After the news broke of the mass shooting in a school in Connecticut, it seems it has become in style to attack gun owners and advocate of American's right to carry firearms. Adam Lanza did a horrible thing and he had clear mental issues, those close to him should have seen it coming. The innocent who have been murdered are not the first and I hope they would be the last. Many Americans do not ask for much, they know however, that the second amendment is on of the rights they cherish the most.
I tend to find myself a purist when it comes to the US constitution, it's a sacred document for many and has worked and been working for a long time. My concern is if you start getting into intentions behind the law and what the founders had on mind, you start getting into muddy water.
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
Freedom of speech could be on the line. Those who want guns will get them--the Oregon Mall shooter stole his, the guy in Norway bough his online from America. I think the issue is mental state of Americans. I understand the fear of guns, but people living in the cities do not understand the value in rural America where hunters live and making a living. They have the right to feel protected, and by owning a firearm, they are saving tax payers money. There is a reason why America works, too many laws that mock the US constitution are no needed.
Look no further, than Israel. People there have so many guns, but you do not see many of them engaging in mass shooting--the do that in Gaza and the West Bank. But in their cities, they do not have many incidents like the ones we do in America. I also think that most Americans are not violent by nature, many American homes where loving families dwell own firearms. I know those people are not heartless, and they feel for the victims of mass shootings. The solution is not in arming everyone and certainly not in disarming everyone.
I hope they would not make any dumb laws that would infringe on the American right to bear arms, and I see eye to eye with justice Scalia "I take that to be any weapon you can carry." I hope American politicians won't instate knee jerk solutions for a problem that would only cure the symptoms but not the real disease--mental illness.
And for conservatives, do not cut any more funding for metal illness programs--otherwise, you would have to deal with people like Adam, Holmes, and Virginia Tech massacre guy.
2 comments:
Is is sacred? Really? What makes it so? Just because the constitution has it in there, does that really infer something divine in it's origin? We are talking about the same people who said "All men created equal" and then allowed slavery to continue for a 100 years. I think the constitution is a great document, fundamental to the creation of our country, but I think that in no way gives it the status of sacred with the inability to be interpreted to fit the times we currently live in. So we actually happen to own a gun, a shotgun that sit in the top of our closet with no bullets that my husband takes out about once every five years to shot jack rabbits with, and I come from a family of gun lovers (all military men in my familby), but is there really any reason to have semiautomatic and automatic weapons out there? The founding fathers had no knowledge of that type of technology when they wrote the constitution, and limiting it does nothing to hinder the constitution. And before you start to argue that gun laws only allow criminals to get their hands on guns (like the NRA's commercial about Australia's stringent gun laws does) it's interesting to check out the actual research. http://m.injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/12/6/365.full New York put in more stringent gun laws and is now one of the safest big cities in the United States. Turns out when you limit the amount of guns the price of your Saturday Night Special goes up high enough that people are less likely to kill each other. Man I love economics. So personally I have no problem with putting some restrictions on guns and honestly I don't think it really hurts the constitution to do so.
Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws and has the some of the highest gun crimes. You can't cherry pick your favorite cities and ignore the others.
If putting restrictions on guns doesn't hurt the constitution then putting restriction on speach wouldn't hurt the constitution either.
Post a Comment