- The Second Amendment speaks of a "well regulated malitia". Unfortunately, at VT, the well regulated malitia - those who had training and licenses to carry concealed weapons - were disarmed by the VT "gun free zone" regulations.
(Posted on May 6, 2007, 11:12 pm Carl Hickman)
- Just a few comments:
1. This response is entirely my own. It was not prompted by the NRA or any other organization.
2. The Second Amendment has nothing whatsoever to do with hunting.
3. The highest levels of gun violence are seen in jurisdictions where the fundamental right to arms is restricted. Atrocities occur in zones where none may lawfully bear arms and all are therefore defenseless.
4. No one but liberals constructing straw men have argued that everyone should carry weapons. But clearly, if adults could carry weapons at their own discretion, the chances of stopping a crazed murderer would be improved. Some of those at the scene would have a better option than either running or dying like a sheep.
5. This is not Australia, Britain, continental Europe or Canada. We have a different history and a very different culture. Comparisons lack meaning and advice from foreigners is unwelcome, especially advice from areas America saved from conquest by force of arms.
6. Politicians are not enthusiastic about enacting additional ineffective restrictions on the constitutional right to arms because they have learned that those doing so often lose their cushy positions. Witness the salubrious example made of Tom Foley, once Speaker of the House.
7. With respect to firearms, you imply those not specifically designed for hunting are useful only for murder. I use mine for casual plinking and could use them for competitions if I cared to. If you will not tell me what sporting goods I can possess, I will refrain from attempting to forbid you yours.
(Posted on May 6, 2007, 11:12 pm Montana Libertarian)
|
