Posts Tagged ‘second amendment’

It’s funny to look back in time and determine where people stood on issues 20, 50 or 200 years ago and then compare the modern day stances on the same issues.  Societal changes, shifting demographics and changes in technology and the ramifications of these changes rippling through society as a whole, sometimes leave me surprised and confused.

Let’s talk about the latest battleground forming in our nation today; The Second Amendment to the Constitution of the United States.

Until just a few short years ago, guns in society were rarely considered.  It was just assumed that most people had guns and knew how to use them.  I grew up with guns in our home.  It was no big deal.  My father taught my brother and me how to properly use a gun, care for it, and ABOVE ALL, respect it.  I personally took a 12 gauge shotgun to school for use in a school play and actually shot it (with the metal shot removed from the shells of course) during the play!  Guess what?  No one was surprised and no one even checked my shells to verify they were empty.  In that era, even adults placed faith in 17 year olds that they were being responsible with weapons.

Until 40 or 50 years ago, guns were a primary means in putting food on tables in a majority of homes in America.  Guns were tools that were used responsibly, for the most part.  Once again, they were no big deal.

Now, it seems, guns ARE a big deal.  Why?  Because some crackpot idiot decided to STEAL guns and massacre 20 children and 8 adults in the most recent act of craziness.  It’s not JUST Newtown, CT.  Its Columbine, Jonesboro, Aurora, etc., as well as Tyrifjorden Buskerud, Norway, Baku, Azerbaijan and Dunblane, Scotland.  If you think crazy is limited to America, then you are nuts as well.

You might think that this is the reason that gun control is all you hear about on the news these days.  Well, it’s not.  I have news for you.  These “crazies” would have killed people with a knife, ball bat or a damn rock if that is what they could get their hand on.  The reason that our Federal Government is so up in arms over guns is simple….control…

I hear people say that we need to ban “military STYLE assault rifles”. Why?  Because they LOOK like an automatic weapon.  Guess what?  They are NOT automatic weapons.  Honestly, you can do as much damage with your Dad’s 30.06 deer rifle as you can with a Bushmaster XM 15 rifle.  It might take you an extra 3-4 seconds to change out the clips since they hold only 5 rounds, but I can carry 20 to 30 full clips with no problem whatsoever.  All this talk about limiting clips to 10 rounds or less is no more than political scare tactics.

It’s about time that our elected officials start talking about the REAL meaning of the 2nd Amendment and quit all the beating around the bush.  They act like stating a fact is treason.  The simple truth is that the 2nd Amendment authorizes We The People to protect ourselves and our country from a tyrannical government…end of story.  It does not mention or even allude to hunting or self-defense from other citizens.  You see, our Founding Fathers were not worried about hunting….that was a daily chore.  They were not worried about self-defense from other citizens…they all had guns and most of them were responsible and trustworthy citizens.  Our Founding Fathers were fighting a war of independence from a TYRANNICAL GOVERNMENT!  The BRITISH!  GET IT PEOPLE??????  These men, in their infinite wisdom, saw fit to delineate a physical object (the ONLY physical object listed in our Bill of Rights) as the ONE tangible object REQUIRED to overthrow a tyrannical government!  ARMS……

Now, if you consider the 2nd Amendment in this light, what makes you think that our Founding Fathers would even consider allowing the People to be armed with weapons that do military style weapon cartoonnot even come close to matching the weaponry that the government possesses?  They would not.  That would be like saying, “Well, the British have flintlock rifles, so we need to fight our battles against them with the bow and arrow”!  Now, exactly how much sense does that make?  None whatsoever!  That would be a totally stupid statement to make, and even an idiot should realize it.

Our Federal Government has NO right under the Constitution to limit the people’s access to weapons and has even less of a mandate to know WHO possess these arms!

It is impossible to overthrow a tyrannical government with sub-standard weapons.  It is also foolish of the People to inform the same government as to who owns weapons that could be used in overthrowing it.

Does this now make sense to everyone?

Alas, probably not…  I understand that Progressives will, for some reason, disagree with even the simplest of arguments.  Just as they cannot usually see that lower tax rates generate MORE taxes in the long run, they will refuse to see that our Founders foresaw that, at some point, the People MAY have to resort to putting its own Federal government back in line.

If, for any reason, you don’t believe the obvious, PLEASE consult an expert.  I can tell you who the experts are that can give you first-hand information regarding banning guns and documented gun ownership…

Gun Control 1

Ask a Russian…ask a Chinese…ask a North Korean…maybe a German!

In the grand scheme, it should not be a question of WHAT kind of arms I can own.  The answer should be anything I can afford.

I’m finished now….  I have to get back to work to make the next payment on my Tomahawk Missile.

Chatter Now Decoded.




Excuse Me?

Posted: January 8, 2013 by G. Byron Barrett in Constitution, Second Amendment
Tags: , , ,

Well, as usual, I cannot leave well enough alone…I have read the comments regarding my colleague’s post “The Sad, Unspoken Truth” by Dr. DA (this chick IS a PHD, right?  OPS….well, WTF…let’s call her Dr. anyway and let the “DA” stand for itself) and I am astonished, as usual, at the lack of original thought, lack of research and the plethora of bad grammar in her woefully poor attempt to debate with Ms. Watkins.

