Posts Tagged Guns
Another Second Amendment Victory
Posted by Scott in Constitution, Guns on May 20th, 2009
The Texas state Senate approved a bill to allow concealed carry license holders to carry firearms on public college campus classrooms and dorms.
Opponents to this bill say that violence will increase over otherwise petty issues, such as disputes over grades, love affairs, and other rivalries. They also say that it will lead to a greater incidence of suicide. They also said that the passage of Texas’ concealed carry law back in the mid-1990′s would turn the state into the wild west. It’s been over a decade since the passage of the concealed carry law, and the predicted bloodshed still has not occurred.
The bill was introduced to reinforce the second amendment right to keep and bear arms.
It also will allow college students and faculty members to defend themselves in the event of an event such as the mass murders at Virginia Tech in 2007, where 32 people were shot before the gunman decided to end his own life.
There have been other campus shootings like the one at Northern Illinois last year. As I mentioned in an earlier post, shootings like this don’t end by unarmed victims politely asking the shooter to stop, but rather by the shooter’s own accord when they meet resistance. Most often it is when they kill themselves.
The steps the Texas legislature is taking is a positive step towards making sure the state’s public campuses remain free of violence. Regardless of what the bill’s opponent’s say, if this bill becomes law, students of Texas colleges will be much more safe because of it. This bill isn’t designed to deputize the student body, but rather it is designed to enable them to protect themselves against violence. The same way that concealed carry laws protect the general public from violent attacks off campus, and the second amendment protects Americans against the government.
Loading ...
Related Posts From Conservative Posts -
Limits to Concealed Carry Laws When dealing with one's right to bear arms, there is... - Lessons Learned From The CT Firefighters The Supreme Court's ruling today in favor of the Connecticut...
Related Websites Not Affiliated With Conservative Posts - Retirement Careers, Volunteering and Public Service Looking for a retirement or second career that combines volunteering,...
-
Consumer Credit Counseling and the Law Let's be clear about two things:. First, there are millions...
Is the US Responsible for Mexico’s Problems?
Posted by Scott in Economy, Foreign Affairs, Guns on April 17th, 2009
President Obama recently visited Mexico to discuss, among other things, the escalating violence in the country, which stems from the growing drug trade.
In his visit, Obama acknowledged that the US shares a piece of the responsibility for the violence in Mexico because of the guns that get smuggled into Mexico from the US. To his credit, President Obama said he would rather concentrate his efforts on anti-smuggling laws rather than on more restrictive laws on sales of guns in the US. Although he did admit that the Clintonian Assault Weapons Ban “made sense”, but that “none of us is under the illusion that reinstating that ban would be easy, and so what we’ve focused on is how we can improve our enforcement of existing laws.” I’m reading that as a positive for now, but stay tuned I’m sure there will be more developments on that front.
Back to my original point, regarding how the US shares the responsibility for the escilating violence in Mexico. Is it our fault that the Mexican economy is in such bad shape that their people have to resort to illegal means to bring money into the country? Is it our fault that the best way for Mexicans to make an “honest” dollar is by crossing the border in to the US and working illegally? Either that or they could team up with a drug cartel and add to the already out of hand violence.
I’m failing to see how the US has caused any of this. True, many of the guns used by the drug cartels were purchased in the US and smuggled across the border. To that same logic though, couldn’t one reason that Mexico is to blame for the US drug problem?
Each country has their own unique social and economic issues, which should be addressed. It doesn’t help either situation though when blame is incorrectly placed on the wrong party. It especially doesn’t help when it’s our President blaming us for other countries problems.
Related Posts From Conservative Posts - If our Borders Weren’t Porous Enough Imagine this:You're a Mexican, living in a border town that...
- To Carry or Not to Carry? The choice of whether or not to carry a firearm...
Related Websites Not Affiliated With Conservative Posts -
Confirmed: Chief of Staff is Rahm Emanuel [/caption] This could be a sign for what's to come... - Obama On Probation: His First 3 Months Republicans - the party that wants less government but total...
It Would Never Happen to Me…
Posted by Scott in Crime/Police, Guns on April 10th, 2009
Our daily lives are full of comfortable situations. We wake up, get in the car and drive to school or work, and we feel safe there. We spend our free time with family and friends in familiar places where we also feel safe. We walk down city streets and feel safe because there are police officers there to protect us. Why would anyone ever have a need to carry a gun?
Over the last few weeks, there were several mass shootings in very public places. People who work and live in nursing homes were murdered by a lunatic in North Carolina. Those people all felt safe when they woke up that morning, and never imagined that they would be faced with a life or death situation.
