Posted on 01/18/2013 9:56:20 AM PST by civislibertas
Holding a gun in your hands does not guarantee either your safety or your life. There is no surety that someone else won’t have bigger or better weapons and can still take what you consider valuable.
The whole point of holding a gun in your hands is that it raises the bar of consequence and therefore of the required level of intent for any attacker. The gun does not say, “you cannot kill me”. The gun says, “you can kill me, but until you do, I remain free”.
To that end, the bigger or better the weapon is, the more freedom you have. If your attackers have bigger and better weapons, your freedom is in danger of being diminished or extinguished. This is the same common sense logic that we apply to arming our military forces to defend our nation.
The second amendment to the US Constitution does not guarantee our right to bear arms, it merely restricts the right of the government to infringe upon the natural right that we have to be free and to defend our freedom. No words can either sustain or deny that natural right. They are only reminders that such undeniable rights exist.
Strawman argument.
“Holding a gun in your hand ..... others will have bigger or better guns etc etc.”
I guess, without any gun in your hand makes you the safest then. You want to be a sheep, be my guest. But you don’t restict my right to bear arms. Personal safety and self-defense is only secondary benefit.
“Any gun will do, if you will do”
“The gun says, “you can kill me, but until you do, I remain free”.”
No, the gun says, “you might succeed in killing me, but also you might die trying.”
Holding a gun in your hand is lot safer than having no gun in your hands when confronted by an intruder.
Two posts in 6 six months, both from your blog and you never answer any reponses?
Another confused with playing with words, which makes Leftists feel so smart.
If that is his opinion, fine. I simply disagree with his interpretation. And I will trust my own judgment.
Having a treadmill and a set of weights doesn’t make you buff, but if you have them there’s much better odds that you’ll train with them so that you are.
Looks like we have a libtard troll spewing anti-gun BS.
So let me get this right, I am safer to be unarmed and let the criminals have what they want?
I have past experience that says otherwise.
6 times I have been in bad situations and every time a gun has ended that bad situation. The gun was in my hands and the criminals/thugs decided to go elsewhere.
This blog or whatever it is, was written by an idiot.
2.5 million times each year average citizens use guns, in their hands, to stop criminals from turning them into victims.
If this article was correct there would have been a lot less citizen survivors and a lot more dead self defenders.
Correct. It does not say that. It says;
"I suggest you don't threaten me further or attempt to harm me. Your life hangs in the balance."
*ahem*
My dad was a prison guard.
They make enemies who later get released.
When I was 10, the lunatic who was screaming and pounding on the front door after dad left for work at 10PM immediately went away when I pointed a .22 pistol at his forehead.
What do you supposed would’ve happened to me and mom if I hadn’t?
He sure wasn’t there selling magazine subscriptions.
It's how you use it.
Really.
I’m still wanting to find a way to carry my Bushmaster:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M242_Bushmaster
(Click on link to get the joke.)
The point, Sir, is that the right is natural and fundamental and cannot be either guaranteed or denied by words. If the 2nd amendment were modified or even struck down, the right would still exist. The 2nd amendment warns the government that they cannot tamper with that right.
What you wrote have nothing to do with ‘guns don’t make you safe’.
Also, this is a good start, but
WHY don’t you address my (and plenty others’) point?
If this were true, the POTUS wouldn't be protected by armed Secret Service agents everywhere he goes. If this were true, his daughters would not attend a school that uses armed security guards for protection.
The fact is that NONE of us is safe if only a FEW of us have weapons. When ALL of us have weapons, those in the wrong will have to decide if today is their day to die.
It's not as difficult as the gun-grabbing bed-wetters want to make us believe.
No, it doesn't, but I can guarantee you that you're better off with one than without.
Apparently nobody but me read past your first paragraph.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.