Our Right To Bear Arms

Comment

Comment by MICHAEL MATHIS on April 18, 2009 at 4:49pm

Comment by okpatriot on April 17, 2009 at 7:37pm

Hey Margaret,

Would you please educate me about the NRA? Please share what you know. Thanks!

Comment by Holli Nass on April 17, 2009 at 12:31pm

Maybe not but they would draw a lot of people to the rallies and more than anything else we need to show the left we are stronger than they think

Comment by margaret (Salty Margarita) on April 17, 2009 at 12:30pm

The NRA is not your freind

Comment by Holli Nass on April 17, 2009 at 11:32am

I have heard about constitutional rallies on other sites on the 4th of July I am saying we petition the NRA to get involved because if not now when.Are we going to let them take our gun rights away. The NRA has millions of members how great would it be for millions to show up to rallies on the 4th

Comment by MICHAEL MATHIS on April 14, 2009 at 6:10pm

Well imagine that....Who would have guessed?

Anti-gun laws favor criminals

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Posted: April 14, 2009
1:00 am Eastern

© 2009

Saturday, April 3, three police officers in Pittsburgh were brutally murdered in the line of duty. Eric Kelly, Stephen Mayhle and Paul Sciullo III were senselessly murdered as they responded to a domestic violence call. The incident took place just two weeks after four police officers were similarly murdered in Oakland.

While most of us can scarcely imagine what it is for families and friends to suffer such loss, to the surprise of no one, in the aftermath of such brutality, politicians are seizing upon the horrific acts of the criminally insane to create more restrictive gun-ownership measures, even as anti-firearm groups are calling for an end to private gun ownership.

The problem is that increasing restrictions on, and/or removing firearms from, responsible gun-owners will not keep us safe, and it sure as heck won't stop violent gun crimes. At what point, if ever, will anti-gun zealots and the "throw the baby out with the bath water" politicians get the message? It isn't responsible gun owners that are committing gun crimes. At what point, if ever, will they understand that an AK-47, a bazooka, or a dozen .357 magnums are no more dangerous in the hands of responsible gun owners than a Rottweiler or pit bull is in the hands of loving and responsible pet owners?

The story of how lives are saved when just one courageous man is armed: "Shooting Back: The Right and Duty of Self Defense"

There is no greater truism than, "If guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns." I personally know dozens of men and women who own and/or legally carry firearms. They, and those like them, do not need more restrictions. They are not the ones committing crimes – just the opposite – they are among the most responsible people I know. Some are collectors of firearms, some are sporting enthusiasts, and others own and carry firearms for their personal protection. Why should they be singled out or lumped together under restrictive bans designed to curb crime that they already abhor?

The corner grocer, bank tellers and law enforcement officers do not fear legitimate, responsible gun owners – they fear criminals and gang members with guns. And further to the point, legislatures can pass all the anti-gun legislation they want – criminals will still get guns and use them

Comment by okpatriot on April 13, 2009 at 7:13pm

Another great story, with great results. Thanks for sharing, Michael Mathis.

Comment by MICHAEL MATHIS on April 13, 2009 at 6:44pm

Wont hear this on the news either...Sure dont wont the people to know that we really are the good guys...


Around 10:45 p.m. an armed robber entered an Alcoholics Anonymous center in Columbia, S.C. The robber brandished a handgun and ordered the people inside the center to “Gimme what you got.” One of the AA visitors, who is also a Right-To-Carry permit holder, drew his gun and fired at the armed criminal, striking him multiple times, ending the robbery. The robber was taken to a local hospital where he died. (The State, Columbia, S.C. 04/13/09)
Dont we all have the right to protect ourselves???

Comment by Gary De Capua on April 13, 2009 at 4:45am

James Madison is considered the most influential contributor to the United States Constitution, and he worked vigorously to see it ratified. On June 8, 1789, he introduced his proposed amendments to the Constitution, which would eventually become known as the Bill of Rights. Supporters of the Constitution called themselves Federalists and labeled their opponents as Antifederalists. The Antifederalists attacked the Constitution on several grounds. They first objected to the absence of a bill of rights. Several states had adopted written guarantees of the rights of citizens to ensure that the government would not destroy the liberty of the people. A bill of rights would assert the freedoms of speech, assembly, and religion, and maintain the protection of property and due process of law and the right to keep and bear arms. Antifederalists feared that the new, strong central government could too easily threaten these rights and be unchecked by the states.

GUN CONTROL” Gateway to Tyranny
Recently, with the discovery and publication of a letter from the Library of Congress to Senator Dodd from July 1968 confirming his request to have a series of Nazi laws translated from documents provided by Senator Dodd, controversy has arisen as to how much of the Gun Control Act of 1968 was taken directly from gun registration laws enacted and enforced by the Nazis in Germany and areas under Nazi control. It is believed that Senator Dodd obtained copies of the Nazi laws while serving as a prosecutor at Nuremberg.

Congress claims that the amendments can be changed by the will of the people. By this line of reasoning the amendments are open to interpretation. This is a clever deception: The political manipulation of language, by obfuscation, e.g. WAR IS PEACE. Using language to obfuscate meaning or to reduce and eliminate ideas and their meanings that are deemed dangerous to its authority.

The biggest crime committed today against the Constitution:
Did you know that the biggest crime committed today against the Constitution and the inalienable rights of the people of the United States of America: Is from our government's violation of The Oath of Office?) An oath of office is an oath or affirmation a person takes before undertaking the duties of an office, usually a position in government. Such oaths are often required by the laws of the state, before the person may actually exercise the powers of the office they have been elected, or appointed.
For more information on the Oath of Office, visit: http://www.civilrightstaskforce.info/

Gary

Comment by okpatriot on April 11, 2009 at 5:03pm

Hey Michael Mathis,

Loved the story from San Antonio.

• ‹ Previous
• 1
• …
• 9
• 10
• 11
• 12
• 13
• Next ›
• Page