And when was the last time you did some research that involved
more than parroting NRA talking points? True debate requires independent research and thinking. I'm well aware y'all are fed up with gun control discussions but keep in mind that this one started over the closing of a simple technical loop hole in a state law and involves the right of a state to determine it's own gun laws. Contrary to what some of you believe, states are allowed to do that. I thought you were big proponents of state's rights or is that only when states do things you personally agree with? I imagine the only reason this came up for debate here was some hysterical hand waving from the NRA.
The law is clear in this respect; the states have some leeway in the matter of gun control, but their laws are still subject to the Second Amendment in the same manner as it applies to the federal government. The Supreme Court indicated that although the right to keep and bear arms in your own home is absolute, the state has some ability to regulate the when and where and always have. Any law or interpretation still must comply with the Second amendment, however.
In all good conscience, I have to say a few words on IT's behalf. What we are witnessing are arguments by an educated, erudite man who is convinced that his liberal beliefs are solid and would benefit most of America if they were enacted into law. He is also expressing an opinion that comes from being born and raised in the North, in an urban area, where guns are used by police or by criminals to kill and rob. More than likely, he was raised in a gated community and the only experience he has with guns is treating gunshot wounds. I'm willing to bet he has never hunted rabbits, squirrel, deer, turkey, quail or doves to put meat on the table or even hunted them for recreation as most of us have. The city perspective on life and liberty is considerably different from those of us raised in the country.
I was raised a country boy, in a time when the great depression was playing out, between WWII and Korea. We were dirt poor, and we hunted to put meat on the table. My Grandfather and my Dad were raised on the farm where guns were as much a part of their lives as a cow or a tractor. I got my first gun when I was thirteen years old, and have killed enough game to feed all of the Republicans in Oklahoma county. We learned gun safety early, and have a healthy respect for what they can do, both good and bad. I have also shot trap and skeet for recreation, and spent a considerable amount of time with my best friend just plinking cans or turtles. I can appreciate the beauty and workmanship of a good firearm, both as a tool and as a piece of art.
I say take heed of what IT says. At least he is not a wild eyed fanatic that spouts off a bunch of irrational BS. We need to hear what the opposition says in order to keep us straight, no matter how righteous we believe our cause. We need to be able to understand the philosophy and reasoning behind the opposition in order to counter their arguments. Right now we have the law on our side; and rightfully so...but it may not always be that way unless we can articulate our position. Remember, the urban crowd loses nothing if we lose all of our gun rights, and in fact most would be happy about it...for awhile. We have to focus on the criminal instead of the gun, and keep the opposition focused there also. I am reminded of the quote from the movie Shane:
Marian Starrett: Guns aren't going to be my boy's life!
Joey: Why do you always have to spoil everything?
Shane: A gun is a tool, Marian; no better or no worse than any other tool: an axe, a shovel or anything. A gun is as good or as bad as the man using it. Remember that.
Marian Starrett: We'd all be much better off if there wasn't a single gun left in this valley - including yours.
A Gun Is a Tool - Shane (5/8) Movie CLIP (1953) HD - YouTube
opcorntub:
