One of the cries of the anti-gun forces is that criminals get guns, and if we made guns harder to get, they wouldn't be able to buy them from gun shops and gun shows. This is, of course, a silly idea, with no formation in actual reality, as shown by the vast increases in gun crime in places like Washington DC and San Francisco. Strict Gun Control measures have not slowed crime in heavily restrictive states like Illinois or New York.
Where, then, do these criminals get these guns, if they are not buying them from gun stores or gun shops?
Flor Santiago, probable general scum, stole a truck, then broke into a gun shop and stole 14 firearms. (I say that, but they didn't release what was stolen. They are, however, charging him with 14 counts of conspiracy to steal a firearm, which leads me to believe that there were 14 firearms.)
Damage to the building is 25 thousand dollars.
Some on the anti-gun front would try to lead you to believe that the gun shop owner, who had his stuff stolen, and had 25 thousand dollars of damage to his shop, should be held criminally liable as a 'supplier' of firearms to the criminals, for being a victim of a break-in.
They would also want you to believe that it is the responsible gun owner that becomes these criminals, somehow being mentally unstable and turning to crime and selling their gun, or committing the crimes themselves. Historically, neither of these are true. An incredible majority of gun crime is done with firearms not registered to the criminal doing the shooting (and most of the time, it is illegal for the one doing the shooting to own a firearm).
The current laws work. In fact, some would suggest that if you loosen the laws, allowing responsible gun owners to carry concealed (After all, the 2nd Amendment grants the right to the individual to both Keep and Bear firearms), crime would go down. History regularly shows that when the good responsible citizens are allowed to arm themselves for self-defense, crime drops.
The anti-gun front would try to tell you that if the responsible gun owners were armed, it would be like 'Dodge City' . . . gunfights left and right at the drop of a hat. Except.... that doesn't happen. It really didn't happen then, either. Movies are just that... movies. Even now, time and time again, when the people are armed, shootouts don't happen as often. In fact, not on campus of course (thanks to Federal Law, only criminals are armed on campus), odds are if you live in a city not un IL or WI, San Fran, NYC or DC.... you've walked past or talked to someone who legally had a firearm on them. Yet, you're still alive. In fact, you are safer when you're in their company, as history again shows.
You don't have to love guns. You don't have to want to own a gun. You don't have to want to ever touch a gun. You can still support the Constitution, and the right it grants to the individual to keep and bear firearms. It keeps them safe and it keeps you safe. Next time the anti-gun forces talk about how people should be held criminally responsible when they're victims of a break in, remember that the result of their goal will be guns in the hands of no one but the police and the criminals.
• 
• 
• 
• 
• 
*shiver*
What an awesome blog... I just love your patriotism and desire to uphold the Constitution, while still understanding the fear of guns.
As I often say, i don't want to force anyone to HAVE to have a firearm.... I just request that they not try to take my rights away out of their irrational fears.
I also noticed on the "Active Threads" link that this post appears to be "Updated"
though I can't see where. heh.
You got promoted to the front page, silly!
Congratulations!
Nice!
Thanks to whoever did that! lol.
My money would be on Nicholas Aden.
_____________________________________________________________
I am the people my mother warned me about.
http://www.progressiveu.org/blog/tuffgong
TUFFGONG
Senior Executive Administrator™
"History regularly shows that when the good responsible citizens are allowed to arm themselves for self-defense, crime drops."- Can you help me find data to support this?? I want to show my parents so hopefully I will be able to convince them about my passion for guns...
I remember having the cowboys discussion with you from another blog. I meant to ask if you know the reason why people began to ban guns since then. The media makes it seems like anyone who is not in the police force has no (good) reason to carry a (concealed) gun around. If the gun owner has a concealed weapon, and no one notices, I don't really see the difference whether the person has the gun or not...is there a difference?
----------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.mylot.com/?ref=truelife
The desire to ban firearms has a few reasons.
The reason they GIVE is for the safety of the populace. Ban guns on school grounds for the safety of the children. Ban guns from the home for the safety of the children. Ban guns at work for the safety of the employees.
Yet, time and time again, it is these gun free zones that have mass shootings. I cannot find one substantiated case of a mass shooting at an NRA rally, gun show or gnu shop.
In fact, from a stastical standpoint, even though by the logic of 'banning guns makes things safer," those places should be the MOST dangerous, as there are normally MANY more firearms per person than anywhere else.
Yet it is at gun free schools that we hear about mass shootings (Virginia Tech comes to mind). It is at post offices and court buildings (also gun free places) or malls, like the mall in Kansas City in the last year or so, in which 3 died (also gun free places).
