Never Forget

gun controlIf you have an argument for opposing sensible gun control that is more convincing than the broken bodies of twenty little kids who were counting the days until Christmas, then by all means, let’s hear it. Your precious second amendment, if you actually read it, gives citizens the right to keep and bear arms for the purpose of maintaining a ready militia. At the time this amendment was passed the only arms they knew and could foresee were muzzle loading, black powder, single shot, flint lock smooth bore muskets and pistols. You cannot pass legislation that will ever keep people from going crazy; but you can take the weapons of mass murder out of their hands.

So many times after one of these mass killings we hear opponents of gun control saying with much bravado, “if the victims had been armed they could have stopped the killer.” Are we now going to suggest kindergarten teachers carry weapons or maybe we arm the five year olds? Why is it ok to ban smoking to save lives, to require seat belts when driving and to outlaw drugs and not put some limitation on the kinds of guns people are allowed to have.

Are we now talking about the lives of little children as the price we are willing to pay for an arcane right to keep and bear arms? It’s no wonder the United States is now only the sixteenth most desirable country in which to live. Come on people, take your heads out of your asses and get real.

Photo: Licensed by at
Frederick Palmer

Frederick Palmer

Writer, painter, Registered Nurse and teller of tales true and untrue who loves nice people, lives in the woods, had a big heart attack, grew up by a funeral home, plays with dogs, makes music sometimes and likes watching people. Loves creativity and strange ideas.

  1. Take one of those handguns into England or even New York City and see what happens, dude. Get ready for an onslaught of crap about 2nd amendment “rights” and the principles of out Founding Fathers (as interpreted by those protectors of the Bill of Rights, Messrs. Scalia and Thomas.) Brother Mike Huckabee, another mental giant, opined that the massacre was somehow tied to the adsence of school prayer. The champions of fair and balanced news will be out today keeping any dialogue or debate down to the lowest common denominator level and as this happens, they usually prevail. Where are the politicians who have the gonads to invoke the Biblical wisdom of beating these heathen instruments of injury and death into useful plowshares?

  2. Eileen Dight

    For a start they could ban multi repeater guns that may be appropriate in a military context in the face of an onslaught, but nowhere at all in public.

  3. Frank Povah

    It is just beyond comprehension that anyone would even try and mount an argument against some sort of halfway sensible gun legislation.

    Hollywood has such a grip on this country that the myth has become the reality.

  4. One arguement could be made that liberals want women to suffer by not having protection when they travel while working or live alone. After you take guns women will suffer with more rapes and other violence against them.

    You can not argue that making women defenseless would be a moral victory.

  5. Second arguement, if you believe what you say then our government should not use those or have them to use against citizens anywhere, at home or at war.
    But you would never demand that, only take guns from the little person.

  6. Liberals have let gangs run our cities, illegal terroist to come here without background checks, and crooks now get out of prision if they go at all in short time……………its a criminal paradise in America thanks to liberals and now you want to take the one protection a citizen could have against the horrific violence that is in America society and make us all victims.
    Makes sense since liberals simply want everyone to be a victim in life while the maintain the power to harm you with violent police officers.

    1. Lee Leslie

      Please stay on topic and re-ready our rules of civility. You are a guest here. Act as one.

  7. The word “control” is both a euphemism for “eliminate,” as in pollution control, and an ideological nod to the idea that “man in charge” is always better than random.
    Also, using the law to mandate positive behavior of the citizenry, instead of just focusing on bad behavior that merits punishment, is an authoritarian attitude with which this liberal does not agree.

  8. Control and eliminate violent video games which are a large part of this evil act.
    No that would never be because of politics……………….

  9. “Halfway sensible gun legislation” is one thing. Dismissively
    declaring that the 2nd Amendment doesn’t describe individual rights
    (unlike EVERY other part of the Bill of Rights, and contrary to 2 recent
    SCOTUS decisions) is just inflammatory.
    And even if one were
    to accept that the 2nd Amendment were strictly about “militias”
    protecting against oppressive government, wouldn’t that void your
    “flintlock muskets” comment and necessitate that the citizenry keep up
    with technology? Or are you contending that our standing army (which our
    founders were opposed to the very idea of) is the militia? Anyway, the
    founding fathers never envisioned mass media or the internet either–
    shall we abolish the 1st Amendment as well? Only halfway joking….

    CT shooting seems to be more a case of unchecked mental illness than
    anything else. Restrictive gun laws were already in place in that state-
    14 day waiting periods and mandatory safety training for handgun
    purchases. The shooter didn’t own the weapons he used. He stole them and
    murdered their owner (his own mother) because criminals BY DEFINITION
    do not care about laws.

    I think the nation would be better served
    talking about the lack of access to affordable healthcare and the
    stigma that society attaches to mental illness more than some
    misinformed anti-gun rant.

Comments are closed.