Guns!
Let us be clear that the second amendment was intended to have an army available if we needed it. We had no formal military then. And hunting with rifles is okay. But most guns end up killing family, or for suicides — and murders. Such makes news and money for corporate ads, I suppose.
Now one can gun down anyone with a good excuse and get away with it. We supply the world with more guns than all other nations combined and many of these end up shooting at us and ours.
We are the only democracy that lets people run around with guns displayed and used — possibly the Swiss are a partial exception as a small nation among large and aggressive ones.
Manifestly we should restrict guns to those who need them to protect — not threaten us. Will we ever be able to beat back the gun lobby? If we can’t, the killing will presumably get worse with our economic hardships. If you can’t get a job, use a gun to take what you want.
And so goes Amerika — daily more and more a killer police state.
—
“A war is just if there is no alternative, and the resort to arms is legitimate if they represent your last hope.” (Livy cited by Machiavelli)
—
Ed Kent [blind copies]
8 users commented in " Guns! "
Follow-up comment rss or Leave a TrackbackFYI comrade Kent, criminals prefer unarmed victims. 1-20-2013 Obama’s last day.
I have owned and carried weapons nearly full time for over forty years, yet I have not killed or robbed. My weapons have not forced me into a criminal lifestyle. Neither will a ban on weapons make criminals model citizens.
The Supreme Court, the Founding Fathers, and most Americans disagree with your interpretation of the Second Amendment.
Does it not seem obvious that where there are the most guns there is the lowest murder rates?
You make the “gun lobby” sound so evil. Have gun owners threatened you lately? I doubt it. If you don’t like guns, don’t own one.
As for me and my neighbors, we own plenty of guns. We leave our cars unlocked, and our neighborhood has no crime.
“most guns end up killing family, or for suicides — and murders”
absolutely no facts to back this idiotic statement. Mr. Kent, you promise not to own any guns and I will promise not to use mine to help you the next time you’re getting robbed….moron!!!
“Now one can gun down anyone with a good excuse and get away with it.”
I stopped reading this Blog right there. As if anyone truly beleives that then they shouldn’t be posting on the internet but seeking a Mental DR.
“The killing will presumably get worse with our economic hardships. If you can’t get a job, use a gun to take what you want.”
Restrictive gun laws do not translate to lower crime and/or homicides. Prime example is the 7 dead, 18 wounded in 12-hour rash of shootings
in Chicago this week. Criminals do not obide to gun laws. You only restrict law obiding citizins who do not Rob or kill anyways.
The crime trends in the United States of America have been significantly better than the trends in countries with more restrictive firearms laws. Since 1991, the number of privately owned firearms has risen sharply by 50 million. Meanwhile, America`s violent crime rate has decreased every year except where guns are banned or severly restricted such as D.C. or Chicago. Other countries/cities with severe restrictive laws have experienced increases in crime.
[…] » Guns! – Blogger News Network […]
Yes, I was held up on a subway with a guy claiming to have a gun in his pocket. We now see a radical increase in armed militias with implied threats to kill — particularly opponents such as pols. It is only a matter of time, I fear, before we see the killing start. Civilized democracies do not use guns except to protect people. Ed Kent
way to not respond to the criticisms of your uneducated article. Oh wait, maybe you did. My mistake…if you were held up on a subway everything about your anti-gun article must be true…silly me.
Leave A Reply