About the Tuscon shooting, he says this:
Rationally there are two main reasons for the Tucson massacre. First a lack of a serious mental health policy in the US and secondly, lax gun control laws that allow people to get guns and kill people.
About the 2nd Amendment he says this:
I love this guy, don't you?The Second Amendment also has roots in the English Bill of Rights of 1689 and whose purpose was to protect people from disarmament from the crown. Founding father's also wanted to empower the citizenry to be able to bear arms against an undemocratic government, invasion, insurrection, and a natural right of self-defense.
The right to bear arms was also important as it allowed people to participate, when called upon, in law enforcement and to create and participate in a militia system.
Even if fire arms were necessary for self protection then, that is not the case any longer.
Please leave a comment.
The Second Amendment also has roots in the English Bill of Rights of 1689 and whose purpose was to protect people from disarmament from the crown. Founding father's also wanted to empower the citizenry to be able to bear arms against an undemocratic government . . .
ReplyDeleteYou like that?
Your tastes are perhaps improving.
Rationally there are two main reasons for the Tucson massacre. First a lack of a serious mental health policy in the US and secondly, lax gun control laws that allow people to get guns and kill people.
ReplyDeleteThe first part of this statement alone is enough to set of many libertarians. A real mental health policy would require a preventative medicine approach and I have read screeds by many libertarians that this approach to mental problems in a society is tantamount to mind control...
I agree with Salazar and it is not about mind control or enforcing standards of behavior. This is a typical sensationalistic hyper reaction to scare people away from any government program which they see as meddling with their freedoms.
So... Because something occurred, insufficient laws must be what allowed it?
ReplyDeleteFollowing this so-called "rational" logic, you would also agree:
Because people overdose on drugs, lax drug control laws that allow people to get drugs to blame?
Because we still have drunk driving deaths, lax drunk driving laws that allow people to drink and drive are to blame?
Because we still have people stabbed to death, lax knife control laws that allow people to get sharp objects and stab people are to blame?
So how many laws do you think will be enough that we won't "allow" the bad guys to get guns and kill people anymore?
...Orygunner...
"Even if fire arms were necessary for self protection then, that is not the case any longer."
ReplyDeleteWith all of the murders, rapes, and robberies in this country there is no longer any need for firearms for self protection? DOES NOT COMPUTE.
Yes, Zorroy, I do like it, especially this part:
ReplyDelete"has roots in the English Bill of Rights of 1689"
Get it?
Does this mean it's open season on Papists?
ReplyDeleteNever realized you quoted my article of Jan 28, 2011. Thanks for doing so. I wish you had sent me an email about it. I am still tilting at windmills on this subject. Have several others since then, both at Communities and Community Digital News. Interesting comments.
ReplyDeleteThank you for quoting and celebrating my article. I continue tilting at this windmill at Communities Digital News.
ReplyDeleteThanks Mario. I've been doing some tilting myself. Please send me some links to your other articles.
Delete