II. 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.
March 12, 2012
COMMENTARY Arms Trade Treaty—The Hell With Congress 03-12-12
Whether you're a gunowner or not, the rationale applicable here applies just as easily to every other unalienable right you cherish and thought couldn't be mitigated much less taken away! The short version: You're wrong. The scenario is further detailed in this column.
COMMENTARY This is What Guns Were Made For 03-12-12
Uncomfortable? Yeah, the author is right about that. In fact, I admit I squirmed a few times just reading what he'd written! But that doesn't make him any less right, you know.- Tea Party groups pressure House GOP leaders to rev up Fast and Furious Probe 03-11-12
If they won't do their job without pressure, than pressure it is!
March 5, 2012
- Federal judge finds right to bear arms not limited to home, Md. handgun law unconstitutional 03-05-12
Excellent ruling! The only question I have is what kind of legislator can possibly take an oath to uphold the Constitution and then pass a law like this one in the first place. (Allow me to answer that: Apparently, the all too typical these days kind.) - Gun instructors hope measure is shot down 03-05-12
It seems to me that the instructors are more worried about their potential students than they are about anything else. After all, you don't see blood running in the streets in Vermont or Alaska, and you don't need a permit to carry concealed in either of those places. Most Second Amendment advocates have been saying for years that any responsible gun owner who carries regularly is educated in how to handle a firearm. It's a matter of personal responsibility, something the vast majority of gun owners have in spades. Or do these people suggest that the residents of Colorado are somehow less intelligent or responsible than the denizens of other states? I had to ask... - COMMENTARY US Supreme Court: Citizens must be permitted to use
handguns for self-defense 03-05-12
You know, when all we hear about is the overall results of a decision, sometimes we miss out on some very, very important things included in the reasoning for the ruling. This is one of those things. - COMMENTARY D.C. Official: Being a Victim Better Than Owning a Gun 03-05-12
Really? Really? The author suggests that perhaps said official needs to re-read the Heller decision. Me? I think he needs to be terrified for himself, or for a loved one, and with no means whatsoever to defend against imminent harm. It's surprising how quickly even the most closed mind opens to the possibilities under such conditions!
March 1, 2012
- Romey bought guns since he last ran for president 02-29-12
Fascinating. Apparently Mitt Romney disagreed with the NRA before he joined it, and he owned a gun he didn't own before he bought a couple for himself (after the fall-out from the last election cycle, you'll note). Add that to the fact that Massachusetts—the state in which he was governor—has some of the most draconian anti-gun laws in the county, and you won't be surprised to hear I'm not buying his pro-Second Amendment claims!
February 29, 2012
Leap Day
- SAF Condemns Texas Law Prof's Claim that OH School Shooting is "Exercise of 2A" 02-28-12
Those comments go well beyond ludicrous and deep into the realm of outright insanity! And yes, once again, the most rabid of the anti-gunners are reveling in the blood. Me? I wonder how many students would still be alive today if somebody else had had a gun and could have effectively fought back!
February 28, 2012
BLOG ENTRY Santorum presents mixed record on gun rights 02-28-12
Mixed, indeed! But still better than Mr. Romney's record...- ANALYSIS Where Does Romney Stand Today on the Second Amendment? 02-27-12
It's hard to tell. Apparently, Mr. Romney has thus far declined to answer questions posed him by one of the country's largest and staunchest defenders of the Second Amendment. What do we know? His record doesn't back up his generic claims (today, anyway) that he favors the Second Amendment.
About the Second Amendment
The Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution is one of the most mistakenly maligned and intentionally misunderstood of our freedoms. The use of the word "militia" often causes anti-gun groups and individuals to claim the amendment applies only to the National Guard, conveniently forgetting that the National Guard didn't exist when the Constitution was written and that, at the time of the writing, "militia" was clearly defined as "all able-bodied men."
The use of the words "the people," of course, are further indicators of the intent for the Second Amendment to apply to individuals (a point agreed upon by the vast majority of Constitutional scholars). Numerous further writings of the framers state in no uncertain terms, lest anyone misunderstand, that the Founders fully intended for individuals to be armed, both for self-defense against crime and as a hedge against government tyranny (a note for the "it can't happen here" crowd: Germany was a democracy, and Adolf Hitler was freely elected). Sadly, once fear and lawyers really get their teeth into something, case law becomes far less clear than the simple language in which the amendment was written.
I support in the strongest possible terms the unalienable right of the people to self-defense against those who would harm them. Should said people also employ their firearms for hunting or target shooting (as I've been known to do myself), I agree they are well within their rights to do that as well.
Click here for more on the Second Amendment. Want to help preserve the Second Amendment? Educate yourself, and then take action!
