I’ve gotten into a few jousting matches in the last week regarding gun control, or my statements that I, personally, will likely never need to own a gun. I believe my statement was something like, “I live in San Jose and cannot go hunting at the park where my kids play, and since I don’t feel a need to pack heat when I go grocery shopping, my desire for a Glock is less than minimal.” Apparently this is blasphemy for some. Guess what – gun ownership beliefs do not define political beliefs any more than your religion, or lack thereof!
Let me clear some things up:
1) I am not against gun control in that I feel people should be able to own a firearm. I do not see a need however, for any private citizen to own an assault weapon or any other weapon that fires more than a single bullet per trigger squeeze.
2) I agree with the statement that “guns don’t kill people, people do,” as much as I agree with the statement, “needles don’t inject heroin; addicts do.”
3) Other than target practice, a handgun does not have much use for a private citizen, since you are not going duck hunting with a Glock.
Dirty Harry needs a gun, I don't
Guns don’t kill people, people kill people – stupid people with guns
Since there are a lot of right-winged yahoos out there who think that anyone who thinks like me cannot be a registered Republican, here is a thought…in fact a solution for the rampant crime in our cities that comes from guns…I mean people, since guns cannot think or commit crimes. Ready, Charlton Heston followers…here goes:
Moving forward (that means from this point on, for you under-educated folk), all handguns sold in this country will be test-fired upon sale, and that bullet and accompanying ballistics will be entered into a data base. Ballistics, for those who are not familiar with the term, is like a gun’s fingerprints.
With the gun’s fingerprint on file, it will be less likely that a gun owner will be inclined to commit a crime. Ah, but what if the gun is “lost” or stolen, and “another person” does something unsavory with this gun, you ask? Well, maybe you don’t have the gun anymore, but at least if a crime is committed and a bullet recovered, we know where to start the search for the criminal – your front door.
My idea still gives you Second Amendment rights, but may help solve crimes as older guns fall by the wayside. So go ahead, let me have it…any argument for gun ownership other than hunting, target practice or protecting a home isn’t going to get very far!
![[del.icio.us]](http://www.logicalrepublican.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/delicious.png)
![[Digg]](http://www.logicalrepublican.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/digg.png)
![[Facebook]](http://www.logicalrepublican.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/facebook.png)
![[LinkedIn]](http://www.logicalrepublican.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/linkedin.png)
![[MySpace]](http://www.logicalrepublican.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/myspace.png)
![[Reddit]](http://www.logicalrepublican.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/reddit.png)
![[StumbleUpon]](http://www.logicalrepublican.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/stumbleupon.png)
![[Technorati]](http://www.logicalrepublican.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/technorati.png)
![[Twitter]](http://www.logicalrepublican.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/twitter.png)
![[Yahoo!]](http://www.logicalrepublican.com/wp-content/plugins/bookmarkify/yahoo.png)
Tags: ballistics, charlton heston, dirty harry, gun control, Republican, second amendment
I hope to never have to defend myself against a perpetrator with deadly force in my home or outside of my home.
I would as a fellow American ( and I say that with out respect for your offensiveness) defend your right to free speech (1st Amendment), if you help defend my right to protect myself and my family (2nd Amendment).
It’ll all be over before you could dial 911.
Good luck out there.
Agreed…and I am not saying the anyone should lose their right to own a firearm as some seem to believe. Guns wind up in the hands of criminals, we all agree to this. But these guns are purchased a first time and if there is a way to trace the gun’s lineage, it may reduce crime or at least give police an extra clue to finding the crook.
The word need is not mentioned in the 2nd ammendment. ……..the RIGHT of the people to keep and bear arms, shall NOT be infringed
Agreed, but “arms” in 1792 were of a different ilk. Arms today have various definitions and come in a multitude of forms, something not available when it was written. Progress and evolution are real; should the document stay static? Maybe…
Republicans want want failure, they want things like the insurance companies to continue to rake in billions and to keep the unwealthy at a disadvantage. The infrastructures portion was what we needed to get us going in advancing our country to come into the present but the old conservatives who want to go back to the “simpler times” (ie. slavery, and racial discrimination via lower education). Our country and everyday people need help due to bad financial policy and they are just not getting it. Who is getting it? Big business. God bless America.
Now this is a really dumb question, but why would Republicans want to keep people at a disadvantage? It is a dumb statement on your part for sure, since I certainly don’t want people to be disadvantaged. Why would I or any Republican want to have to fork out welfare and other benefits when you can get off your rear end, study hard, work hard and get a job instead of whining about budget cuts and layoffs?
I agree with you. I am a registered Republican, and although my views are sometimes more moderate, I generally agree more with conservatives. However, this issue just doesn’t make sense to me. I don’t think guns should be outright banned, but why does everyone need one? I also don’t see any harm at all in improving background checks and the like. I don’t understand why so many Republicans seem to be against any type of improvement, even when it’s not remotely aimed at banning gun ownership. Although to be completely honest, any gun in a household, even just for protection, really makes me nervous.
Lindsey – Even amongst Republicans there is no firm agreement. The loudmouths who sent me hate mail seem to think that any control of weaponry is a step too far. Should we then be able to own a bazooka? An M-16? Hell, what about an M-50? The line needs to be drawn what is needed for self-protection and hunting, versus what is just plain absurd.