Hal, now you have touched on a subject dear to my heart and soul. Of course, the founding fathers enabled us to protect ourselves against an army that was out of control or a government that was attempting to take our rights and freedom away. But they also intended for us to protect ourselves against intruders and people trying to do harm to one another. This is why we became the greatest nation and ultimately built the greatest armed forces in the world. It goes without saying that guns, bombs, knives, cars, trucks, and planes, don't kill people, people kill people. Look at the recent murders in Utah (4 murders with a knife). So people are constantly picking on guns. Go to Wyoming or most of the states that allow open carry. Murder rates basically are not existent, because people are allowed to protect themselves. The problem in this country is not guns it is mental health. You have half the population on some type of antidepressant drug. Maybe we should stop drug manufacturers from making drugs. The inner cities are the worst areas, with the strongest gun controls. Look at your home city Chicago with the most stringent gun controls in the US a liberal judicial system, with the highest murder rate in the nation. These are just really bad people. Guns have nothing to do with it. I live on the eastern shore of MD, where everyone owns a gun for either hunting or sport. We sure as hell don't have the killings here that you do in inner cities. Why, because the bad guys know that people here shoot back. One of the most important reasons behind our government was to protect its citizens. The problem that we have now is that our government will not protect law-bidding citizens. They are more interested in releasing mass murderers to kill again. Our right to bear arms is one of our greatest assets. That's why it was number 2. Take away our rights to protect ourselves and then you will see a country that will be weak. Next, the liberals will eliminate knives and cars. By the way, for your readers, the gun that was used at the Walmart in Chesapeake was a pistol, not a long gun. Biden immediately attacked the assault rifles. I guess his press secretary forgot to tell him that it was a pistol, not that he knows the difference. Thank god we have people standing up for our gun ownership rights.
Our founding fathers did not have a private army (FBI) harassing and arresting mostly peaceful protestors at school board meetings, or many political opponents of this White House.
With rising violent crime in our Democratically run cities with strict gun regulations, and progressive aversion to holding criminals responsible for their violence, it is time all law abiding citizens should be required to own guns.
Years ago I would’ve agreed with you. Then I watched 12 years a slave. It showed how the slave owners used dogs and guns to control their slaves. They beat them and have vicious dogs chewing on them while they held guns at them. It changed my mind. Then I saw during the lockdowns in Australia the police shooting big rubber bullets and using dogs against their citizens! (One person was killed!)The Australians gave up their weapons and their government took advantage of them. It happened in Canada too, violence by the government against its citizens as they peacefully protested. These acts were not shown on main stream media. Under no circumstances should law abiding citizens have their guns confiscated. If they can figure out how to get them out of the hands of the criminals I’m all for it.
The paranoia of more guns being better protection against any but home invasions is just that. The explanation that is given by Mr Gershowitz against protecting our country from what at that time were using in most Europeans countries as a standing army did not reflect the people’s rights but reinforced the rulers rights is correct
Most Americans should have the right to buy arms but with proper checks but NOT weapons of war. Restricting drivers licenses by administering tests but having no restrictions nationally against tests and types of guns is looney
Define weapons of war , since the gun control act of 1934 and again 1968 full auto weapons have been restricted to the general public. The gun controllers have re defined the meanings of assault rifle/weapon to mean something wholly different.the A.R in A.R 15 does not stand for Assault rifle it stands for armalite rifle the name of the company that designed it. The M-16 military variant is a true assault weapon as it has a selective fire switch,the m2 carbine is an assault weapon as is the uzi the mac10, tech9 et al ,however the semi auto civilian versions of these ARE NOT assault weapons . Just because they share some of the same features cosmetically does not make them a weapon of war/Assault rifle, much the same adding loud exhaust and fancy wheels to the family sedan does not a top fuel dragster make. Thanks to s complicit media and the general public ignorance on the part of the public about guns the assault rifle/ weapon stigma has been cast on any fire arm that shares a few cosmetic traits of these military only arms. Just my thoughts on the definition.
