Preserve our gun rights

  • Follow Letters

The gun control issue seems to be a priority media event. From my perspective, blaming the gun for murder is like me blaming food for my being overweight.

The primary purpose of the Second Amendment was for citizens to be able to protect against a tyrannical government. Now I am sure guns played an important part in providing food and protection. Guns are designed for different purposes. I hunted most of my life, and my guns were designed for hunting.

When I got to an age at which I enjoyed watching wild animals more than shooting them, I sold my guns and purchased guns designed for home defense. I currently have no need for high-capacity magazines or assault rifles. However, if I was concerned about defending myself from a tyrannical government, those would be my next purchase, and I would stockpile a lot of ammo.

At 67, I don’t think that will happen in my lifetime, but our forefathers knew that governments evolve and tyranny is always a threat. Our nation is changing at a rate that concerns me. Let our law-abiding citizens keep their Second Amendment rights to own and bear arms. To our apathetic citizens: Get involved, and keep this the greatest and freest nation on earth.

Comments (13) 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.
Jon Lester
2297
Points
Jon Lester 02/12/13 - 02:54 am
3
2
Lately, I'm careful to use quotation marks

when speaking of "assault rifles" and "high-capacity" magazines, because those terms exist arbitrarily, and don't make literal sense. A deer rifle is more accurate, over a longer range, with .30/7.62mm ammo than a Kalashnikov of the same caliber, to give you just one example of how terminology has been abused by gun control advocates. I also do it because, were I accept the other side's sneaky semantics, I would make myself more prone to accept "compromise" of a right I have that's pretty plainly defined in the Constitution. Besides, why can't I, as a private citizen, develop the same skill set that law enforcement personnel do with semi-automatic rifles and 30-round magazines? Wouldn't I, in easily conceivable situations, be safer knowing something I can do while I wait for first responders?

carcraft
25791
Points
carcraft 02/12/13 - 06:32 am
1
2
Indeed Jon and as has been

Indeed Jon and as has been pointed out many times a pawn shop owner in Aiken required an "assault " type weapon a couple of years ago when people drove their car into the shop and he had to fend them off. An asteriod is headed our way as we speak and there is concern it may knock out some communication, what happens when ATMs quit working suddenly?

Techfan
6461
Points
Techfan 02/12/13 - 07:30 am
3
4
" what happens when ATMs quit

" what happens when ATMs quit working suddenly?" Wait a few hours. If you can't, you probably didn't need it anyway. Unless it's your insulin and then the pharmacy would probably work something out.

grouse
1635
Points
grouse 02/12/13 - 08:21 am
0
1
Ah me, another gun owner who
Unpublished

Ah me, another gun owner who thinks he can beat the US Military with his little arsenal! Actually, Mr. Field, there are times when you can blame the food you put in your mouth for all times of health-related problems, which is why food labeling is important -- and still inadequate.

Little Lamb
45870
Points
Little Lamb 02/12/13 - 09:11 am
4
3
Single Shot, Bolt Action

Aren't those the weapons of choice for professional long-range snipers? Wouldn't a single shot, bolt-action rifle be considered an "assault rifle" if it were actually fired at a human being?

Tonight is Obama's fifth State of the Union address. He has achieved little of substance in four years, but tonight he will ask for re-instatement of a formerly-discredited assault weapons ban from the 1990s. That ban did not stop assaults, and neither will Joe's and Barry's ban.

Instead of implementing weapons policies that attack law-abiding gun owners, why not try implementing policies that are aimed at criminals only? Didn't Augusta praise Sheriff Ronnie Strength for the sting operations that netted hundreds of weapons owned by criminals and got most of those criminals back behind bars? How about the feds try some sting operations instead of banning inanimate objects?

How about data mining health records to identify mentally ill persons with tendencies toward violence? Then, follow them around and arrest them for jaywalking to get them out of society's hair. There are lots of things Obama could do that might actually prevent a shooting instead of banning some objects, which will not prevent said shootings.

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 02/12/13 - 09:24 am
3
3
"Wait a few hours. If you
Unpublished

"Wait a few hours. If you can't, you probably didn't need it anyway."

And if it doesn't? Trampling on someone Constitutional rights is the answer?

GnipGnop
12227
Points
GnipGnop 02/12/13 - 10:02 am
6
1
One of the problems is...

light sentencing. If you are convicted felon in possesion of a gun it should be a mandatory life sentence with no parole. That should be the sentence whether you are 14 or 40. How many times do we read that these senseless shootings are committed by people that have already had multiple brushes with the law? They should be locked away and prisons should be punishment. Funny how liberals think the cruel and unusual punishment part of the 8th amendment of the constitution should be follwed to the letter but not the 2nd amendment.

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 02/12/13 - 10:05 am
5
3
Why do people want to ban so
Unpublished

Why do people want to ban so many things that they don't feel you "need", but are entitled to have? I don't see them trying to ban cars that are able to go over the speed limit. No one "needs" one....right? And you don't even have a constitutional right to a car.

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 02/12/13 - 10:06 am
4
2
True, gnip gnop....and "cruel
Unpublished

True, gnip gnop....and "cruel and unusual" has some gray area. "Shall not be infringed" has none.

Little Lamb
45870
Points
Little Lamb 02/12/13 - 10:14 am
4
3
"Need"

Right, Angela. No one "needs" a vacation home. You can just stay in a Motel 6 when you go on vacation.

No one "needs" to pay someone else to paint her nails. Let's have a nail salon ban come from the State of the Union speech tonight!
- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Edited to add: Oh, yes, I forgot about the thing Obama hates more than anything else: No one "needs" a private jet. Air Force One belongs to the people.

soapy_725
43676
Points
soapy_725 02/12/13 - 11:23 am
0
0
Just for the sake of history and arguement.
Unpublished

Preserving gun rights did not help former Revolutionary War heroes protesting unfair taxes from being attacked by the Federal Army in the 1790's.

