George Washington on Gun Control

[jgreiner]

This says it all. He was wise enough to be fearful of an out of control federal gov't.

Another of his quotes:

"Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people's liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurrences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that's good."
George Washington
First President of the United States

 

[jwh20]

Yes, but George Washington could not have foreseen the "weapons of war" that now fill our streets. He would never have imagined people using "assault weapons" to protect themselves.

I mean really, do you think Washington imagined people in the United States having "military style weapons covered in nasty black plastic with deadly pistol grips that can fire enormously powerful ammunition", really?

As wise as Washington was, he'd have never imagined weapons that have no purpose other than mass-murder.

But I also don't think he imagined the "press" concentrated into a few mega-corporations controlled by inaccessible CEOs? Or that the local newspaper man, who everyone knew and debated at the pub would be replaced by one-way talking heads beamed through space. Or that voters would come to the polls not knowing the issues or the candidates or what they stood for.

I wonder what Washington would have thought about security checkpoints at airports or government buildings so that the government could be protected from the people it is supposed to serve?

I think George Washington would do just what he did a couple hundred years ago. He's be a revolutionary and put his life on the line to protect what was most precious to him. I see in the news the cry, "it's the children. Our most important asset." BALONEY! That's an emotional and foolish argument and Washington didn't say, "no, don't fight the British, they might hurt the children. We must protect them at all costs!"

Yes, our children are vitally important. But there are ABSOLUTELY things more valuable than they are. Freedom, liberty, opportunity, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Those things are what we must value most. If those are gone, then the children are gone also!

 

[dab77]

Really? What guns have no purpose but mass killing? Many AR's are used for hunting, competition, and recreational shooting. "Weapons of war", "enormously powerful ammunition" These "assault weapons" you speak look similar to the military rifles but are not the same. They are no more powerful than any hunting rifle. What makes a pistol grip deadly? Ugly black plastic? One man’s ugly is another’s beautiful. I really hope your comments were poor attempts at sarcasm. I am sure Washington would have a collection of ugly plastic rifles and enjoy shooting them as much as we do! If you truly cherish freedom you would realize the 2nd Amendment has no disclaimers. If you really feel that certain guns are evil remember this, you can ban all the guns you want and evil people will still commit evil acts. It's not the gun it's the people that are the problem.

 

[Bobby]

Yes, but George Washington could not have foreseen the "weapons of war" that now fill our streets. He would never have imagined people using "assault weapons" to protect themselves.

I mean really, do you think Washington imagined people in the United States having "military style weapons covered in nasty black plastic with deadly pistol grips that can fire enormously powerful ammunition", really?

As wise as Washington was, he'd have never imagined weapons that have no purpose other than mass-murder.

But I also don't think he imagined the "press" concentrated into a few mega-corporations controlled by inaccessible CEOs? Or that the local newspaper man, who everyone knew and debated at the pub would be replaced by one-way talking heads beamed through space. Or that voters would come to the polls not knowing the issues or the candidates or what they stood for.

I wonder what Washington would have thought about security checkpoints at airports or government buildings so that the government could be protected from the people it is supposed to serve?

I think George Washington would do just what he did a couple hundred years ago. He's be a revolutionary and put his life on the line to protect what was most precious to him. I see in the news the cry, "it's the children. Our most important asset." BALONEY! That's an emotional and foolish argument and Washington didn't say, "no, don't fight the British, they might hurt the children. We must protect them at all costs!"

Yes, our children are vitally important. But there are ABSOLUTELY things more valuable than they are. Freedom, liberty, opportunity, life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. Those things are what we must value most. If those are gone, then the children are gone also!

George Washington may not have forseen the weapons of today but it doesn't matter. The 2nd Amendment was not about limiting goverment control over muskets. It was designed to protect the principle that private citizens had a right to be heavily armed as much if not more so than the governments over them.

Remember what sparked the Revolutionary War in this country? The British were marching on Lexington and Concord. The reason WHY the British were marching on those towns gets forgotten at times. The Bristish troops were being sent to confiscate the American colonists stockpiles of cannons. What were Americans(i.e. private citizens) doing with the heaviest weaponry at the time?

The Founding Fathers remembered the lessons of Lexington and Concord and wrote the 2nd Amendment to limit government control over ALL arms. I am not avocating that you and I have tanks in our back yards. But, what is so bad about private citizens having access to and training with the same weapons as our modern military? It is what the American colonists were doing and they went to war to prevent the British government from restricting that access.