A second reason given is that getting rid of guns helps to protect everyone from the 'loonies' . . . the crazy people who would shoot others. (In fact, some hold that anyone who would EVER want a firearm must be one of these loonies, and they work hard to make everyone believe that.)
Yet, time and time again, we see that those who commit crimes with guns are almost NEVER the owner of the gun. It is almost always stolen (as this article describes) from a business or a home. Those who are legal responsible gun owners don't go around shooting people or mugging people. Most guns are owned for hunting or target shooting purposes. In fact, I would wonder why someone would legally own a firearm if it is not for hunting, target shooting or home protection. (Excluding people who collect rare and antique firearms as display pieces, but those don't always fire.)
A third reason for banning firearms, one that the anti-gun forces will NEVER admit to, is to disarm the public for the good of the state. Every oppressive society began by giving free handouts to get support, promising all sorts of great things (like free food, money, healthcare, etc)... then they talk about how safe the streets are and how we don't 'need' certain types of firearms. Slowly they collect all firearms from the individuals. Then the friendly hand turns to an oppresive fist. This is how it worked in Soviet Russia, and Communist China. It is how it is in the Sudan (If you've heard about the killings in Darfur, those being killed were forcibly disarmed a few years back).
The Constitution of the United States, one of the most precious documents we have, recognizes certain rights of the legal citizens of the United States. Each of these rights exists to protect the individual from an oppressive governmental system (like the one we cast off when we declared independence.) and to guarentee that we are free people.
The Second Amendment stands alone in that while it not only protects the American public from an oppressive government (Such as the communists or socialists, Fascists or Tyrants), it also serves to protect the Constitution itself.
The individual is specifically given the right to both keep and bear firearms. That means you are allowed to own and use a firearm. As a citizen of the United States, you also have a responsibility to provide for your own safety, and to fight for that Constitution, as it is what keeps you free.
Those who are in the military swear to defend the constitution from all threats foreign and domestic. They give up their comfort (and sometimes their lives) to fight for the interests of this nation, in defense of, and for the universal freedoms of that Constitution.
Those who would wish to remove those rights from us, for their own personal gain (I.e. Communists, Socialists, etc) need to get rid of that 2nd Amendment, so that we cannot fight back when they go after the others.
You write Some amazing responses. And some good blogs too. I never could get past the logic of "If only police and criminals had guns then you would automatically know who the criminals are." I've seen people on buses and trains with concealed handguns, I saw them prolly b/c the people were trying to look cool with that "under the arm holster", and it just makes me uneasy. I can't understand the logic of walking around with a gun, especially if you flaunt it as these people were, b/c you are automatically raising the stakes of any situation. I respect people's right to carry weapons but I don't understand WHY they feel the need to carry weapons.
Silent enim leges inter arma
First, thank you for your compliment.
Second, You woudn't see my pistol. I keep it concealed better than those arm holsters. When I tell others about my holster, I tell them that 90% of people would never think to look there, and the other 10% wouldn't admit to it. There are also compact firearms that can fit in your pocket and look like a wallet in a special holster.
As for need... eh. One either understands it or they don't. We don't feel that a place is 'unsafe' so we bring a firearm. We avoid the unsafe places.
We have a firearm for the times when the unexpected happens. For the times when the criminals leave the unsafe areas and spread out, looking for victims.
now, some states allow open carry, in which case you can expose your firearm. My state does not. Either way, history has shown that the responsible gun owner having a firearm in an area makes the area safer, especially if the criminal knows that someone there is likely armed.
This is why criminals avoid NRA rallies and gun shows. They know that if they try to mug someone, they're going to have issues with lead poisoning that finally WON'T be the fault of the Chinese toy makers.
Great Article!!!!!
However, you wrote: "After all, the 2nd Amendment grants the right to the individual to both Keep and Bear firearms".
The first ten amendments do not "grant" us anything; they are RESTRICTIONS ON GOVERNMENT. For example Amendment II restricts the government from "infringing" on the peoples right to keep and bear arms. The first ten amendments were designed to keep government from passing laws against rights that were given by The Creator, not by government.
Well, the rights granted by the 2nd Amendment do indeed exist as given by the Great Architect of the Universe (Sorry, Atheists, but that is how it is.)
but you and I are saying the same thing, from another perspective.
I said that the rights are granted to protect us, and it is from an oppressive government as well as from other people.
They are not given by the government, just recognized by it. Still, there are many countries in which the government does NOT grant the freedom of speech or the freedom to keep and bear firearms. Many are not allowed to vote, others are held as slaves. The governments in other countries can take what they want from people, then throw them in prison on trumped up charges with no representation....
While these rights do not originate with our government, the Constitution is a piece of holy work that acknowledges our freedom in such a way as to protect it from tyranny and oppression... and it is defended by us, the citizens, with our vote.