Gun rights did not save the WWI veterans protesting unfair treatment in Washington DC.

Guns rights did not save the Confederacy as it protested unfair policies.

Guns rights did not prevent the POTUS from using national guard troops to over rule state laws in Arkansas and Alabama.

Are we being deceived again? Are gun rights the issue for our emerging totalitarian state? Gun related homicide is not the real issue since Chicago stats are ignored?

Pray and get right with God. There is a political beast on the horizon like none before. And there is a church like never before that will sing the praises of the beast. One world government and one world church. One and the same enslaving power.

itsanotherday1
42933
Points
itsanotherday1 02/12/13 - 11:33 am
4
1
Correct GnipGnop

I've had that same opinion for a long time; make illegal possession penalties very onerous, and illegal possession while committing a crime a life sentence.
I would also go hard after the people who sell to criminals. Every day, there are trunkloads of guns headed up I-95 from Fla, Ga, and Va. Who are they acquiring these guns from? Something in the system is broken if a dealer in Ludowici is selling 25 pistols at the time to one guy.

deestafford
27522
Points
deestafford 02/12/13 - 12:18 pm
3
1
"Assault Weapons" are not only

to be used against a tyrannical govenment but for personal protection as well. Recall the Korean standing with an AR 15 on the roof of his store to protect it during the LA riots. His was the only one spared from the rioters. How about the people in New Orleans during Katrina who had to protect themselves and their property from looters and thugs? And what was the response of the liberal mayor of NO? Take people's guns away...an illegal act of course.

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 02/12/13 - 12:24 pm
2
2
I would like for just one
Unpublished

I would like for just one liberal to try to justify why I shouldn't be allowed to own what he defines as an "assault weapon."

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 02/12/13 - 12:26 pm
3
2
I agree with you, deestafford....
Unpublished

except that the guy in the LA riot didn't have an assault rifle. He had an AR-15.

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 02/12/13 - 03:07 pm
2
2
What part of "shall not be
Unpublished

What part of "shall not be infringed" do they not understand.

http://www.lectlaw.com/files/gun01.htm

faithson
5157
Points
faithson 02/12/13 - 04:39 pm
2
2
drivers license...

pray tell what is wrong with just registering and keeping track, it happens in so many ways these days, so what to report my 4 shotguns and pistol to the authorities, I have nothing to hide. Should insurrection arise, I have plenty of double ot and feel very confident I can defend myself and wife.

allhans
23626
Points
allhans 02/12/13 - 05:22 pm
1
2
TONIGHT OBAMA will ask for

TONIGHT OBAMA will ask for more money to create more temporary jobs...always temporary jobs....it looks good when jobs are added and who notices when those same jobs are eliminated.

He'll talk about building bridges, highways, fast transit systems ...we heard it all in 2008...It didn't work then and it won't work now.
His only interest is in making himself look good..after all; he will soon be gone...laughing all the way to his mansion in Hawaii.

Darby
25578
Points
Darby 02/12/13 - 05:53 pm
2
1
"Wouldn't a single shot, bolt-action rifle be considered....

an "assault rifle" if it were actually fired at a human being?" Said Little Lamb and she's right.

As used today, "assault weapon" is nothing more than a political definition. If you want to split hairs, ANY weapon used in an assault would be an assault weapon. That could include the AK-47, but could also include the old but dependable, bolt action Springfield '03. Or for that matter the single shot Italian 6.5 mm Carcano rifle used by Lee Harvey Oswald to kill JFK.

I've often thought about that too. The one weapon that caused the most shock and world-wide grief and upheaval ever on this entire planet, was a simple bolt action rifle that a competent gunsmith could have built from scratch in his garage workshop.

Politicians who would deny citizens the rights granted under the Constitution use a very flexible definition for assault which changes more often than most of them change their underwear.

Darby
25578
Points
Darby 02/12/13 - 06:01 pm
6
1
"pray tell what is wrong with just registering....

and keeping track"

If you really want to know what's wrong there, just go back and read your history. If you register your weapons, the "authorities" know where to go to get them.. and if they feel the need, that's exactly what will happen. And that's exactly what has happened down through history.

If they don't know where (and how many) the guns are, they will think long and hard before trying to take them away.

bumblebeerose
682
Points
bumblebeerose 02/13/13 - 04:06 am
0
0
Ban Everything!!!! That is where we are headed!!!!

At the rate the government is going everything will be banned. 32 oz drinks, guns, I thought we lived in a country with "Freedom Of Choice".

Why is it that people fail to see the gun did not shoot that bullet that killed someone a person had to pull the trigger. Please understand I think we need background checks and things like that in place to keep them out of the wrong hands but I also think like most people we need to enforce the laws we already have. The government does not enforce the laws on the books now making more laws is not going to fix this it is only going to create more confusion.

If the punishment were to fit the crime and jails were not like Holiday Inns maybe things would not be this bad, but when a felon just gets a slap on the wrist for being arrested and having a gun on them what reason do they have to do the right things.

Darby,
I agree with you on the registering part if you register them the criminals know where to come and get them.

Humble Angela
41338
Points
Humble Angela 02/16/13 - 07:55 am
1
0
I would have no problem
Unpublished

I would have no problem registering all my firearms IF I were given some reason to believe that the Government would not use that list for nefarious reasons......What has the Government done to earn that trust?

Back to Top

Top headlines

Former commissioner's case remains under review

While former Augusta commissioner Donnie Smith's statements to Georgia State Patrol investigators likely can't be used against him, the state Office of the Inspector General continues to conduct ...
Search Augusta jobs