1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

from November Blue Press

Discussion in 'Legal' started by alan, Oct 27, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. alan

    alan Member

    Dec 24, 2002
    sowest pa.
    As I said in another post today, one that also included material from The Blue Press, I'm not really happy with Bush. I will not bore readers with my reasons, the man simply does not "ring right" to my ear. Of course, Kerry rings much less "right". I hope that people will take the small trouble to read the following, and think on the possibilities.
    Who Can You Trust?
    To the Editor:

    I think the main question in this election boils down to who can you trust? This has been the quintessential question for Americans throughout our history as a nation. A further question is: Can you trust those who don’t trust you?

    The US Constitution reflects the issue of trust in its structure. Having just fought off the British monarchy and gaining independence, the Americans knew that no matter how well meaning a leader might be, power was often a corrupting influence. Their distrust of the human ability to withstand this influence led them to dilute it by creating three branches of government with specifically limited powers. Next they gave each branch checks and balances over the others. They further added a Bill of Rights with ten amendments specifically stating certain freedoms the government was not to violate.

    The second of these constitutional amendments stated: “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.†Because this amendment dealt with the application of physical force and those who had the right to use it, it was of greater importance than any other constitutional limitation. Why? Because, if government engaged in serious rights abuse and all else failed, individual citizens could use their force of arms in an attempt to protect and or restore them.

    Over most of its existence, the constitution has faced many attempts by our leaders to exceed its’ limitations and in many instances they have. For example, during the worst deadly days of the Civil War, World War I, and World War II, our rights were seriously curtailed for security reasons. However, the one right that, with rare limited exceptions, was never denied the people was the right to keep and bear arms. In other words, the government trusted the people and vice versa. Most other rights were restored after the wars.

    It has only been in the last thirty odd years that serious challenges have arisen to the individual’s right to keep and bear arms. The most serious is based upon a socialist inspired ideology that influenced the Clinton administration. This ideology, despite its pretensions of support for the common man, does not trust the common man. Now represented by Kerry and Edwards it has, for all intents and purposes, captured the reigns of the Democratic Party.

    As a result of the War on Terror, the Bush administration and a bipartisan congress have again found it necessary to curtail our rights with laws such as the Patriot Act. Regardless of this, the Bush administration has still upheld the individual’s right to keep and bear arms. This has resulted in rolling back Clinton era gun restrictions across our nation. Today our citizens are freer to protect themselves. The lower crime rates in areas of least restriction support this. In addition, over the past 40 years, firearms ownership in the US has tripled, but the firearms accident rate is now at an all time low.

    Senator John Kerry wants to be our next president. He claims to support gun rights, but his senate voting record gives the lie to this charade. True to his ideology, he has demonstrated a lack of trust in the people by voting against every bill that would reduce gun restrictions and for every bill that would increase them. Now he asks you to trust his word that, if elected, he will not restrict or destroy your gun rights. Can you trust those who don’t trust you?

    After the election the War on Terror will still go on and our rights will still, in one way or another, be restricted for security reasons. If you think that Kerry and the democrats might change this, remember that they also voted for the Patriot Act. Can you really trust their word that they would weaken it?

    So, whom can you trust? Can you trust President Bush who, despite the Patriot Act and other restrictions, has supported and extended your gun rights (The one most important right)? Or, can you trust John Kerry who has shown a lack of trust in you by attempting to restrict and destroy them? It’s your choice and our future.

    Thank you.

    W. Homer Ballard, Jr.
  2. cropcirclewalker

    cropcirclewalker member

    Apr 30, 2004
    In the Woods close to Arkansas
    Did W repeal the 68 GCA when I wasn't looking?

    Oh, maybe you mean when he said he favored or would support the extension of the AWB. Is that what you call extended?

  3. JL2152

    JL2152 Member

    Jun 27, 2004
    Well realisticly our choice is between Bush and Kerry. Both supported the Patriot Act and both supported the renewal of the AWB. But Bush wouldn't support a semiauto ban, an armor piercing ban, and every other anti gun bill Johnny boy supported.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page