Hal, now you have touched on a subject dear to my heart and soul. Of course, the founding fathers enabled us to protect ourselves against an army that was out of control or a government that was attempting to take our rights and freedom away. But they also intended for us to protect ourselves against intruders and people trying to do harm to one another. This is why we became the greatest nation and ultimately built the greatest armed forces in the world. It goes without saying that guns, bombs, knives, cars, trucks, and planes, don't kill people, people kill people. Look at the recent murders in Utah (4 murders with a knife). So people are constantly picking on guns. Go to Wyoming or most of the states that allow open carry. Murder rates basically are not existent, because people are allowed to protect themselves. The problem in this country is not guns it is mental health. You have half the population on some type of antidepressant drug. Maybe we should stop drug manufacturers from making drugs. The inner cities are the worst areas, with the strongest gun controls. Look at your home city Chicago with the most stringent gun controls in the US a liberal judicial system, with the highest murder rate in the nation. These are just really bad people. Guns have nothing to do with it. I live on the eastern shore of MD, where everyone owns a gun for either hunting or sport. We sure as hell don't have the killings here that you do in inner cities. Why, because the bad guys know that people here shoot back. One of the most important reasons behind our government was to protect its citizens. The problem that we have now is that our government will not protect law-bidding citizens. They are more interested in releasing mass murderers to kill again. Our right to bear arms is one of our greatest assets. That's why it was number 2. Take away our rights to protect ourselves and then you will see a country that will be weak. Next, the liberals will eliminate knives and cars. By the way, for your readers, the gun that was used at the Walmart in Chesapeake was a pistol, not a long gun. Biden immediately attacked the assault rifles. I guess his press secretary forgot to tell him that it was a pistol, not that he knows the difference. Thank god we have people standing up for our gun ownership rights.
Our founding fathers did not have a private army (FBI) harassing and arresting mostly peaceful protestors at school board meetings, or many political opponents of this White House.
With rising violent crime in our Democratically run cities with strict gun regulations, and progressive aversion to holding criminals responsible for their violence, it is time all law abiding citizens should be required to own guns.
Years ago I would’ve agreed with you. Then I watched 12 years a slave. It showed how the slave owners used dogs and guns to control their slaves. They beat them and have vicious dogs chewing on them while they held guns at them. It changed my mind. Then I saw during the lockdowns in Australia the police shooting big rubber bullets and using dogs against their citizens! (One person was killed!)The Australians gave up their weapons and their government took advantage of them. It happened in Canada too, violence by the government against its citizens as they peacefully protested. These acts were not shown on main stream media. Under no circumstances should law abiding citizens have their guns confiscated. If they can figure out how to get them out of the hands of the criminals I’m all for it.
Who suggested confiscating guns?
The paranoia of more guns being better protection against any but home invasions is just that. The explanation that is given by Mr Gershowitz against protecting our country from what at that time were using in most Europeans countries as a standing army did not reflect the people’s rights but reinforced the rulers rights is correct
Most Americans should have the right to buy arms but with proper checks but NOT weapons of war. Restricting drivers licenses by administering tests but having no restrictions nationally against tests and types of guns is looney
Perry Altshule
Define weapons of war , since the gun control act of 1934 and again 1968 full auto weapons have been restricted to the general public. The gun controllers have re defined the meanings of assault rifle/weapon to mean something wholly different.the A.R in A.R 15 does not stand for Assault rifle it stands for armalite rifle the name of the company that designed it. The M-16 military variant is a true assault weapon as it has a selective fire switch,the m2 carbine is an assault weapon as is the uzi the mac10, tech9 et al ,however the semi auto civilian versions of these ARE NOT assault weapons . Just because they share some of the same features cosmetically does not make them a weapon of war/Assault rifle, much the same adding loud exhaust and fancy wheels to the family sedan does not a top fuel dragster make. Thanks to s complicit media and the general public ignorance on the part of the public about guns the assault rifle/ weapon stigma has been cast on any fire arm that shares a few cosmetic traits of these military only arms. Just my thoughts on the definition.
I guess I assumed that that’s what you were implying! I’m sorry for that assumption.