Gun control has not worked in D.C. The only people who have guns are criminals. We have the strictest gun laws in the nation and one of the highest murder rates. It’s quicker to pull your Smith and Wesson than to dial 911 if you’re being robbed.
The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered as the palladium of the liberties of a republic.
False is the idea of utility that sacrifices a thousand real advantages for one imaginary or trifling inconvenience; that would take fire from men because it burns, and water because one may drown in it; that has no remedy for evils except destruction. The laws that forbid the carrying of arms are laws of such a nature. They disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes.
Continue reading “Favoring the criminal”
[T]he next time you read or hear about a murder victim, a rape victim or an assault victim, I want you to preface it with the word ‘unarmed’ so that murder victims become ‘unarmed murder victims’; this is especially true in rape. How many times have you read, ‘An unidentified woman, heavily armed with a semi-automatic weapon was raped by a man wielding a knife.’ No answer is necessary, right?
[T]he police do not and cannot protect law-abiding citizens from criminal violence … This thought may not occur to wealthy people who can shelter themselves in low-crime enclaves and who care not at all about their less fortunate neighbors. But no one knows it better than the police, who scrupulously preserve their own right to carry firearms on and off duty (and often after they retire as well) even while some of them advocate disarming those whom the police cannot protect.
Among the many misdeeds of British rule in India, history will look upon the Act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest.
Firearms are second only to the Constitution in importance; they are the peoples’ liberty’s teeth.
A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.
As the Founding Fathers knew well, a government that does not trust its honest, law-abiding, taxpaying citizens with the means of self-defense is not itself worthy of trust. Laws disarming honest citizens proclaim that the government is the master, not the servant, of the people …
The peaceable part of mankind will be continually overrun by the vile and abandoned while they neglect the means of self-defense. The supposed quietude of a good man allures the ruffian; while on the other hand, arms, like laws discourage and keep the invader and plunderer in awe and preserve order in the world as well as property. The balance of power is the scale of peace. The same balance would be preserved were all the world destitute of arms, for all would be alike; but since some will not, others dare not lay them aside … Horrid mischief would ensue were (the good) deprived of the use of them … the weak will become a prey to the strong.