Nope – the US doesn't need gun control…

Sunday’s killings were the latest in a series of high-profile but unrelated rampages in March, including the killings of 10 people by an Alabama man who was then killed by police. At a southern Illinois church, a man shot and killed the pastor and stabbed two parishioners.

I wonder if cold dead hands come to mind with another shooting?

I suppose the NRA will now be holding a rally near by suggesting that if people didn’t have guns only the criminals would have guns.

Eight killed in North Carolina nursing home rampage – CNN.com.

Add to FacebookAdd to NewsvineAdd to DiggAdd to Del.icio.usAdd to StumbleuponAdd to RedditAdd to BlinklistAdd to Ma.gnoliaAdd to TechnoratiAdd to Furl

Advertisements

About Bolshy

Blogging in the ether to see if that elusive literary agent or publisher wants some new talent.
This entry was posted in Bias, Blah!, Comment, Modern Liberty, Personal Opinion, Personal philosophy, Politics, Sociology, Technology and tagged . Bookmark the permalink.

0 Responses to Nope – the US doesn't need gun control…

  1. jonolan says:

    Over 50% of American voters cast their ballots for Obama, a far greater crime than this slaughter. Should Americans then not be allowed to vote because some will willfully or ignorantly misuse the right to do so?

    I’m sure you’re smart enough and educated in life enough to understand the sarcasm above.

  2. ReyMac says:

    jonolan-
    Have you read the second amendment? No sarcasm intended, but it says something like, “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.” Now, as I understand it, we don’t have militias to keep the peace anymore, so this legal argument doesn’t guarantee anyone the right to own a gun. And although I appear to be in the minority interpretation, the more people who get shot with legal and illegal guns, the more bodies piled up at the door, the more I believe that will CHANGE, too. “a far greater crime than this slaughter”? really . . . that didn’t sound like sarcasm, it sounded like hyperbolic nonsense.

  3. lunawolf says:

    All these shootings. It’s terrible. The pressure is on and we are not a society that allows people to show weakness or ask for help, so we end up with sick, frustrated people who have a “second amendment right” to own deadly weapons. Sad.

    There’s nothing in the second amendment about firing a gun. While I agree with Rey’s interpretation of the amendment, the courts don’t think so, and therefore a law should be passed that it be illegal to fire a gun except in the most extreme or regulated circumstances.

  4. jonolan says:

    ReyMac,

    I think that you need to go back to history class and actually study the US Constitution and the surrounding arguments – in this case over the meaning and purpose of the 2nd Amendment.

    Here’s a place to start: http://blog.jonolan.net/politics/original-2nd-amendment/

    You might also want to review the SCOTUS decisions surrounding the amendment, the most recent being DC v. Heller. That decision was quite on-point to this post since even the Dissent recognized the 2nd Amendment as guaranteeing a individual right to own firearms.

  5. leapsecond says:

    Jonolan’s sort of right, folks. Let me quote the late, great Thomas Jefferson:

    “Laws that forbid the carrying of arms . . . disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes . . . Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man.”

    You would agree, my friends, that this “gun control” would only affect law abiding citizens, NOT the criminals that we do not want possessing our guns. The logic behind it is this: these criminals are already going to break laws to kill; so why would they care if the government makes it illegal to own a firearm? It’s just another law that they’ll disregard as they pump bullets into an innocent victim. Thus, gun control laws only hurt those who would responsibly carry and fire a weapon.

    And what happens in the event that the government needs to be usurped because they do not fulfill the needs of the people? They will be crushed by the government if they wield all the weaponry. And a police state is born.

  6. BING says:

    DO WE NEED A GUN CONTROL LAW IN AMERICA? NO! ARE GUNS HAZARDOUS TO OUR HEALTH? MOST EVERYTHING IS HAZARDOUS TO OUR HEALTH. CARS, PLANES, TRAINS, FOOD, TO NAME A FEW — SO I WOULD THINK IF A GUN CONTROL LAW WAS THE NORM TODAY — IT COULD PROMPT LAWS TO CONTROL OUR LIVES BEYOND THE ISSUE OF GUN CONTROL. WHICH WOULD BE A NO-NO ALSO.

By all means, leave your 2 bobs worth

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s