Subject:
|
Re: Gun Control, Unnessesary Evil
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Wed, 25 Jul 2001 15:28:57 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
1039 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Mike Petrucelli writes:
> > Now that I have my ability to post again...
> >
> > The whole idea of gun control (regardless of what the majority belive) is
> > uncostitutional.
>
> If you are correct, why not just make it costitutional?
Because Gun Control is wrong. Did you read the rest of the post.
>
> Scott A
>
> > Our founding father's in their infinite wisdom drafted the
> > constitution to protect everyone's rights from the tyranny of the majority.
> >
> > The major flaw with the idea of gun control is that in does not actually work
> > the way the masses are led to belive it would. If total gun control were
> > instituted, it would serve to insure that only criminals would have guns.
> > Understand that well over 90 percent of guns used in crimes are not obtained
> > legally anyway. I am not a member of the NRA nor do I support them, but I do
> > agree with the NRA's one core belief. Guns should not be punished, criminals
> > should. The fact that over 10,000 crimes a year involve guns is the staple
> > statistic of the Gun Control advocates. Of course they conviently ignore the
> > fact that over 2 million crimes are prevented every year by armed citizens.
> > Gun Control advocates no doubt pretend that statistic is NRA propaganda.
> >
> > The three biggest supporters of Gun Control in the 20th century are: Adolf
> > Hittler, Joe Stalin, and that Chineese guy whose name I cannot even pronounce
> > let alone spell. Sarah Brady (founder of Handgun Control Inc.) was qouted in
> > the 80's stating: "Socialist America cannot be realized untill those who • would
> > oppose us have been totally disarmed." I personally would love to know why
> > everyone pretends she never said that. The common response to the
> > aforementioned is along the lines of: "Nazi America, that's preposterous."
> >
> > The United States Gun Control Act of 1968 is virtually word for word • identical
> > to the translated Nazi Weapons Law of 1938. The main thing this law
> > establishes in the government registration of firearms. (Jewish handgun • owners
> > were among the first to be rounded up.)
> >
> > I have read journalists' columns about how the right to bear arms is not a
> > significant right like free speach or freedom of the press. They are mindless
> > puppets. The right to bear arms is the single most important right. It alone
> > empowers the people to protect the rest of their rights.
> >
> > There are 3 types of laws that I abide by. The first and fore most is God's
> > law. The second is constitutional law. The third is common saftey law • (traffic
> > laws for example) A common saftey law is only valid if it does not • contradict
> > constitutional law. Constitiutional law must not contradict God's law.
> > Everything else does not apply to anyone as far as I am concerned. For the
> > most part what occurs in D.C. is hot air with no sustenance. Fortunately for
> > me and everyone else remotly concered with our individual rights the majority
> > will never be able to take them away. For that we must give thanks to our
> > founding fathers.
> >
> > -Mike Petrucelli
> >
> > WARNING! Short rant follows, read at your own risk.
> >
> > The correct translation from Hebrew is "Thou shalt not murder." As murder is
> > defined as killing an innocent, it is impossible to murder a criminal.
> > Personally I am still trying to figure out why it is illegal to fire an RPG • at
> > a car conducting a drive-by shooting. Ah well what should I expect from a
> > society that belives convicted murderers have rights.
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
Message is in Reply To:
16 Messages in This Thread:
  
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
