Extortion by Gun Grabbers

North Korea is pretending to be crazy and expecting us to once again provide millions or billions of dollars in aid in return for backing down from their pretend stance; in other words they are using extortion.  This is precisely what the gun grabbers are doing in this case.  Pretend to take an extreme position and then settle for whatever you can get.  The problem, as I see it, is twofold:

 1. The gun grabbers do not understand that the Second Amendment was written to prevent, or if needed repel tyranny. (There were 56 million people murdered in the last 100 years by their own government after their firearms were taken away!)   

2. All of the proposed weapons’ bans and background checks would not have prevented the Newtown Tragedy.  It is upsetting that so many people have fallen for the Obama-Biden-Feldstein Theater without realizing the futility (or lack of logic) in it.    Yes, it is terribly sad that some nut case harmed school children but the solution lies not in attacking our Second Amendment Rights.  That is tantamount to outlawing cars because a few drunk drivers have misused them.  Stop thinking with your emotion and use your God given brains!

Bob Cushman

Northville

Views: 24

Comment

You need to be a member of Rattle With Us Tea Party to add comments!

Join Rattle With Us Tea Party

Comment by ed cassi on April 15, 2013 at 10:25pm

If a person really wants a weapon there are a lot of bad guys ready to provide them.  I'm not sure background checks will provide the real information needed to predict a person's future behavior.  The patient doctor confidentiality laws would have to be violated.  Therapists might have to provide the names of patients that visited them to a central data base but nothing else.  So would the goverment ban everyone that had visited a therapist from purchasing a weapon without knowing the reason for the visit?  If that should happen it would set a precedent for more attacks on the Constitution

Comment by Tom on April 15, 2013 at 10:04pm

Common sense isn't common any more, Bob. 

In 2005, the Supreme Court ruled that it is not the responsibility of law enforcement to protect us. http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html?_r=0

If law enforcement isn't responsible, who is? 

When I confront a gun grabber, I ask, "Do you have fire extinguishers in your home?" If they say yes, I ask them, "Why? You have the fire department to put out fires." 

We have fire extinguishers in our homes to handle the immediate threat. Gas stations have huge fire extinguishers above the pumps because the threat is bigger there than in your kitchen. 

We have guns because when seconds count, the police are minutes away. Besides that, they are not obligated by law to protect us.

Now we have Bills proposing smaller capacity magazines. What if the immediate threat requires more than 10 rounds? Their answer would be that you will be collateral damage on the way to total control.

© 2019   Created by Liberty Belle.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service