No one is coming for your guns … yet

[cce1302]

Yeah...Just read the words and post your comments.

The laughs just keep coming.

I’m sure I lost a lot of readers right off the bat with my headline, but for those of you who are willing to hear me out (and if you are still reading I am going to assume that you are), let me explain my position to you.
Gun control is an absolute joke in this country. Background checks are all well and good, but if you can turn around and sell the gun to your neighbor without one, they’re utterly pointless. Assault weapons being sold to the general public is ridiculous. Nobody needs an AR15 to shoot a deer. And this whole open carry movement just terrifies me.


It seems to me that while some people are so adamant about their Second Amendment rights, they’ve forgotten all about my First Amendment ones — specifically my right to life. Sorry, that should trump your “right” to sling a semi-automatic weapon over your shoulder and sit in the booth next me at a restaurant.


Gun control is a political platform utilized by both parties to pander to the masses and garner votes. It sickens me that human lives are the cost of winning an election nowadays.

Because this is a column, inherently an opinion piece, I’m not going to pull out a bunch of stats and quotes to support my cause (although they are abundant.) But there is one that I can’t let go. The majority of people I talk to seem to think that President Obama is “out to get your guns” when in reality, the first Bush administration had stricter gun laws.


In fact, two of the most critical gun control measures that ever passed took place in the 1990s: 1993’s Brady Bill and 1994’s Assault Weapons Ban — both passed by a Republican president (George H.W. Bush) with the help of strong vocal support by former President Reagan.


The reality is that our forefathers in 1791 had no idea about the weapons technology we would have in the future. The notion that the constitution is static is absurd. This is why they are called “amendments” so that they can be amended to keep up with the times.


Mass shootings have almost become common place in today’s media, and every time one happens the same rhetoric is replayed: “Now is a time of mourning, and not an appropriate time to discuss gun control.”

So, my question is: when is the appropriate time? When do we as a society decide to finally catch up with the rest of the modern world and say enough? What exactly are you defending with your “well regulated militia?” Because I guarantee that whatever you may have in your personal arsenal is a joke compared to what the most well funded military on the planet has to bring to the field.


As much as I would like to, I am not calling for the complete disarming of the American public. What I would like to see are some reasonable restrictions put into place.

For starters, registration. This seems obvious to me. When you sell your car, the registration of the car follows it from owner to owner — it should be no less for firearms. Licensing to own a gun would then logically follow. I don’t have a problem with hunting rifles or family heirloom pieces either.


I’m not overly fond of handguns, but I’ve learned to pick my battles. This “open carry” nonsense has to stop. Everyone wants to strap on a six shooter like Wyatt Earp, but they forget that the gunfight at the OK Corral took place because Earp was trying to enforce the town’s ordinance banning guns.

America, for all her technological advances, is in reality a very young nation. Perhaps in time, as our country grows in age and experience, we will finally see the error of our ways and begin to make amends. If we can only get through this rebellious teenager phase, we might even stand a chance

Unbelievable. Truly unbelievable. At least, I hope nobody believes that GHW Bush passed Brady & AWB in 1993 & 1994.

I highlighted some of the best stuff, but even the normal colored stuff is pretty funny.


No one is coming for your guns … yet - Pickens Sentinel - pickenssentinel.com

 

[Kirk Freeman]

At least, I hope nobody believes that GHW Bush passed Brady & AWB in 1993 & 1994.

Have you ever heard of INGO?

 

[GodFearinGunTotin]

It's hard to come up with smart, witty, or just plain old wise-*** retorts to this crap. So...; ; ; will have to do.

 

[Beowulf]

It seems to me that while some people are so adamant about their Second Amendment rights, they’ve forgotten all about my First Amendment ones — specifically my right to life. Sorry, that should trump your “right” to sling a semi-automatic weapon over your shoulder and sit in the booth next me at a restaurant.

Last I checked, the First Amendment to the US Constitution does not include a right to life (that was sort of implicit in the whole document). What an idiot.

 

[Classic]

Well if it had been "Billery" it wouldn't really fit the writer's agenda, so she just stretched the truth a little.

 

[88GT]

Have you ever heard of INGO?

No kidding. That could have been written by a few INGOers.

 

[Bennettjh]

First Amendment=right to life? That's a new one...

 

[M67]

It seems to me that while some people are so adamant about their Second Amendment rights, they’ve forgotten all about my First Amendment ones — specifically my right to life. Sorry, that should trump your “right” to sling a semi-automatic weapon over your shoulder and sit in the booth next me at a restaurant.

Last I checked, the First Amendment to the US Constitution does not include a right to life (that was sort of implicit in the whole document). What an idiot.

It does give you the right to say something stupid because it's your opinion.


But agreed.....complete idiot.

 

[NyleRN]

This guy is laughable at best

 

[87iroc]

I was just going to post this. I didn't get past the Germans Bombing Pearl Harbor though...errrrr Bush Sr passing the Brady bill.

 

[SteveM4A1]

 

[drillsgt]

That was funny about when is time to have a "discussion", the anti-'s don't even wait for the bodies to be cold before they're trying to ram something through congress.

 

[Bigphil5000]

Our forefathers not having an understanding of " future weapons technology" makes no sense at all. So what I'm supposed to be prepared to fight today's tyranny with musket ?

 

[JetGirl]

Our forefathers not having an understanding of " future weapons technology" makes no sense at all. So what I'm supposed to be prepared to fight today's tyranny with musket ?

The 2nd doesn't apply to weapons technology of *today*. Just like the 1st does not apply to media technology of today.
Wait... I mean...
Internet, TV, radio is covered by the 1st (even though the technology wasn't around when the amendment was written) because the Forefathers had the foresight to know that we may *someday* actually have the technology to fire semi-auto... Wait...
Um...
I mean...

 

[MCgrease08]

More of the same tired arguments we've heard ad nauseam. No real facts, statistics or even basic understanding of the issue or second amendment. Just more emotional clap trap.

If this is the best argument they anti's can muster then we will win. As Kirk would say, "their arguments are weak. Laugh at them."

 

[OakRiver]

I believe that the only thing factually correct in that entire article was the claim that it was an opinion piece


Just remember http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/07/daniel-zimmerman/seriously-one-wants-take-guns/#more-329740

 

[BiscuitNaBasket]

 

[DoggyDaddy]

The 2nd doesn't apply to weapons technology of *today*. Just like the 1st does not apply to media technology of today.
Wait... I mean...
Internet, TV, radio is covered by the 1st (even though the technology wasn't around when the amendment was written) because the Forefathers had the foresight to know that we may *someday* actually have the technology to fire semi-auto... Wait...
Um...
I mean...

Exactly. Freedom of the press should only apply to those articles written with quill and ink - the prevailing technology at the time of the writing of the Constitution.

 

[OakRiver]

Exactly. Freedom of the press should only apply to those articles written with quill and ink - the prevailing technology at the time of the writing of the Constitution.

And only in those States that made up this great country when the document was signed. Clearly the Founding Fathers could not envisage the country growing

 

[JetGirl]

That. Made me laugh. Out loud. Seriously. It's just...so... bwuahahaha