Guns fight off repression

  • Follow Letters

I have listened to and talked with various people about the government wanting to institute new gun-control policies. Some want guns gone, and some say it is OK to have some guns for hunting or self-protection but no so-called “assault weapons.”

The Second Amendment to the Constitution is not aimed at hunting, nor is it aimed at self-protection from individuals. It is strictly aimed at the people being able to defend themselves against a repressive government – which we are slowly getting under this administration, with that socialist in the White House, along with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid and their kind.

If the government has assault weapons, then the people need access to them to put down a repressive government. They need the same firepower. There should be no limit on what law-abiding citizens should have access to.

What needs to be done is to punish those who take guns and injure or kill people. For example, the individual who shot up the movie theater in Colorado. Have a hearing before a judge, have the judge render a sentence, then execute him – or turn him over to the families of the victims. It would send a message to others, and the taxpayers would not have to pay for room and board, attorneys, medical treatment, etc.

I have no problem with state-operated background checks. They should be done. I do have a problem with federal checks and guidelines, as it is obvious how out of control the federal government gets. Hitler confiscated guns in Germany, and what happened? If any politician votes to eliminate the rights of law-abiding citizens, then vote them out, or if they want people’s guns let them personally go from door to door and attempt to collect them. I can assure that they would not like the results, because I know what part of the gun most people would let them have.

Guns do not kill – people do! I have a number of guns in my home, and several could be considered assault weapons based on some of the descriptions I have heard. I carry a sidearm at all times; it is for my protection and those around me. Like it or not, people believe a confrontation with an overbearing government is coming, and it is – and I for one am prepared.

A state does not need the permission of the federal government to secede from the union. It is up to each state and its citizens. Read the opinion of Chief Justice Salmon P. Chase right after the War of Northern Aggression against the South; he stated that there was not anything in the Constitution prohibiting states from leaving the Union.

Donald Turner

Grovetown

Comments (2) Add comment
ADVISORY: Users are solely responsible for opinions they post here and for following agreed-upon rules of civility. Posts and comments do not reflect the views of this site. Posts and comments are automatically checked for inappropriate language, but readers might find some comments offensive or inaccurate. If you believe a comment violates our rules, click the "Flag as offensive" link below the comment.
deestafford
25458
Points
deestafford 02/03/13 - 09:38 am
2
0
Excellent letter.

When people talk about the background checks and how they are for them don't really understand what that entails. To say there is a gunshow loophole is false. If a person is a licienced dealer they must do a background check no matter where the sale takes place. Now, if I want to sell a gun to my neighbor, friend, or brother I don't need to do a background check because it is not required for private sales. Therefore, I can go to a gunshow and sell as a private individual. If this universal background check goes into effect one would have to give private information up to those who are not currently authorized to have it. Do you want to give your private info including your SSN to someone. You may not be able to will a firearm to a grandson or neice without a background check. The figure of 40% of weapons are obtained without background checks is a bogus number because it was done prior to the Brady Bill and the required mandatory checks were in placed for licienced dealers. Once again, they are preying on low-information, emotional voters.

dichotomy
31704
Points
dichotomy 02/03/13 - 12:44 pm
2
0
Can anyone explain what a

Can anyone explain what a "universal" background check really is. I would understand a "mandatory" background check....or simply a background check......but I am always suspicious when the government puts an unexplained, unnecessary, undefined term in front of self-explanatory requirement.

Back to Top

Top headlines

Outlet mall plans canceled

Ben Carter Enterprises has decided not to pursue a fashion outlet mall at the Village at Riverwatch development.
Search Augusta jobs