Gun Control, New Issues Facing Citizens


There are those who seem to think that the ordinary citizens of this country can’t be trusted to use, own, or operate a gun, rifle or any other form of firearm.  The Congressmen or woman that have decided we are incapable of the most basic of safety precautions are ridiculous.  People are smart and careful.  None of us wants to have an accident, let alone USE guns, but neither will we allow someone else to legislate our freedoms away.

Courts have decided that the police do not have to respond to crimes inside the homes of citizens.  Case after case can be shown where police either failed to act, were late, or never showed up at all when a citizen called.  Most often the assaults were against women and children.  Read Here: These cases are horrific in the amount of violence these women endured and then had no recourse to the law.  It is a sad state of affairs when law enforcement has no need to respond to those cries for help.

As if that weren’t reason enough for us to own a gun in order to protect ourselves, new legislation is being drafted which would put gun owners under extreme duress in order to comply with these new laws.  How sad is it to hold gun owners responsible for the deeds of criminals?  With the incompetence of law enforcement to clean up the criminal element, stem the flow of illegals, and then blame gun owners who are upstanding citizens for these issues, is beyond reasonable thinking.

The FBI even did a paper on this very issue further giving police an ability to claim they had no duty to come to the rescue of the average citizen.  Read Here: The District of Columbia has had some of the most extreme gun laws on the books, yet crime in that area due to guns, skyrocketed.  Not from average citizens, but from criminals who knew the people there were unarmed.  D. C. having lost their case and having their ban found to violate the Constitution,  is on a rampage to get even… However, they are NOT the only ones after our guns.

A history of laws enacted by Congress for or against gun control can be found HERE: Yet each and every gun control law passed only affects those who obey the laws to begin with.  Criminals certainly pay NO attention to these laws.  They do not get their weapons from a normal law-abiding gun seller.  So how do these laws even pretend that they are doing a good thing?  The truth is so obvious even a 2year old knows better.  Thumbs up for the stupid pill and Congress, AGAIN!

One has to wonder at the TRUE reason Congress has for making it so hard for the average citizen to defend themselves.  Could it be that an unarmed citizenry gives the government reason to install a police state? In those states where gun control is more moderate, the crime rate due to guns is way down.  There is only one conclusion to come to; where the citizenry are armed, criminals hesitate to attack…

I live in Phoenix Arizona.  Here the criminal element from across the border is a very real threat.  Kidnappings are on the rise here from the Mexican side of the border.  Yet Congress and President Obama fail to secure that border.  There are not enough police officers or border patrol, to defend the people here.  In Maricopa county we have an excellent Sheriff in Joe Arpaio who does his level best to protect and defend us.  Every election the Sheriff is re-elected to office DESPITE all those who claim he is violating the rights of illegals in this country.  Keep up the awesome job Sheriff Arpaio!

I fail to see how any illegal has ANY rights in this country! Break the law, go to jail, isn’t that the idea?  Break the law here and you get deported if you are an illegal.  That is the way it SHOULD be.  Screw Congress and the new President and amnesty!

So, here in Phoenix the threat of violence from both illegal aliens and gangs is high.  If we cannot defend ourselves with equal measure and the police are not obligated to respond, how then does Congress justify their intended legislation?  If guns are taken out of the hands of lawful citizens, only criminals and the police will have guns.

View short video here: Video is 2:47 seconds but only about a minute is relevant.

Watching Lou Dobbs last night was educational.  As always Lou covered the new gun control assaults on our 2nd Amendment rights.  Read Here: It is towards the bottom of the transcript.  I will place it here for convenience sake:

DOBBS: Well, a right of Americans to bear arms, right guaranteed through the second amendment, are being threatened. Legislation has been introduced in congress and in states all across the country that would severely restrict the ability of law abiding citizens to buy and own firearms. Bill Tucker has our report.

BILL TUCKER, CNN CORRESPONDENT: You’re four times more likely to die in a fire accident than a gun accident. Fire arms have the lowest rate of accidental deaths per 100,000 of the accidental deaths tracked by the National Safety Council but that hasn’t stopped efforts to oppose tighter restrictions on gun ownership. In New Jersey, there’s legislation pending to limit gun owners to one gun purchase for 30 days. The National Rifle Association says legislation in New York would outlaw firearms based on what they look like and how they are assembled with no testing procedures spelled out. Groups supporting gun ownership say the New York bill would give the police unlimited and arbitrary power. They say to crack down on guns is misplaced.

LARRY PRATT, GUN OWNERS OF AMERICA: Gun control legislation has never been shown to do anything to dissuade criminals from getting guns or to make it difficult for them.

TUCKER: If someone wants to commit a crime with a gun, they don’t have to go through legitimate channels. The state that has the most attention at the moment is in Illinois. That bill would require gun owner to carry at least $1 million in liability insurance. The sponsor defends the bill saying —

KEN DUNKIN, ILLINOIS GENERAL ASSEMBLY: We have house insurance. We have car insurance. We have a gun that is one of the most dangerous piece of instruments in our house, or within our lives that can cause and does irreparable damage. Why not have insurance on that.