Shall we dissect just the last comments by Dr. DA?  Okie-Dokie then……  😉Iroquois

“The biggest fear our founding fathers had was against the native Americans (Indians)”.  Huh?

Now Dr. DA, you cannot truly believe that Indians were a greater worry to our fore-fathers than the English.  Can you???  If we follow this reasoning, we would have declared our independence from the Iroquois Confederacy instead of the English Crown.  I cannot remember seeing ANYWHERE where the Indians levied taxes, quartered soldiers or exercised naval blockades against Colonial America.  But the British DID…

She also states,the idea of this “tyrannical government’ is more modern history, the truth is that Britain governed us with a velvet glove, the majority of our taxes were self Declaration of Independenceinflected”.  (Even though you are wrong Doc, don’t you mean self-inflicted? Hello spell-check!) Evidently Dr. DA has failed to READ the Declaration of Independence.  If she did, you might have noticed the section that starts “The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world” and THEN lists not one, but TWENTY-SEVEN SPECIFIC instances (FACTS) of tyranny.

Also, I guess the definition of “velvet glove” would be, in Dr. DA’s opinion, a British occupying force exceeding 75,000 troops including a MINIMUM of 30,000 hired mercenaries.  Nothing says Velvet like a paid German contract killer!  Add to this, 160,000+ British Naval troops pirating American vessels and blockading Colonial ports and I would be forced to disagree with Dr. DA that the British were a kindly bunch of blokes with America’s best interest at heart.

And Doctor…regarding your asinine statement that “the majority of our taxes were self inflected”; if you were familiar with British governance (or cared to research), you would know that Parliament authorized the levying of taxation for any of the colonies of the Crown.

Now, let’s get to the meat of this discussion…the 2nd Amendment. 2ndAmendment

Dr. DA states, ” But the biggest disconnect you have is that our founding fathers ever envisioned the weapons 200+ years in the future. For you or anyone to propose that they ever thought the AK47 would exist and that each citizen should have the right to own one is the real shame, my point back day one was that WAS not the intent of the 2nd Amendment”.  Hogwash!

For once and for all, let me explain to everyone the real intention of the 2nd Amendment to the Constitution…  When government becomes tyrannical, WE THE PEOPLE have the RIGHT to use our WEAPONS to abolish the government and start a new one.  I’ll go you one better even…We The People have the RESPONSIBILITY and the CONSTITUTIONAL AUTHORITY to do this!!!!!

I have no idea where people came up with the notion that the 2nd Amendment has ANYTHING to do with hunting or self-protection from other citizens.  The 2nd Amendment has nothing whatsoever to do with these things.  It ONLY addresses the ability of the governed to fight the government for their rights.

Now Doc, you say that the Founders never envisioned AK47’s…and that may well be true.  However, we had some pretty sharp cookies founding our beloved country.  Ben Franklin, Thomas Jefferson, George Washington ALL had damn good imaginations…hell, they IMAGINED a free country called the United States of America didn’t they?  Now, they may not have dreamed of a weapon that could fire 30 shots per second, but I can damn well tell you that they would have one in their gun safe!  What I am saying is that while they may not have imagined the devastating weapons we have created in the last 200+ years, they would DEMAND that We The People had access to the same weapons used by the military.  Think about it for a second without a conservative OR liberal bias…without the same weapons as the military, what chance would We The People have against a government gone awry?  NONE AT ALL!  The Founding Fathers provided We The People with the RIGHT to be as well armed as the military with the 2nd Amendment!

knife_in_handAs a close to her uneducated comments, Dr. DA then wants to get a personal jab against Ms. Watkins.  She states, “As for your suggestion that the professors with PhD’s (which since you declined to answer, can only make me assume you don’t have) are rewriting history to accommodate ones agenda liberal or otherwise … only tells me that perhaps you might be accusing them based on your own agenda. See educators become such to educate, not become well known, I wonder if you can say you have such a pure heart”?  REALLY?

I, in my many years of education, have seen a multitude of professors.  While all of them had PhD’s, not all of them have the sense to open an umbrella when it rains.  Regardless of what you may think, ALL educators do NOT become such to educate.  Some, and probably most, wish to promote their own agenda and opinion as opposed to stating facts to their charges.  Open any high school or college textbook and see how long it takes you to find a mistake or an outright lie.  It will not take long.  I have read many of these and have confronted your so-called “professors” with the facts before.  Some will argue and some will admit the problem, depending, of course, on the veracity of their character and ethics.  History is re-written every day and it is the duty of everyone to call it out and educate our children and young adults with actual facts…. not liberal OR conservative fiction!

I have not seen where Ms. Watkins stated that she was a PhD.  Why should that matter?  Is research LIMITED to the hallowed PhD?  God, I hope not….  because most of them are your standard, garden variety idiots, spouting opinion as fact and taking umbrage to being called out to face the facts and being found wanting.  I’ll take Ms. Watkins research over that of Larry, Curly and Moe (Your 3 professors) any day of the week.

Ms. Watkins’s column has hundreds of comments and thousands of daily readers, so evidently she is doing something right.  I surmise that this something would be honesty, integrity, diligence and patriotism.  What do you have?