C
Cory Steiner
Guest
For tomorrow evening, here's mine for a community Patriotic Speech Contest. Throwing caution to the wind:
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." The Supreme Court hasen't yet officially defined "militia", but some will argue that the 2nd Amendment IS homeland security and that the militia is us. Having said that, it is the "shall not be infringed" part that's of most interest to me.
Versions of gun control have been around for centuries. Oppressive dictators can't get to work until their subjects are disarmed. More recent versions of gun control began after the Civil War by racists who feared newly freed slaves. Gun registration in 1928 Germany led to confiscation that paved the way for the murder of 21 million non-combatants.
Modern gun control in the United States began in the late '60's in response to assassinations and riots. Comparing gun controllers to Hitler or the KKK isn't fair as initial intentions of modern gun control were sincere, but the truth quickly became obvious even though the Michael Moores of the world are still trying to convince us of the false hope promised by an impossible utopia.
So let's get back on track. Is the 2nd Amendment essential to freedom? Freedom is about our inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I was twice held at gunpoint for the few dollars in my pocket and am still here on the whim of criminals who allowed me to continue to pursue my inalienable rights, but others aren't as lucky.
Many people see the right to protect themselves and their families as the single most important civil right. But what about safety? That arguement would have us outlaw bathtubs and cars. Many more children tragically die in a bucket of water than by firearms. The media just makes the 6 year old in Michigan who brought her drug dealing father's illegal gun to school seem commonplace. And some use statistics that include gangland crime and suicide to further attack the responsible and self reliant law-abiding citizen.
Misters Harris and Klebold violated over 20 firearm laws in obtaining the weapons used in the Columbine tragedy. Additional laws would likely have not made a difference. An armed law-abiding citizen may have.
Colin Ferguson was able to kill 6 people on a train in New York because the law-abiding citizens of New York, like New Jersey, are not trusted with the means of self defense.
Vermont has no gun laws at all and hardly any crime. Florida has allowed concealed carry since 1989 and you're twice as likely to be attacked by an alligator than a person with a concealed carry permit.
So it is my opinion that the 2nd Amendment is as essential to freedom as air is to breathing. Any attempt at reducing crime can only be effective if it is directed at criminals. Restricting 2nd Amendment Rights only gives criminals greater predatory confidence.
The right to keep and bear arms is not at all archaic. Efforts to undermine the 2nd Amendment threaten not only the physical well being of all Americans, but also the core concept of the liberty that our Founding Fathers struggled so hard to perfect and protect.
What can we do in New Jersey where 2nd Amendment Rights are greatly restricted? Not much, really. Too many of us don't realize that a person with a clean record, FBI background check, training and a legally obtained permit is highly unlikely to commit a crime or cause an unsafe condition. But maybe an awareness that those who sacrifice fredoms for the sake of security usually lose both will keep us from becoming a nation of defenseless victims.
As many politicians continue to use guns as a means of scaring us into voting a certain way it is my opinion that a raped and strangled woman isn't necessarily morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun in her hand and a dead rapist at her feet.
The armed citizen is the ultimate right of a free people. Personally, I'm pro-choice about a lot of things and the right to keep and bear arms is one of them.
"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." The Supreme Court hasen't yet officially defined "militia", but some will argue that the 2nd Amendment IS homeland security and that the militia is us. Having said that, it is the "shall not be infringed" part that's of most interest to me.
Versions of gun control have been around for centuries. Oppressive dictators can't get to work until their subjects are disarmed. More recent versions of gun control began after the Civil War by racists who feared newly freed slaves. Gun registration in 1928 Germany led to confiscation that paved the way for the murder of 21 million non-combatants.
Modern gun control in the United States began in the late '60's in response to assassinations and riots. Comparing gun controllers to Hitler or the KKK isn't fair as initial intentions of modern gun control were sincere, but the truth quickly became obvious even though the Michael Moores of the world are still trying to convince us of the false hope promised by an impossible utopia.
So let's get back on track. Is the 2nd Amendment essential to freedom? Freedom is about our inalienable right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. I was twice held at gunpoint for the few dollars in my pocket and am still here on the whim of criminals who allowed me to continue to pursue my inalienable rights, but others aren't as lucky.
Many people see the right to protect themselves and their families as the single most important civil right. But what about safety? That arguement would have us outlaw bathtubs and cars. Many more children tragically die in a bucket of water than by firearms. The media just makes the 6 year old in Michigan who brought her drug dealing father's illegal gun to school seem commonplace. And some use statistics that include gangland crime and suicide to further attack the responsible and self reliant law-abiding citizen.
Misters Harris and Klebold violated over 20 firearm laws in obtaining the weapons used in the Columbine tragedy. Additional laws would likely have not made a difference. An armed law-abiding citizen may have.
Colin Ferguson was able to kill 6 people on a train in New York because the law-abiding citizens of New York, like New Jersey, are not trusted with the means of self defense.
Vermont has no gun laws at all and hardly any crime. Florida has allowed concealed carry since 1989 and you're twice as likely to be attacked by an alligator than a person with a concealed carry permit.
So it is my opinion that the 2nd Amendment is as essential to freedom as air is to breathing. Any attempt at reducing crime can only be effective if it is directed at criminals. Restricting 2nd Amendment Rights only gives criminals greater predatory confidence.
The right to keep and bear arms is not at all archaic. Efforts to undermine the 2nd Amendment threaten not only the physical well being of all Americans, but also the core concept of the liberty that our Founding Fathers struggled so hard to perfect and protect.
What can we do in New Jersey where 2nd Amendment Rights are greatly restricted? Not much, really. Too many of us don't realize that a person with a clean record, FBI background check, training and a legally obtained permit is highly unlikely to commit a crime or cause an unsafe condition. But maybe an awareness that those who sacrifice fredoms for the sake of security usually lose both will keep us from becoming a nation of defenseless victims.
As many politicians continue to use guns as a means of scaring us into voting a certain way it is my opinion that a raped and strangled woman isn't necessarily morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun in her hand and a dead rapist at her feet.
The armed citizen is the ultimate right of a free people. Personally, I'm pro-choice about a lot of things and the right to keep and bear arms is one of them.
