Monthly Archives: February 2011

Should Guns Be Allowed in Our Society?

I read a blog article today lamenting the Arizona shooting  in January, the deaths of the six people who died and the shooting of U.S. Representative Gabrielle Giffords.   I agree, that day will live on as a tragedy of our societyhat will be

Gabriell Giffords

regretted for many years to come.  But the conclusion of that blog post was that guns should not be allowed to be a part of our society and that the Constitution is being misinterpreted.  I admire the author’s bold exclamation but feel that it is woefully lacking in understanding of the intent of our Constitution.  Jared Loughner was an unbalanced crazy person.  No law will ever protect us from crazy.

To say that guns should be outlawed as a logical result of this horrible shooting is like saying that when the jilted wife uses her car to run over her cheating husband repeatedly in a parking lot, that we should outlaw cars.  It is like saying we should outlaw kitchen knives when one is used to kill someone.

The right to keep and bear arms is not a misinterpretation of the constitution.  That right was deliberately written into the Constitution because our founding fathers recognized that it was needed to keep us free as a society.  It was pretty high on the list of rights too – like number two.

In order to completely understand and interpret our Constitution, you must try and understand the intent behind it, the temperament of the writers and social condition in which our founding fathers lived.  Thomas Jefferson, writer of the Declaration of Independence, contributor to the writing of the Constitution, and third President of the United States wrote that, “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”  He further wrote, “No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms.” 

Those statements are not ambiguous and certainly seem unlikely to be “misinterpreted”.  These words have only one meaning.  It is thinking such as this, which was common for all of our founding fathers and authors of the constitution, that caused the provision for we the people to keep and bear arms, to be specifically written into our Constitution.  Some people like to point to the line about the right to a militia as the intent for the ones who would bear the arms.  But it is the militia from who we should forever be able to protect ourselves, because as soon as we give up our arms, that militia will have little trouble leading us into tyranny and removing our freedom forever.  Take, for example, what is happening right now in Libya where the dictatorship is shooting its citizens who are dissenting against it.

So more and more, anti-gun extremists, chip away, a little bit at a time, at our rights to “bear arms” and own guns every time one is used to commit an egregious crime.  They use tragedies such as the Arizona incident to cry for more regulation and call for banning guns, ammunition, and large ammo magazines.  Incrementally, they remove a little bit more of our freedom, until one day, we will wake up to hear the local authorities tell us to bring our guns down to the police station and watch as they throw them away. 

These same anti-gun extremists ignore the fact that millions of people own guns safely and only rarely is one used to commit such a horrible crime.  They immediately cry for stricter gun laws and restrictions. 

Guns are used more frequently in the inner city by lawless criminals who obtained their guns illegally.  No law will ever take the guns from their hands.

The problem with this kind of extremist thinking is that, you can never legislate away mentally disturbed or unbalanced people by passing laws against guns.  You cannot ban guns and expect them to go away from our society.  People will always find a way to obtain them.  If it was possible to legislate them away, we would be able to also get drugs out of our society.  Drugs are illegal, but they’re still there.  The only people who have drugs are the ones who are getting them illegally – criminals.   The same would be true of guns.  If guns were made illegal, the only ones who would have them would be criminals.  Do you think they will willingly give up their guns?  I think not.  Frankly, I would prefer to protect myself from criminals with guns. 

Another problem with banning guns is that every time it has been tried, violent crime has risen in that population.  Criminals find it much easier to commit horrible crimes if they think their intended victims cannot defend themselves.  On the other hand, where guns are more prevalent, crime statistics are lower – significantly lower as a result.

Guns actually work to keep our society safe, especially when they are in the hands of law abiding citizens.  It is the law breaking citizens that we need to control – not guns.

GE

3 Comments

Filed under General, The Fight for Our Rights

Safety Checklist for Keeping Guns at Home

The decision for people to keep guns at home for personal defense is a personal one.  It is a serious personal matter to weigh as whether to maintain guns at their residence for personal protection.  It is important to consider all factors as to how they will keep their family safe with guns on site that can potentially harm someone if handled improperly.  Improper handling can most obviously happen if young children get hold of the firearms.  Any added safety benefit added by keeping a weapon at home depends in large measure on the owner’s having appropriate and clear understanding of safe gun handling and storage rules.  Factors to consider include; the members of the family, their ages, their knowledge of safe gun handling, availability of the weapons for emergency use, what to do in an emergency, and support of other members of the household for keeping firearms in the home.

