Comments on: Sixty Five Million Firearms Owners Killed NO ONE Yesterday…

By: bootblack_Jaecks

bootblack_Jaecks — Mon, 27 Apr 2009 12:15:46 +0000

ilduce315 Says: “the Constitution guarantees my right to own and doesn’t say I have to pass a test. ”

what do you think a Militia IS? Military training under the supervision of a government appointed leader. The first words of the Second Amendment are “A well regulated Militia”… THAT is why the Founding Fathers wanted us to own guns. They saw a professional and standing army as a tool to an oppressive Imperial government… they weren’t going to establish a standing army… They want you to own a gun– and train with it– under their rules.

By: ilduce315

ilduce315 — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 12:19:21 +0000

Responsible gun owner…Exactly!. The only irresponsible owners are the criminals. You and I know how to handle, transport and operate and should have the right to buy any number of guns at any time. I don’t have a problem with safety classes for firearms ownership but the Constitution guarantees my right to own and doesn’t say I have to pass a test. Yes, to drive, I have to pass a test but driving is a privilege from the state not a right. Owning firearms is a RIGHT.

Gun owners now have to become even more vigilant and write state and federal legislature an voice your concerns. Joining the NRA is a great way to stay current on the issues. Challenge the media, they are the biggest offenders even more than anti-gun lobbyists.

As Charlton Heston would say, “From My Cold Dead Fingers!”

By: bootblack_Jaecks

bootblack_Jaecks — Tue, 10 Mar 2009 01:22:13 +0000

“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.”

people tend to forget the “well regulated Militia” part and interpret the Second Amendment as carte blanche to own guns with zero restrictions or responsibility whatsoever… hell, the Second Amendment doesn’t even mention GUNS in words, just in implication. As written, the Second Amendment can be interpreted as “We, the government, doesn’t want to pay soldiers… therefore, we are more than happy to allow you to take up pitchforks, on our behalf, to protect the shores of our Nation… but as you are Militia, we ain’t paying you…”

By: somnus

somnus — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 19:54:37 +0000

We have a saying in Texas that originated with the first military action of the revolution against Mexico and helped lead to Texas’ independence: “Come and Take It!” Under Mexican President Antonio Lopez de Santa Anna, residents of Gonzales were given a cannon for protection against raiding Comanches. Within four years (the length of a POTUS term) Texans grew tired of Santa Anna’s increasingly dictatorial maneuvers. Because of the discontent, the commander of all Mexican troops in Texas, Colonel Domingo de Ugartechea, decided that is would be best if the Texans were disarmed and wanted the cannon returned. “Come and Take It” the Texans said and meant it! They were prepared to die defending it and their own freedom. I don’t know who said it first but it is a good quote: “An armed man is a citizen. An unarmed man is a subject.” And I say the same thing: “Come and Take It” – Eric Caldwell

By: WG_dog

WG_dog — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 19:13:27 +0000

Being a responsible gun owner is good. I don’t mind hunter safety programs in order to hunt. But having to pass some local, state and or federal safety course in order to own any kind of firearms? Hell no, bullshit and FOAD! Second Amendment says nothing about having to pass a safety course. And to hell with putting bureaucrats at any level in charge of such a safety course and deciding what hoops you have to jump through, and who they allow to have a gun.

Responsible gun owner my ass!

By: Darren_in_Detroit

Darren_in_Detroit — Mon, 09 Mar 2009 15:01:05 +0000

Well written. Good points.