Comments on: Understanding the Second Amendment http://capnbob.us/blog/2009/02/16/understanding-the-second-amendment/ Our Unique Perspectives on Life and Politics Thu, 17 May 2012 01:46:43 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.3.3 By: Cap'n Bob http://capnbob.us/blog/2009/02/16/understanding-the-second-amendment/#comment-27471 Cap'n Bob Fri, 17 Apr 2009 00:47:51 +0000 http://capnbob.us/blog/2009/02/16/understanding-the-second-amendment/#comment-27471 "It just doesn’t have relevance anymore." Let me point out that these very arguments were used in the recent D.C. vs. Heller Case before the Supreme court, i.e. the Washington D.C. gun ban. The majority found in favor of the defendant and it is again legal to possess firearms in D.C. for home protection. Think about it and you will find this is a good thing (hint: find out the average response times for 911 calls). "320 million folks “bearing” arms is unthinkable. Get real." For you, perhaps. For me (and millions of other Americans), a person trained in the use and application of firearms who regularly drills and does target practice it's not "unthinkable." I have military training and have owned guns for over 45 years. I have a permit to carry a loaded concealed handgun in more than half the states in the union (including Minnesota). My weapons have never leaped into my hands and caused me to do harm to anyone or anything other than taking game and fending off varmints. "an artifact designed to kill" My guns are designed for protection, defense, hunting and sport. Any other definition is "an artifact of your perception." Who "in their right mind" would deprive me (and millions of other Americans) of those purposes? "Let’s repeal the thing on its face value and get on with it." I say that we keep the Bill of Rights intact, and allow those not comfortable with it move north of the 49th parallel, where they don't have such a pesky artifact. "Get on with it." I would have to say that your nom de plume, derived from altruism, a selfless concern for the welfare of others, does not fit your agenda when it comes to personal defense and the protection of liberty. “It just doesn’t have relevance anymore.”

Let me point out that these very arguments were used in the recent D.C. vs. Heller Case before the Supreme court, i.e. the Washington D.C. gun ban. The majority found in favor of the defendant and it is again legal to possess firearms in D.C. for home protection. Think about it and you will find this is a good thing (hint: find out the average response times for 911 calls).

“320 million folks “bearing” arms is unthinkable. Get real.”

For you, perhaps. For me (and millions of other Americans), a person trained in the use and application of firearms who regularly drills and does target practice it’s not “unthinkable.” I have military training and have owned guns for over 45 years. I have a permit to carry a loaded concealed handgun in more than half the states in the union (including Minnesota). My weapons have never leaped into my hands and caused me to do harm to anyone or anything other than taking game and fending off varmints.

“an artifact designed to kill”

My guns are designed for protection, defense, hunting and sport. Any other definition is “an artifact of your perception.” Who “in their right mind” would deprive me (and millions of other Americans) of those purposes?

“Let’s repeal the thing on its face value and get on with it.”

I say that we keep the Bill of Rights intact, and allow those not comfortable with it move north of the 49th parallel, where they don’t have such a pesky artifact. “Get on with it.”

I would have to say that your nom de plume, derived from altruism, a selfless concern for the welfare of others, does not fit your agenda when it comes to personal defense and the protection of liberty.

]]> By: altrurian http://capnbob.us/blog/2009/02/16/understanding-the-second-amendment/#comment-27470 altrurian Thu, 16 Apr 2009 21:51:18 +0000 http://capnbob.us/blog/2009/02/16/understanding-the-second-amendment/#comment-27470 I agree with the irrefutable parsing of the amendment that you have provided. It seems rather straight forward. It just doesn't have relevance anymore. You can't make that argument about any of the other amendments in the "Bill". 320 million folks "bearing" arms is unthinkable. Get real. Surely even you recognize the ludicracy of the epithet "anti-gun". Who in their right mine wouldn't be against, in the abstract sense, an artifact designed to kill. Let's repeal the thing on its face value and get on with it. I agree with the irrefutable parsing of the amendment that you have provided. It seems rather straight forward. It just doesn’t have relevance anymore. You can’t make that argument about any of the other amendments in the “Bill”. 320 million folks “bearing” arms is unthinkable. Get real.

Surely even you recognize the ludicracy of the epithet “anti-gun”. Who in their right mine wouldn’t be against, in the abstract sense, an artifact designed to kill.

Let’s repeal the thing on its face value and get on with it.

]]> By: Cap'n Bob http://capnbob.us/blog/2009/02/16/understanding-the-second-amendment/#comment-27286 Cap'n Bob Tue, 17 Feb 2009 18:24:55 +0000 http://capnbob.us/blog/2009/02/16/understanding-the-second-amendment/#comment-27286 Thanks lakotalady, We did an article on Congressman Rush's HR45 a while back - <a href="http://capnbob.us/blog/2009/01/14/rush-to-ban-guns/" rel="nofollow">Rush to Ban Guns</a>. We think that <b>HE</b> should submit <b>HIS</b> mental health records and be subjected to psychiatric examination after such an insane bill. Thanks lakotalady,

We did an article on Congressman Rush’s HR45 a while back - Rush to Ban Guns.

We think that HE should submit HIS mental health records and be subjected to psychiatric examination after such an insane bill.

]]> By: lakotalady http://capnbob.us/blog/2009/02/16/understanding-the-second-amendment/#comment-27285 lakotalady Tue, 17 Feb 2009 15:34:44 +0000 http://capnbob.us/blog/2009/02/16/understanding-the-second-amendment/#comment-27285 Great blog! Have you heard about the bill just introduced to the House, H.R. 45 was filed in the House of Representatives by Rep Rush, Bobby L.[IL] on January 6, 2009. This bill will impose severe restrictions for licensing on gun ownership. What this means is that two years after the passage of this bill, all firearms in your possession must be registered. And Eric holder was confirmed as Attorney General. Eric Holder has a very anti gun record. Man they just don't give up do they! Your site is so well put together I put it on my blogs to follow! I GOD BLESS AMERICA! Great blog! Have you heard about the bill just introduced to the House, H.R. 45 was filed in the House of Representatives by Rep Rush, Bobby L.[IL] on January 6, 2009. This bill will impose severe restrictions for licensing on gun ownership. What this means is that two years after the passage of this bill, all firearms in your possession must be registered. And Eric holder was confirmed as Attorney General. Eric Holder has a very anti gun record. Man they just don’t give up do they! Your site is so well put together I put it on my blogs to follow! I GOD BLESS AMERICA!

]]>