If you decide that it is important to keep firearms in the home for personal family protection, it is important that safety rules be strictly enforced.  After all, if the firearm is not immediately available in an emergency, than it has little value for personal protection.  On the other hand, if keeping a firearm at home puts family members at risk, than that risk could outweigh the benefit.  But it makes no sense to keep a weapon for personal protection if you cannot access it quickly in an emergency.

If you choose to keep a firearm at home for your personal protection, it is imperative that you follow some safety rules to keep all members of your household and visitors safe.  Below is a checklist that can help you maintain that safety.

Make sure that:

  1. Firearms kept for security reasons are fully controlled at all times.
  2. Firearms are securely stored in a location inaccessible to children and other unauthorized persons at all times.
  3. Sporting firearms are unloaded before they are brought into the home and never loaded in the home.
  4. Sporting firearms are immediately cleaned and placed in secure storage when they are returned from hunting or target practice.
  5. When firearms are removed from storage that they are carefully checked to confirm that they are unloaded.
  6. Ammunition is stored under lock and key away from the firearms.
  7. The owner’s manual that came with the firearm must be read and understood.

Adherence to these simple rules can help to ensure the safety of yourself and loved ones.

Leave a comment

Filed under Gun Safety

Some Gun Enthusiast Words of Wisdom

  • The sword is more important than the shield, and skill is more important than either. The final weapon is the brain. All else is supplemental.
  • Never pick a fight with an old man. If he is too old to fight, he’ll just shoot you.
  • I carry a gun because a cop is too heavy
  • When seconds count, the cops are just minutes away.
  • A reporter did a human interest piece on the Texas Rangers. The reporter recognized the Colt Model 1911 pistol the Ranger was carrying and asked him, “Why do you carry a 45?” The Ranger responded, “Because they don’t make a 46.”
  • An old sheriff was attending an awards dinner when a lady commented on his wearing his sidearm. She commented, “Sheriff, I see you have your pistol. Are you expecting trouble?” He replied, “No Ma’am. If I were expecting trouble, I would have brought my shotgun as well.”
  • Beware of the man who only carries one gun. He probably knows how to use it.

And my personal favorite:

  • I was once asked by a lady who was visiting, if I had a gun in the house. I said I did. She said, “Well, I certainly hope it isn’t loaded!” To which I said, “Of course it is loaded, it won’t work without bullets!” She then asked, “Are you that afraid of someone evil coming into your house?” My reply was, “No, not at all. I am also not afraid of the house catching fire either, but I have fire extinguishers around, and they are all loaded too”.

1 Comment

Filed under Humor

California May Soon Ban Lead Ammunition

The California Fish and Game Commission is considering a state-wide ban on the use of lead ammunition for hunting making it illegal for the Gun Enthusiast to hunt with lead ammunition.  Two years ago they were successful at banning lead ammunition in areas inhabited by the California Condor with AB 821 that was signed into law by the governor.   Now through their hunting regulations, they have extended the ban to include .22 rimfire ammunition in the condor habitat.   This incremental approach puts them in line to extend the ban to the State’s borders, which they are considering now.

Proponents of the current ban have wanted a state wide ban from the very beginning.   The California Condor simply provided an excuse to implement a smaller version of the law to get us used to the idea.  The anti-hunting and anti-gun extremists now are pushing to extend their little ban to prohibit all Gun Enthusiasts from using the less expensive lead ammunition for all purposes whether hunting or target practice statewide.

Lead is a natural element that comes from the earth.  It is an element that all humans and animals alike require in their bodies, to a small extent.  However, large enough quantities can cause lead poisoning.  But it is ridiculous to make us believe that condors are likely to eat spent lead ammunition in the first place, thereby causing them to get ‘lead poising’.   But this is the premise that made it possible for the anti-gun lobbies to garner favor with the Fish and Game Commission and convince them to enact this preposterous regulation.  But now they are going for the entire State.