TUCKER: In addition to legislation at the state level, there is also legislation pending in congress.

TUCKER: The one that has everyone’s attention at the moment is HR-45. Gun owners are alarmed at this bill because it would require every gun to be registered and every registration to be renewed in five years. They simply want to strip away that right by simply making it too expensive and bureaucratic to own guns, Lou.

DOBBS: It’s obvious, it’s transparent, it’s blatant, it’s an assault on the second amendment.

TUCKER: Absolutely.

DOBBS: Bill Tucker, thank you very much, appreciate it.

Joining me now is Steven Halbrook. He’s research fellow at the Independent Institute. He is the author of the Founders’ 2nd Amendment. Great to have you with us.


DOBBS: The idea of this legislation, whether in congress, state legislators, this is such a blatant assault on the second amendment, the use of taxation, the use of bureaucratic regulation, to stifle the second amendment individual rights of gun ownership. I mean, this is outrageous. Is there a likelihood that any of this would succeed?

HALBROOK: Well, just when you think that we have enough prison population in our country, we have proposals to create land mines for gun owners for exercise of amendment rights. We have an attorney general who advocated five years incarceration for unregistered firearms. In other words, if your papers are not in order, you could go to prison for five year, the same attorney general who in a previous office advocated a pardon of terrorists. So what we’re dealing with between that, hr-45, the bill in congress, that would create gun owners in the United States to be registered. If you’re not licensed, you could be sent to prison for a substantial amount of time.

DOBBS: Why in the world are we tolerating an individual right guaranteed? I mean, imagine this. If you were to apply these kinds of restrictions against our other individual rights and the bill of rights, I mean, there would be a march on Washington D.C. tomorrow that might be considerably more in terms of a powerful social reaction. Why is this being accepted?

HALBROOK: Well, how would you like it if you had to get —

DOBBS: Why not answer my question first?

HALBROOK: Well, it’s crazy if we have a new administration, we have a lot of people advocated prohibition policies in the past to make gun ownership difficult. We had a Supreme Court last term that held the second amendment an individual right. It’s like the empire strike back. The District of Columbia creates a law that you have to register a gun every three years or you go to prison if you neglect to do so. Why is this happening now? It’s difficult to say. But the proposals get more and more extreme. We get the $1 million insurance proposal in Illinois, for example, and notice what happens if you don’t have the insurance. And in that state you have to have an identity card and if you don’t have that, it’s a felony offense and if you don’t get the insurance, your card is invalidated.

DOBBS: I think if the folks in Illinois accept that, you know, then we’ve got the republic, at least they do, in Illinois that they deserve. You testified against Eric Holder at his confirmation hearing. Why so?

HALBROOK: Well, Mr. Holder advocated policies for gun owners adverse to the second amendment. He signed on to a brief in the Supreme Court saying that nobody has —

DOBBS: Handgun ban overturned by the Supreme Court.

HALBROOK: Right. He said that you, as an individual, have no rights under the second amendment. He supported legislation when he was a member of the Reno Justice Department that would have created not only making private transfers of a gun a felony unless you had a background check. If you give a gun to your son for Christmas, you’re a felon if you don’t get a background check.

DOBBS: I’m sorry. We’re way over here but I appreciate you being here with us.

DOBBS: And citizens group wanting to get the political leaders out of office. I wonder why? The government is double. They are broke. A few other issues. We’ll be right back.

I’m sure that General Assemblyman Ken Dunkin has made a deal with the insurance companies to get a cut off this legislation.   It isn’t hard to figure out that it is another way for the insurance industry to make money and is directly of benefit to them! Certainly it is of NO benefit to those gun owners who are valuable citizens of the State of Illinois.  How much are the insurance lobbyists paying you huh Mr. GA?  Just how deep are your pockets???  Who wrote the legislation?  Inquiring minds want to know.  Shall we file FOIA documents to see???  Citizens of Illinois are you going to take this kind of thing? Nor are vehicle owners, those responsible for MOST of the deaths, required to carry $1,000,000.00 in insurance coverage.  Get real General Assemblyman Dunkin!

I also looked up the National Safety Council Report on accidental deaths.  The report states that the #1 cause of accidental death in this country is due to automobiles. Yet there is no pending legislation to track vehicle homicide.  So why are they singling out guns, gun owners and bullets?  You can read the report for yourself HERE: In reading that report, NOT ONCE did they mention guns or bullets!