Thhe video below is my favorite 2nd Amendment video to date. It gives many examples in the Founding Fathers own words how they viewed weapons and who should control them.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRCPoGpPF6c&feature=share&list=UUyUPngKLxiB3xkUfHVDxGeg

 

[LordTio3]

I think he meant to write that in purple.

~LT

 

[Expat]

I think he meant to write that in purple.

~LT

I will hope, but given we have seen several others post that sort of attitude on here recently, I am not so sure.

 

[jwh20]

I think he meant to write that in purple.

~LT

I'm not sure what you mean by purple but my point was to make a point by using the silliness of the other side's lame argument.

The I'm serious about the rest of it. The freedom of the press has been co-opted in ways that have rendered it virtually meaningless. It's made that freedom a freedom only for those who can afford it.

It's like freedom of speech but the other guy gets a megaphone. I can say all I want to, but nobody can hear me.

I believe the 2A means EXACTLY what it says and I think the only mistake the authors made was to include that bit about the militia. I think they did that intentionally to put a "military" focus on the reason for arms. That was to differentiate it from the "hunting" need which didn't even need to be spoken of in that day. The anti's have misconstrued the meaning of the 2A for their own purposes.

 

[jwh20]

By the way, I'm also glad the writers of the Indiana Constitution didn't mince words:

The people shall have a right to bear arms, for the defense of themselves and the State.

 

[wakproductions]

Really? What guns have no purpose but mass killing? Many AR's are used for hunting, competition, and recreational shooting. "Weapons of war", "enormously powerful ammunition" These "assault weapons" you speak look similar to the military rifles but are not the same. They are no more powerful than any hunting rifle. What makes a pistol grip deadly? Ugly black plastic? One man’s ugly is another’s beautiful. I really hope your comments were poor attempts at sarcasm. I am sure Washington would have a collection of ugly plastic rifles and enjoy shooting them as much as we do! If you truly cherish freedom you would realize the 2nd Amendment has no disclaimers. If you really feel that certain guns are evil remember this, you can ban all the guns you want and evil people will still commit evil acts. It's not the gun it's the people that are the problem.

But... you don't need an assault weapon to kill a deer!

 

[-Rogue-]

Where is the Quote originally sourced from?

 

[UncleMike]

George Washington wanted the Colonists to be armed with The Brown Bess Musket, the assault weapon of it's day, the same as the British.
And......
Technology is irrelevant when it comes to human Rights.
Cave Men had the same rights as we do.
The only difference between us and the Cave Men is that we have nicer toys and more capable weapons.

 

[jwh20]

But... you don't need an assault weapon to kill a deer!

Do the deer know the difference?

 

[DragonGunner]

http://www.guncite.com/gc2ndbog.html


George never said it....I see alot of quotes that were never said, have a list of qoutes I have researched that are true....amazing how many false ones are out there.

 

[Bill of Rights]

Where is the Quote originally sourced from?

Good question. I've seen several sources that identify the "liberty's teeth" phrase as not one of Washington's statements.

http://www.google.com/search?as_q="...=any&safe=images&tbs=&as_filetype=&as_rights=

Blessings,
Bill

 

[No2rdame]

I'm not sure what you mean by purple

It's a highly loved color on this forum to indicate dripping sarcasm. I tend to use it quite a bit, and wish I could actually color my verbal communications with it.

 

[TiminMishawaka]

Yes, but George Washington could not have foreseen the "weapons of war" that now fill our streets. He would never have imagined people using "assault weapons" to protect themselves.

I mean really, do you think Washington imagined people in the United States having "military style weapons covered in nasty black plastic with deadly pistol grips that can fire enormously powerful ammunition", really?

Weren't private citizens allowed to own cannons and grenades then too? Hint: yes they were.

 

[DragonGunner]

George probably couldn't imagine airplanes that bomb people, or indoor toilets either......see the logic.

 

[Slapstick]

It's a highly loved color on this forum to indicate dripping sarcasm. I tend to use it quite a bit, and wish I could actually color my verbal communications with it.

FTFY

 

[draketungsten]

I always prefer Thomas Jefferson.

"...I presume he is a gun-man, as I am sure he ought to be, and every American who wishes to protect his farm from the ravages of quadrupeds & his country from those of biped invaders."

 

[pokersamurai]