Skip to comments.Second Amendment out-of-date (Barf Alert)
Posted on 04/20/2007 10:26:44 AM PDT by Thunder90
There was a time in American history when the Second Amendments right to bear arms promoted safety and a sense of well-being among the citizenry of the United States. Today, however, the Second Amendment seems to do nothing more than act as a precipitant of violent and life-threatening behavior. The days when the right to bear arms was relevant are now more than 200 years past, and furthermore, the demographics of America have changed beyond anyones wildest prophecy.
We no longer live in tight-knit farming villages where family solidarity is vital. Nor do we live in a country where minutemen need to be able to arm themselves with muskets at the drop of a hat and defend their nation. Today, we no longer even live in a country where children can safely play outside unsupervised. There are just too many lunatics, too many gangs, too many guns. And, tragically, everyone witnessed this week what happens when you mix lunatics and guns.
On the day of the Virginia Tech massacre, President Bush attempted to offer a heart-felt apology that had all the warmth and pathos of a public relations sound bite. I do not doubt the presidents condolence for the lives lost that day, but what is our leadership doing to keep these horrific incidences from happening? The answer, surprisingly enough, is nothing.
On May 4, 2000, before the Bush war machine even came into power, The Washington Post ran an article about a closed meeting of National Rifle Association members, during which these members boasted that if Bush won in November, they would have a president where we work out of their office. The NRA is not skittish of their ties to the Bush administration, and it is these ties that many point to as the reason President Bush allowed the federal ban on assault rifles to expire in 2004. Yet, the special interest favoritism of the Bush administration is nothing new. It is merely just another stick shoved in the gears of political progressivism.
Let us reason together. Whoever imagined that we could defeat smallpox, malaria or polio? These diseases that were once considered the scourge of humanity are negligible in comparison to the rampant violence and killing of our population with weapons that none should possess. It is time that we take firm steps to eradicate this epidemic, and it most certainly can be done.
American history has been and continues to be riddled with tragedies caused by gun violence. Stricter legislation has slowly been enacted over time. Antigun commercials have flooded television sets. And despite all the different forms of identification a gun owner may have to produce in order to get his hand cannon, guns continue to fall into the wrong hands. It may sound radical, to some very radical, yet every hand is a wrong hand when it comes to gun ownership.
I know that to the gun enthusiast, the idea of giving up even one pistol sounds like an atrocious encroachment on personal liberties. After all, they dont use their guns to harm anyone. However, the same right that allows a man to cabinet his pistols and rifles permits the opportunity for the mentally dysfunctional person to commit appalling acts of violence. Since it is difficult, at best, to mandate psychological testing for potential gun owners, the solution we need to embrace is to disallow all gun ownership to protect the many from the few.
Granted, the abolishment of guns would take years after its enactment for illegal and legal gun owners to be deprived of firearms through attrition and lack of availability. Still, I feel the dividend of this seemingly drastic alternative will save many more lives compared to hiding behind an archaic amendment in the Bill of Rights.
So, to all those who cant seem to make it through a day without covering their forearms in gunpowder residue, I suggest that police stations allow for civilians to test fire weapons under supervision. To all those who feel the need to kill their own dinner as opposed to making a trip to the local grocer, I suggest that you craft yourself a bow and arrow and practice your aim. And to all those who fear they may need to take the life of another at any moment, I suggest you take up martial arts. The right to bear arms should become something that exists only in history textbooks and the video game Grand Theft Auto.
Remember this April 19th (Waco Anniversary): the BATF is the Armed Forces of the international Gun Control lobby!
It’s still in the Constitution. It’s still the law of the land.
Have a nice day.
Max Schlusselberg ... is a freshman majoring in journalism.
Just some dopey kid.
“2nd Amendment out of date”
I keep going to the clerk’s office to see if marriage
license has expired, and they keep saying `No’.
Just another college dumba$$ writing in another dumba$$ college newspaper.
Yep They seem to think that if all guns
are outlawed, the modern outlaws will obey
the law and NOT obtain weapons! Idiots.
Besides, he suggests the ridiculous premise
that our society no longer faces the Wild
West dangers of roaming animals and maurading
savages. Those are pretty apt nomenclatures
for the Manson’s, Speck’s, Gacy’s, Bundy’s and
If you Google the author’s name, you’ll find that he has written several articles/columns for the Badger Herald that mark him as a member of the fascist left right down the line, from hating Pres. Bush, to decrying the war, to trivializing Saddam’s death, to global warming, and so on. In other words, he’s your average jounalism major. Nothing special about this clown.
Every American has the right to propose and work for any amendments to the Constitution he thinks are appropriate.
And the rest of us have the right to oppose those changes if we think they’re a bad idea.
It’s only when the courts short-circuit this process that problems arise.
Who is this NAZI?
"Let us reason together"
Here’s a thought, a la Rush’s “demonstrating obsurdity with obsurdity.”
I suggest creating a Bill of Non-Rights to document exactly those things liberals advocate. If you amend the Constitution by removing the 2nd amendment you will have in affect taken a right away. So it only seems appropriate to deliniate these non-rights so that they will stand out as special, as the “Bill of Rights” does.
It would go like —
1. NO right to free speech when in regard to hate, race, or other special groups to be addend on to as libs see fit.
2. No right to protect one’s self by possessing personal fire arms — period.
Someone please feel free to continue with this. When any of the 10 non-rights are brought up by the libs we can begin to refer to them as such.
The Second Amendment is vital to repelling tyranny, whcih is why liberals hate it so much.
Gun control has an evil downside...Genocide.
Our Founding Fathers valued the rights of the individual, and sought to protect those rights.
That is why they gave us a bicameral legislature.
That is why they gave us the electoral college.
And that is why they gave us a Constitutional Republic, rather than a "democracy".
My friends at JPFO would call him a lampshade.
Here is some of the kid's brilliant writing.
"...weapons that none should possess..."
"It is time that we take firm steps to eradicate this epidemic, and it most certainly can be done."
The saddest part of this paragraph is that malaria has not been eradicated. Millions still die from it because DDT was banned by libs.