine firearm at a time...

...point, game, match!

-editing for the html code-

GT - Sort of. Some of the material I cut and pasted was written by me in 1998/99. Last year I finally figured out the victim mentality that the liberal politicians coddle to. It was so hard for me to fathom as it's 180 degrees from everything I live.

Certain people, the "sheep", are missing a portion of their up bringing where they were taught personal responsibility. They are always the victim of someone else’s negligence – when they crash their car into a power poll while reaching for their cell phone it’s the fault of power company, car manufacture, cell service provider or the caller – never theirs. They are never responsible for any of their direct actions. If they are addicted to crack it’s because the CIA is selling it or they are predisposed to addiction because of their genes.

Liberal politicians, the socialist, seek power by creating a dependant class who looks to the politicians to solve their problems whether they are self-protection, health care, education or something else. The socialists actually create the problems and the dependency of the “sheep” to get more power. Sure we’ll spend $22,000 a student per classroom, about 10 time what we did 20 years ago and have lower standardized test scores – scores are down because we need more money, because standardize test scores discriminate against minorities (except for the Asians who score the highest). Sure will pass more gun laws – even though the latest school killers broke a dozen or more that were already on the books, never mind that more kids die on the play ground that were shot last year, gun should only be owned by the government (and our tax dollar paid for private security guards). We’ll pass hundreds of new gun laws and not enforce any of them, send us your tax dollars, send us your life energy and we’ll take care of you.

“See me cry, I feel for your poor suffering. I’m from Washington and I’m here to help.” These are jokes for some of us but for millions, apparently 51%, they believe that the government way is the best way. When some handsome lawyer gets elected suddenly he’s an expert in gun safety or she’s an expert in environmental systems.

[size=4]Why? [/size=4]

[green]Power. Power. Power. (money)[/green]

While you are entitled to that opinion, the fact is I already have em, so your ideas about if I should or not are irrelevant. You only can deal with the reality of the situation, and that is that I will not give up my rights. Registration ALWAYS has led to confiscation, so why should I make thier job easier?

As far a being able to eventually get all guns gone, CNC manufacturing technology has come far enough that the machinery needed to make guns is in almost every community with a small manufacturing plant, machine shop, or community college. And they can be smuggled just like drugs.

However, make guns illegal and if I am going to go to jail for a single shot 22 I may as well go for having a full auto, so I am gonna smuggle select fire AK's and make Stens. So your policy of banning guns has not only removed them from the law abiding, but the bklack market that the criminals get them from has shifted to even deadlier firearms. Is that what you want? If the government cannot stop the flow of drugs (and that is always being consumed) they will not stop the flow of guns (and the supply builds every day they are smuggled since they last forever).