Tuesday, March 18, 2008

Second Amendment Case Hits the Supreme Court

Let the arguments begin. 

The Supreme Court is set to begin hearing arguments on the D.C. gun ban today.

According to the ban, a citizen may not own a handgun at all, and may only have a rifle or shotgun if it is unloaded, dismantled and/or locked.

Yeah. That's helpful. I'm sure the guy attacking my family will wait patiently while I reassemble and load my gun. 

Frankly, I find it fascinating that the authorities claim they don't want guns to cut down on crime. D.C. is one of the most crime-ridden cities in the U.S., so that clearly hasn't worked. 

I believe the truth lies more in the politician's fear that We The People might take Thomas
 Jefferson's advice:

 "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants."
DC city council argues than the ban is justified because "handguns have no legitimate use in the purely urban environment of the District of Columbia".

I would argue that the "purely urban environment" of D.C. makes a handgun even MORE of a necessity... 

But most importantly, who do these petty dictators think they are to tell ME what I need or don't need to protect my family?!?

Our founders outlined this right, which We The People received from God:

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not 
be infringed. 

Notice the comma separating the right of the People to keep a militia and the right of the People to bear arms?

This is where those leftists who argue that guns are only for militias get into trouble. Do they think those hack framers managed to screw up the punctuation here but nowhere else? 

Did the founders mean this:

I think not.

The bottom line is, at best these gun bans come from nanny, Code Pink, hippie types who think that if we just all hold hands and "give peace a chance," somehow all the predators out there will loose their will to attack.

At worst, it is the power-hungry politicians who want to regulate every aspect of our lives, make us dependent on them and fear our ability to defend our homes from them. Only by making us helpless will they be able to run amok unchallenged.

Let's pray that the Supreme Court does not set a precedent for that scenario! 

No comments: