 |
||
 |
 |
 |
 |
 |
| The real reason for demanding weapons bans by Commander Tansin A. Darcos 12/27/2013, 11:51am PST | ||||
 |
 |
|||
| The impetus on weapons bans is not to keep people safe, there's another reason. President Obama said that military weapons destined a war theatre have no place in theatres.
Tell that to SWAT and police. Would they claim that they should not have military weapons if they were chasing someone violent and armed into a theatre? Well, you might say that police officers are better trained. However, a police officer is six times more likely to shoot the wrong person than a typical civilian who is also trained. Police make mistakes six times more often than civilians when involved in shootings. But the real reason for weapons bans is to disarm the public. With the exception of the Gabby Giffords shooting, every single mass shooting was in a place where it was already illegal for the shooter to have the weapons they used in the first place. The law does no good to stop criminals, who are already violating the law. But it works very well to turn the otherwise law abiding general public into helpless people who have no means to protect themselves. There are some restrictions which do make sense. I live in Maryland which, unfortunately has very strong rules on public carrying of a weapon. You can't publicly carry unless you have a state permit or you're on your own property unless the gun is in a closed case while being transported. And you can't even buy a gun in Maryland unless you take a class on gun safety. You can take it either where it's offered or view it for free over the Internet from the Maryland State Police website. That, I have no problem with. Making sure you know how to safely carry a gun so you don't shoot yourself or someone you're not intending to shoot is a good idea. You just have to take the class, then you print out the certificate they give you. You're also supposed to send a copy in to the State Police to show you took the class, which I also don't really have a problem with, if for no other reason then it tells the state police who they shouldn't try to bother as they know how to handle a gun! The Luby's Cafeteria shooting in Killeen, Texas proved that weapons bans do not help the public, but make them weaker, because a number of people could have done something, because a number of the diners had handguns, but at the time Texas law prohibited carrying their sidearms - even with a permit - with them in the restaurant, so they left their guns in their cars and trucks, out of reach, which did them no good, and their obeying the law cost them their lives. The aftermath of this was so serious it caused one of the survivors to run for the state legislature where she was elected, and she subsequently fought to change Texas' laws so they now allow carrying of weapons in most places by people with concealed carry permits. It's even admitted that in Great Britain, that the purpose of their gun control laws is to disarm the public to prevent the public from being able to uprise against the government. The Second Amendment is not there to protect the right to hunt, or to target shoot, or to all of the straw man arguments people use to justify gun control and gun restrictions. It's to allow the public to have the means to overthrow the government by force and violence, and, when necessary, to allow the general public to kill military and police who might support a totalitarian or despotic government. In short, the 2nd Amendment was to ensure the general public had the capacity to become cop killers if necessary. If you don't think it might have been necessary, consider this. Exactly how many American Citizens would have been forced into U.S. operated internment camps during World War II if the targets (and others) of those internment orders issued by or to the United States Military were responded to with assassinations of the local military commanders who were supposed to carry out those orders? It was later admitted - despite the U.S. Supreme Court upholding those orders establishing internment camps were constitutional - by the subsequent apology by Congress and the establishment of a fund to pay restitution to the people affected by the interment orders or their surviving families, that it was the wrong thing to do. And when a government becomes totalitarian or despotic, as the Declaration of Independence admits, sometimes the only response available is violence. Robert A. Heinlein had it right when he wrote it in his book "Starship Troopers," and later when Mr. Radchak states in the movie, "Force, my friends, is violence, the supreme authority from which all other authority is derived." |
||||
 |
 |
|||
|
The real reason for demanding weapons bans by 12/27/2013, 11:51am PST  Yes Paul, guns are awesome. Also air, water NT by 12/27/2013, 9:36pm PST Oh come on... by 01/04/2014, 2:04pm PST |
