[lit-ideas] Re: Feeling Safe isn't safe
- From: "Lawrence Helm" <lawrencehelm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- To: <lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 1 May 2007 11:33:04 -0700
Paul:
It is interesting that you find some of our rights outdated. How
condescending of you. They likelihood that we may ever have a tyranny may
be low, but so what? Our founding fathers were worried about it. The world
still has tyrannies. Nothing in existence precludes having one here.
Thanks for your interest, but we'll just keep our Second Amendment until
human nature changes.
I'm not extending the Second Amendment to anything. I'm describing why the
Second Amendment exists, but it exists now because we are free men. It
exists because we the people have the power here in America - at least so
far. Yes, I know you'd like us to give up our guns and become like
Europeans, but it isn't our way - at least not the way of most of us -
although Leftist-pacifistic beliefs in big-government which controls people
from cradle to grave is making inroads here as it is in Europe.
Do you really think the world is no so safe and peaceful that Americans can
give up their guns? I know Europeans and their cohorts, guarded by
gun-toting Americans during the Cold War think that we should dispense with
them. They have a lot of opinions we find strange. We don't need to
justify why we have guns. We have them because we are entitled to them. I
would rather ask why you don't have them? Doesn't your government trust
you with them? We on the other hand don't trust leaders that want to take
this right away from us - that may be why none of the front runners in the
current presidential race are proposing anything so ludicrous.
Notice you frothingly all the Leftist Pacifists have glommed onto
gun-control slogans and don't want to trace this train back to its
inception, the killing of 32 people by the Nutcase Cho in a state that
entitles anyone who qualifies to carry a concealed weapon EXCEPT IN VIRGINIA
TECH WHICH WAS DECLARED A GUN FREE ZONE! Would Cho have even attempted
his rampage had not Virginian Tech disarmed itself? Probably not.
Lawrence
From: lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:lit-ideas-bounce@xxxxxxxxxxxxx]
On Behalf Of Paul Stone
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2007 9:34 AM
To: lit-ideas@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [lit-ideas] Re: Feeling Safe isn't safe
Lawrence:
Since gun control advocates have attempted to institute legislation favoring
their position, this matter has been hotly debated in congress from time to
time, but the fact that the founding fathers, the originators of the Second
Amendment meant a certain thing by it weighs heavily against gun control and
gun control makes little headway. The above is an analysis from a
congressional subcommittee on gun control. It is especially interesting
because in it one can find a history of the thinking that led up to the
Second Amendment.
The Second Amendment seems to be as outdated and as relevant as the "rules"
in The Bible against eating certain things or menstruating women attending
church. The liklihood that the reason that you need a gun is to form an
armed militia against a tyrannical government is very low. It's interesting
that the answer to "why do you have a gun?" and "why should you be allowed
to have a gun?" are very different. The answer to the first is so you can
shoot people if they "get too close" or try to take your stuff. The answer
to the second is because your fore-fathers lived in a renegade society where
you needed to be able to form militias against certain other factions... and
now you extend it to the ludicrous argument: so you can shoot _government_
people if they try to take your stuff.
paul
Other related posts:
