Evan Todd speaks out on this issue on Fox News…
Please share this post with your friends and comment below. If you haven’t already, take a moment to sign up for our free newsletter above and friend us on Twitter and Facebook to get real time updates.
Follow @WestJournalism
Loading ...
The Founders – Framers – Ratifiers all knew that the Central Federal government must be small and limited [weak] and the States should be strong and unlimited . . the following is how we the people can take our Freedoms and Liberties back . . will you do it? It is long past time to act.
http://articlevprojecttorestoreliberty.com/
I feel sorry for this young man. I’m willing to bet that he will get all kinds of hate mail, especially on facebook and twitter. Wouldn’t be too surprised if they don’t threaten his life. I pray I am wrong
The progressives don’t care what we think, they want us dis-armed for their NWO bosses. Right now they are just trying to push registration past everyone. They pile up all these same horrendous bills knowing the Rep.’s will settle for that and maybe smaller mag.’s. Do not compromise with these crooks, their ultimate plan is to dis-arm America, those are their orders period.
Mr. Todd makes a strong and valid point. He brings up a good point, one that has not been discussed nearly enough – he points out “cultural problems”. Another valid point – protecting the children. Can’t do that in a gun-free zone. Yes, there was an armed guard at Columbine, but one person cannot always defend numerous innocents from murdering evil. Let everyone carry – train them, teach them respect for guns, make them practice often if they carry – bet a dollar to a donut that these mass shootings would cease.
All this endless talk about gun control is maddening, especially since the vast majority of gun restrictions that have been proposed are totally irrational. For example, possession of an AR-15 will continue to be legal if it was obtained prior to it becoming illegal. The same twisted logic will also allow the continued purchase of an AR-15 if it is absent a pistol grip.
Many other examples could be given that reflect not only irrational thinking, but a total lack of knowledge of the features of various types of weapons such as the semi-automatic AR-15 and it’s identical twin, the M-16, which unlike the AR-15, is fully automatic capable.
The only sensible argument for stricter controls is that fully automatic weapons, such as the Thompson sub-machine gun, have been strictly regulated since 1934 with the passing of the National Firearms Act (NFA), so why can’t others now be regulated as well?
The answer to that and other questions was attempted in 2012 by Supreme Court Justice Scalia. He stated, (inconclusively in my opinion) that “dangerous and unusual” firearms, such as M-16 rifles, military-style assault weapons, extended magazines, cop-killer bullets and universal background checks would likely all be permitted under the Second Amendment. However, he did not single out the AR-15 or other semi-automatic weapons and, like all others to date, he did not adequately define an “assault weapon.”
Conditions that made the NFA possible during Prohibition do not exist today, i.e., there are no turf wars and Tommy guns being fired indiscriminately by bootleggers on city streets. However, never letting a crisis go to waste, gun control advocates, led by President Obama, are hanging their hats on recent mass murders, but without mentioning that their killers, like many others before them, were mentally unstable and, as previously stated, that currently owned and even new AR-15s will still be legal. And, contrary to the intent of the Second Amendment, which clearly was to give citizens the right to own and bear arms for defense against a tyrannical government and nothing else, President Obama focuses only on hunting, target shooting and protection against home invasion.
Of course, only flintlock rifles and pistols were available when the Second Amendment was passed, so it is now not unreasonable to question which of the many different types of weapons that exist in millions of households, should or should not have Second Amendment protection.
My answer is that all law abiding citizens should have the same right of self protection that government officials and their families have as provided by the Secret Service, with the exception of existing prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession. To that end, all of our hand-wringing politicians need to get off of their soap boxes and instead of fear mongering, focus on getting the mentally ill off of the streets. After all, they are the ones doing the mass killings.