The Second Amendment was intended to protect the ability of the people to field infantry as well equipped as any they might have to face, in the form of enemies foreign or domestic. That is why arguments about a "sporting purpose" of a given firearm, or class of firearms, miss the boat--and why, indeed, the entire "sporting purpose" clause of the Gun Control of 1968 (and subsequent legislation) is a disgraceful insult to all the brave men and women who have died to defend the Constitution.That's today's St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner column--please give it a look.
"Weapons of war"? Those are just what Constitutional militias need. Those who claim otherwise are telling one more lie, which I suppose makes this article more closely related to Monday's than I had thought. [More]
Digg me?
Check out other Gun Rights Examiners:
- Atlanta: Self defense is harmful to the environment
- Austin: The ‘gun lobby’ and democracy
- Charlotte: Meet the ‘Rapist Protection Act’
- Cleveland: Would you know an assault weapon if you saw one?
- DC: DC Council's Mendelson's defense of DC gun registration stretches truth beyond breaking point
- Denver: Why big cities want gun control
- Los Angeles: Militia Movement, You Say..?
- Milwaukee: The Second Amendment and Guns, Today
- Minneapolis: There are no super heroes
- National: Oakland shootings show uselessness of 'gun control'
- Seattle: Nickels resurrects gun ban plan; is it a diversion? Gun groups vow to sue
- Wisconsin: If you open carry - Wisconsin laws you must know
Stumble it!
0 comments:
Post a Comment