In another incident a man shot random victims from his car as he drove around town. In the same incident the man killed his grandparents, aunt and uncle, a deputy’s wife and 18 month old child, in addition to the random other people. There were 10 dead in all. None of those people (especially the relatives) thought that they would be in a fight for their life that day. They were all wrong. Oh yea, he also fired about 30 rounds at police before killing himself.
So let me ask. Had any one of those victims, or at least someone nearby, had been carrying a gun, do you honestly think there would have been so many deaths? The shootings only stopped when the shooter met resistance from police. If someone had presented some form of resistance sooner, the number of deaths could have been greatly reduced.
The next time you’re walking around unarmed, think about these incidents, and how safe the victims felt immediately prior to becoming a victim. Then think to yourself “how safe do I feel right now”?
Related Posts From Conservative Posts - Clinton Gun Ban Sunsets! Finally, after 10 long years, the Clinton gun ban has...
- To Carry or Not to Carry? The choice of whether or not to carry a firearm...
Related Websites Not Affiliated With Conservative Posts - Leave people feeling better about themselves A valuable principle to keep in mind is: Leave people...
-
Perpetual Organic Link Generator Wouldn’t it be great to have a perpetual organic link...
Limits to Concealed Carry Laws
When dealing with one’s right to bear arms, there is a fine line between addressing public safety concerns and infringing on that right.
Some jurisdictions place limits on where you can carry a gun. Across the nation, it is illegal to carry a gun inside a Post Office or other Federal building. Other areas limit one’s ability to carry a gun if they are going to a restaurant that serves alcohol – regardless of whether or not that person is drinking.
Lawmakers address public safety concerns by imposing restrictions on dangerous activity. Driving while intoxicated is obviously a public safety concern, so states impose a legal limit of alcohol one can consume and still be able to drive. In a perfect world, this will help to keep the public safe, as no one will drive while intoxicated. It’s not a perfect world however, and many people break this law and drive anyway.
If there is a limit to how much one can drink and still be able to drive, why do guns get unequal treatment? After all, a car can be a deadly weapon if operated by an irresponsible driver, just as a gun can be a deadly weapon if used by an irresponsible person. If you can say that a person with a gun who goes to a restaurant that serves alcohol has the potential to be dangerous, why can’t you say the same for a person who drives to that restaurant? It doesn’t mean that the person is going to saddle up to the bar, take six shots of whiskey, have eight beers and go on a shooting rampage, just as someone wouldn’t drink that much and then get behind the wheel.
A responsible gun owner will plan ahead, and leave their gun at home if they know they’ll be drinking. Just as a responsible driver would find a designated driver before heading out to drink.
If states are going to ban firearms in establishments that serve alcohol, they should also ban people from driving to them. The public would be outraged at such a ridiculous law, that it would be shot down almost immediately (no pun intended).
Check to see if your state has laws like this and question your elected officials about them.
Related Posts From Conservative Posts - Manufacturer's Liability Should the manufacturers of the products we use everyday be...
- Give me Liberty, or I’ll Shoot! A few months ago I was having a conversation with...
Related Websites Not Affiliated With Conservative Posts -
Cyclists or Drivers: Who Really has the Right to the Roads? [/caption]If you're driving along and happen to spot a cyclist... -
Guide to Hunting Guns pt 2 ... This article is a continuation from part 1. Now...
Not That I Doubted Him, But Chuck Norris is Right!
Chuck Norris appeared on Glenn Beck’s show on Fox News. He defended the Second Amendment saying :
“The final line in the Second Amendment says, ‘The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.’
That means not by the president, not by Congress. They are not allowed to take our rights away with this because of the Second Amendment, Glenn. And the thing is, I have a 700-acre ranch in Texas. And I have a lot of guns on my ranch.
I don’t use them for hunting. I’m not a hunter. But the thing is, it’s for protection. And the Second Amendment was designed for tyranny against the government. If the government decides to become a tyrannical government, our guns are to protect us against that. And that’s really what the Second Amendment is all about, Glenn.”
Chuck is right. Without armed citizens, the government is left to run unchecked. Since the government in the United States exists for the people, and by the people, it stands to reason that the people should have the right to stand up against a tyrannical government.
Thankfully this country has not seen tyranny as Europe saw out of Germany in the early part of the 20th century, or Africa saw from Rwanda. The day may come however, and you’ll know it’s close when the government starts taking away our guns.
Here’s the transcript: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,501929,00.html
Related Posts From Conservative Posts - Why do we Celebrate? This coming weekend is Fourth of July weekend. Millions of...
- Universal Insurance Let's get one thing straight here. When people start talking...
Related Websites Not Affiliated With Conservative Posts -
If I Promise to Spend it, Will Obama Send Me Stimulus Money? Neither Obama nor Congress have any desire to send Mr.... -
The Rare Coin Collecting Debate Those who are thinking about getting into coin collecting are...
Follow On...