Friday, January 18, 2008
Gun Control and the 2nd Amendment on Hannity & Colmes
Sean Hannity and Alan Combs tackle the issue of gun control in response to some of Rosie O'Donnell's anti-gun comments (also shown on this video).
What do you think? To what extent should Americans have the right to "keep and bear arms"?
*******
For a critically acclaimed look at the Founders and the Second Amendment...
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Subscribe Here!
Posts
Comments
6 comments:
Interesting post. You've struck a chord with me! I've always disliked Sean Hannity. I think he would disagree with the Democrats if they said the sky was blue. He's simply WAY too conservative for me.
As far as the 2nd Amendment goes, I think Americans should realize three things:
1.) The Founding Fathers created the 2nd Amendment so that citizens would be able to fight in a militia unit, in defense of their nation. It did not have a lot to do with being able to collect guns or carry them around. James Madison even stated that the 2nd Amendment was created so that there would never again be a Lexington & Concord incident (when the British tried to take control of the colonial armory).
2.)The Right to Keep and Bear Arms should not apply to all people and all guns. Don't get me wrong, I own 3 guns, and I defend a person's right to do so. My belief, however, is that certain guns (automatic assault rifles, TEC-9 semiautomatic assault pistols for example) should not be available to the public. They are never used in hunting, nor do they make good self-defense weapons. They are only good for mass-killing.
Also, people with ANY FELONIES on their record should NEVER, EVER be allowed to own a gun. Having worked in law enforcement, I have seen the destructive nature of guns, and I believe that once a person has broken the law of the land, they should NEVER be entrusted to own a gun of any kind.
3.)Those that say eliminating guns will eliminate crime are either uninformed or ignorant. Most criminals get guns from friends, steal them, or buy them illegally. They are very aware that they cannot purchase them legally, so they resort to other means. Should we therefore take a law-abiding citizen's gun away from him/her? I cannot tell you how many times I've heard or seen honest citizens defending themselves and others with a gun. I live in Co. Springs where we recently had the tragic shooting at the "New Life Church." A female security guard was the person that saved the day. The killer had come to the church with several hundred rounds of ammunition on him. Had the armed female not acted, many more could have died.
In short, of course we need gun CONTROL (control meaning limitations, rules, etc.)but we do not need gun ELIMINATION. The good people of this nation can and should be entrusted to own a REASONABLE firearm if they'd like to, and if they qualify. Sorry felons, don't bother applying and DON'T break into my house. I have a very pretty Glock 45 that I shoot quite well.
Sorry for my rant Brian!
Had you ever been to the New Life Church? That was a pretty scary situation. You'd think it a family could go to church in peace. What a tragedy!
How long did you work in law enforcement?
I have been to the "New Life Church." I didn't go for any services, just as a guest to tour. It is an incredible facility. To call it huge is a massive understatement. It's like a mall!
I worked in law enforcement (as a Sheriff's Deputy) for roughly 4 years, but I have been involved in law enforcement in one for or another for probably another 4 years (as a 911 dispatcher, loss prevention officer, investigatior, etc.). I actually am wanting to get back into it in some capacity, probably not as a uniformed cop though. Maybe as an investigator or probation. Only time will tell.
By the way, the New Life Church is the one that Ted Haggard started. He still has quite a legacy here (both good and bad).
They don't want us to have (insert name of weapon[s] here), then they shouldn't have it either.
I want it, I'll get it.
I do not murder, steal, rape, or assault. Simple ownership of let's say a machinegun is not a crime against humanity, and there is no other kind of crime. People who are willing to punish NON violent people will be punished by me, one at a time. They are combatants, they can not be victims.
i say tht the second amendment is somewhat needed but at the same time it is not needed to keep us a society in line.
I say the 2nd amendment is a bunch of rubbish now because not only is the country gun happy the percent of gun related deaths is up 15 percent since 1990. i think this out of hand and ithink we should abolish the 2nd amendment becuase we have never needed a miltia since the late 1700's to the early 1820's.
Post a Comment