There is no scientific evidence that lead ammunition is causing lead poisoning in condors or any other animals.  Similarly, there is no evidence that lead ammunition is a risk to human health or the California environment.  What is evident is that a small group of extremist activists, who have friends on the Commission, will not stop until they successfully remove some more of our freedom and make the most affordable and ballistically superior ammunition illegal to all Gun Enthusiasts.   They know the damage that this will do to hunting interests in the State.  Further, it is a loss of freedom that we will never get back if they are successful at extending the ban on lead ammunition to cover the entire state. 

Californians are encouraged to call and write Fish and Game Commission and request them to oppose all efforts to extend the ban on lead ammunition.  I personally feel we should also request that they rescind the current ban covering the condor habitat. 

CONTACT INFORMATION FOR THE CA. FISH & GAME COMMISSION:

Mailing Address:

California Fish and Game Commission
1416 Ninth Street
P.O. Box 944209
Sacramento, CA 94244-2090

Phone Number:
(916) 653-4899

Fax Number:
(916) 653-5040

E-Mail:  (Please include “State-wide Lead Ammo Ban” in the e-mail subject line.)

Submit written comments, via electronic mail to:  

John Carlson, Jr.,  Executive Director fgc@fgc.ca.gov  
Jon K. Fischer,  Deputy Executive Director – Regulations and Policy jfischer@fgc.ca.gov
Adrianna Shea,  Deputy Executive Director – Special Advisor to the Commissioners ashea@fgc.ca.gov

Please compose your email with all civility beginning with:  Dear Fish & Game Commissioner (name)

5 Comments

Filed under General, News

Top Shot Begins Today on History Channel

The History Channel’s surprise hit “Top Shot” begins it’s second season today.  Gun Enthusiasts discovered this sharp shooting series last season that pitted ordinary shooters against one and other with different weapons, in different scenarios, competing to win the title of “Top Shot”.  What made the show interesting was all of the different types of guns they got to use each week to test their ability.  From muzzle loaders, to early lever action rifles, early revolvers and state of the art semi automatics and full automatics, they shot in different scenarios at different distances, losing at least one competitor each week.  

This season looks to be even better with even more challenging competitions and some great firearms that are sure to please the Gun Enthusiast.  From what I saw, some of the guns will include a 1911, the first military sniper rifle – the Sharps Falling Breech load rifle, a Thompson sub machine gun, ARs and many more.  Sixteen competitors from different walks of life will compete until one is left.  

Top Shot is on the History Channel Tuesday nights at 10 PM Eastern, 7 PM Pacific.  I am looking forward to it.  Let me know what you think.

 GE

1 Comment

Filed under General, News

South Dakota Bill Would Require All to Own a Gun

A bill has been introduced by South Dakota legislators last week that would require all citizens of the State to purchase at least one gun.  The bill would require all persons, within 6 months of their 21st birthday, to buy a gun of their preference, suitable to their temperament, “sufficient to provide for their ordinary self defense”. 

The bill that was introduced by Republican representative Hal Wick from Sioux Falls and is sponsored by no less that 4 other legislators, is intended to point out the absurdity of ObamaCare.  Recognizing that the bill has no real chance of proceeding, Rep. Wick said that he is introducing the bill to prove a point that the federal health care reform mandate passed last year by Congress, is unconstitutional.  In fact the federal health care bill, signed by the ‘Bamster’, was actually ruled “unconstitutional” by a federal court judge in Florida on Monday.  The unfortunate part of that ruling is that the Obama administration is thumbing their collective noses at it, in contempt of court, thereby creating a constitutional crisis – but I digress.  

This bill is actually openly mocking the federal healthcare bill, and is a form of protest against ObamaCare, which requires every American to purchase health care insurance or face a penalty.  It is demonstrating absurdity with absurdity.  The bill’s sponsor, Rep. Hal Wick said that he knows the bill won’t get far.  “Do I or the other co-sponsors believe that the State of South Dakota can require citizens to buy firearms?  Of course not,” he said.  “But at the same time, we do not believe the federal government can order every citizen to buy health insurance.” 

Frankly, I like it.  We need more lawmakers like this that are able to think on their feet and use a little common sense when trying to combat the liberal left.  Give them back a little of their own whacked out thinking.  It is fun though, to think about the consequences of actually passing a bill like this.  For one thing, the crime rate would certainly go down – dramatically.  

The Gun Enthusiast

1 Comment

Filed under General, News