A student is looking for gun control opinions

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Jun 27, 2007
Messages
3
Location
People's Republic of Looneyville, KY
A student is asking for gun control opinions for an essay at the link above. I have already posted.

If you have the time and inclination, a number of reasoned and reasonable posts there may be of some use, if only to this one student. I suggest you read the posts extant, and do not cover the same ground as others. My post is below.
thx
Joe, the GreatBlueWhale.

1. The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution enumerates the self-evident, pre-existing human and civil right of a law-abiding individual (those who habitually obey the law) to keep (own and control) and bear (carry on or about their person or property) arms (generally considered firearms, but could be any other weapon) shall not (what part of NO don't people understand?) be infringed (hindered, encroached upon, denied) by government. A number of state constitutions also specifically address this civil right.

2. Surveys of incarcerated career criminals (those who make a habit of breaking laws) show they are not hindered by gun-control laws because they don't obey any laws that would hinder their criminal activities. Therefore, any laws which make it more difficult or impossible for law-abiding citizens (those who habitually obey the law) to acquire, keep and bear firearms are not aimed at criminals (those who habitually disobey laws) but at disarming law-abiding citizens, and are arguably unconstitutional.

3. Gun ownership by law-abiding individuals reduces violent crime. See http://johnrlott.tripod.com/postsbyday/RTCResearch.html for a listing of scientific, scholarly studies which show a decline of violent crime in states where right-to-carry laws have been passed. There is also a link at the bottom of the page for works citing no reduction of crime due to right-to-carry laws. (Note: I have never seen gun control advocates forthcoming with information contrary to their position.)

4. Firearms are not evil. Firearms are only tools used to do various tasks as individuals wield them. And yes, tools are sometimes misused. Hammers, shovels, kitchen knives and automobiles have all been used to murder people. See http://www.a-human-right.com for more on firearms as tools. Nor are specific firearms “more evil” because of the way they look. See http://www.a-human-right.com/looks.html for “The Aesthetics of the Gun Debate.”

5. If it isn’t fully automatic (fires more than one shot with only one pull of the trigger), it isn’t an “assault rifle”. Fully automatic firearms have been regulated heavily since the National Firearms Act of 1934. Anyone who legally purchases a fully automatic firearm must undergo an FBI background check, have the approval of the chief law enforcement officer of the jurisdiction in which they live, and pay an additional $200 tax over and above the purchase price of the firearm.

6. Gun control in the United States was originally instituted in post Civil War Jim Crow laws to keep firearms out of the hands of black Americans. This legislation was an unconstitutional attempt to deprive black citizens of the opportunity to acquire, own, and bear firearms, a civil right guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. Gun control laws passed today are less discriminatory. Many of today’s gun control laws violate the 2nd Amendment civil right of every citizen, regardless of race.
 
1. The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution enumerates the self-evident, pre-existing human and civil right of a law-abiding individual (those who habitually obey the law) to keep (own and control) and bear (carry on or about their person or property) arms (generally considered firearms, but could be any other weapon) shall not (what part of NO don't people understand?) be infringed (hindered, encroached upon, denied) by government. A number of state constitutions also specifically address this civil right.

I would add that this opinion is backed up by the founder's own writings
(http://etext.virginia.edu/jefferson/quotations/jeff1480.htm)
is a good start. The arguement against the people's right is the easiest to debunk.
 
My comment is awaiting moderation...

Instead of opinions why not use facts ? Facts are much stronger then mere opinions.

Advocates of gun control strongly prefer to oppose opinions as opinions can be beaten down with repeated rehetoric.

The use of facts will defeat any gun control argument in a heart beat.

Good luck.

Cut 'n paste addresses into your browser.

For Militia issues see:
US Code Artical 10;
http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/html/uscode10/usc_sec_10_00000311----000-.html

Where it is stated;
(a) The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32, under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.
(b) The classes of the militia are—
(1) the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and
(2) the unorganized militia, which consists of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard or the Naval Militia.

Are you aware the ploice have no duty to protect you ?
See;
http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/kasler-protection.html

Police Have No Duty To Protect Individuals
by Peter Kasler _ Full text too long to post here.
Read it. you'll be surprised.

An actual incident where armed citizens forcefully overthrew their local government;

See:
http://www.jpfo.org/athens.htm

The Battle of Athens, Tennessee
As Recently As 1946, American Citizens Were
Forced To Take Up Arms As A Last Resort
Against Corrupt Government Officials.


Again too long to post here but all of these make an excellent starting point.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top