According to PoliceChiefMagazine the following article was written, here is an excerpt:

Special Relationship
The Due Process Clause of the Fourteenth Amendment forbids the government to deprive individuals of life, liberty, or property without “due process of law.2 In 1989 the U.S. Supreme Court stated, “Nothing in the language of the Due Process Clause itself requires the State to protect the life, liberty, and property of its citizens against invasion by private actors.”3 Generally, the Due Process Clause does not provide an affirmative right to government aid, “even where such aid may be necessary to secure life, liberty, or property interests of which the government itself may not deprive the individual.”

As you can see, law-enforcement has gotten around defending us by the interpretation of the courts.  Nor do I believe that the Founding Fathers meant for our defense to be left in the hands of law enforcement.  I believe that is why the 2nd Amendment is so very important and that it not be infringed upon by Congress or those seeking personal gain.  Personal gain comes in the form of lobbyist funds paid to Congresswomen and men proposing bills which do NOT benefit the general public.  Aren’t we a little tired of this sort of legislation?  I know I am.

It is an often heard argument that guns kill people.  This is NOT true though.  Guns do not kill, PEOPLE kill.  A gun cannot pull its own trigger and thereby fire itself at an individual.  Nor do any but criminals run around the streets with an intent to shoot someone.  But criminals do, those in a rage do, or those mentally unhinged, (not all mentally impaired individuals are incapable of handling guns either), are the ones who are killing other people.

Now we come to some truly retarded legislation, that of ammo tracking.  A good site to look up and see if your State is looking into this brain-dead legislation is HERE: Now, the reason I’m so down on this is not because it wouldn’t be an invaluable tool to law enforcement, it is because criminals do not buy their ammunition from regular sources.  Nor are bullets made exclusively in the united States.  So the brilliant minds who come up with this stuff just make me wonder what planet they live on that I don’t.

For example: New York is considering this legislation:

AN  ACT to amend the general business law and the penal law, in relation
         to establishing a statewide database to maintain and track coded ammu-
         nition and establishing penalties for  individuals  who  violate  such
         provisions;  to amend the state finance law, in relation to establish-
         ing the ammunition coding system database fund; and to amend  the  tax
         law,  in  relation  to  establishing a tax credit for manufacturers or
         dealers who exchange old uncoded ammunition for new coded ammunition.

Imagine the burden on the taxpayers for creating this new database and its usefulness if only the law abiding citizen uses these coded bullets. Criminals can still get ammunition from say, Mexico where bullets are not coded.  Do you suppose that New York will be able to solve any more of their unsolved homicides with this law enacted?  Me either.

Also, those law abiding citizens who have old ammunition may be criminally liable for having those bullets.  Just how is that going to help law enforcement keep the peace?  Are we going to create a whole new class of criminals with this legislation?  That is my belief.  How many of us in today’s economy can go and buy all new ammunition just because the State legislature tells us we have to?  Way to go New York!  I wonder just how many of their unsolved homicides with guns are done by illegal aliens?  It is a sanctuary State after all…

Oregon, it seems, is going just the opposite way unless I’ve misread the legislation. A brief description can be found HERE: According to what I read:

Prohibits specified units of government from adopting conditions of employment that regulate, restrict or prohibit specified activities related to firearms.  A BILL FOR AN ACT
Relating to firearms; creating new provisions; and amending ORS 166.170

Obviously there are widely differing points of view on gun legislation and each citizen should be keeping track of what their State legislature is doing or attempting to do. Our government is big enough as it is and is sucking the life out of you and I.  Those who represent us are supposed to do just that, represent US.  They are not supposed to adopt a pet project, like Pelosi’s pet mice in the urgent Stimulus Package we’ve all been so against!

And if you are one of those people who think that gun legislation doesn’t affect you because you do not own a gun, then think about when the time comes and you need help but no police show up.  Think about what you would do if you were raped, beaten or disfigured because you didn’t have the means to defend yourself due to gun legislation.  If police are not obligated to come to your aid, how will you defend yourself?  Who will you blame for your hurts?

Our legislators seem to be nothing more than paid prostitutes anymore.  The Lobbyists line their pockets and they put their names down on any legislation that crosses their desks, rarely bothering to read it.  Our founding fathers would turn over in their graves to see those we place our trust in so betray us!


~ by justmytruth on February 24, 2009.

3 Responses to “Gun Control, New Issues Facing Citizens”

  1. Great site.

  2. Great page, thanks!
    I believe the founding fathers offered the Second Amendment as a “check and balance” to prevent government from becoming so large that it crushed the Liberty of the individual. The reason for “gun control” is to remove firearms from the general populace so that government can pursue any agenda it wishes without fear of the general public retaliating. Every time a law is passed, continued gun violence is used as the excuse for more laws keeping guns out of the hands of the general public. In my home town, the city just announced a 30% cut in Police and Fire services, yet we have very strict gun ownership laws.

  3. You are absolutely correct. Gun laws only hinder law-abiding citizens, not criminals. The government is also now claiming that victims of guns are due justice, however, it is the criminal element they need to go after, not the citizens. In areas where gun laws are more lenient crimes by guns are WAY down!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: