4 votes

Stop All Potential Bans on "Defense Weapons" by the Central Government

The central government caused the deaths of over 500,000 Iraqi children during the 1990's with economic sanctions and then publicly stated that the deaths of those youngsters were justified in pursuance of their desired ends. If the central government is capable of dismissing the inflicted deaths of half a million children, then the central government is capable of anything.

Regardless of the cause, do you really think the central government actually gives a damn about any children that happen to die domestically?

To the central government, situations that provoke emotion are simply an opportunity to demagogue in attempts to make gains on their agenda. Does 9/11, the Iraq War, the Afghanistan War, the TSA, and the Patriot Act ring a bell?

Don't let the central government ban defense weapons like Hitler, Stalin, or Mao. That is just the first step in a long line of inevitable tyranny that will ensue if given the opportunity.

This is not an instance where anyone wants to say - "I told you so."

Resist all attempts to ban defense weapons.

Trending on the Web

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

Defense Weapons?

Not only do they need to stay away from 'defense weapons', whatever that is, but they had best keep their grubby-paws off of 'offense weapons'.

With respect to the 2nd Amendment, "Defense Weapons"

is a much more appropriate term.

Perhaps...Perhaps Not...

Not being argumentative, merely introducing a divergent concept and thought...

If deployed, is that 'well regulated militia' mentioned in the prefactory clause of Amendment II, going to defend or take the fight to the opposition, aka offensive operations?

When the Declaration of Independence is taken into account, as it must be, is it describing a 'defense' when it states that it is the right and the duty to 'throw off' such government?

"...But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security..."

If pondered in the context of defense from crime or related areas, 'defense weapons' is an appropriate terminology.

When Amendment II and one of our Organic Laws is taken into account, then I propose that my EBRs (evil black rifles) and other such 'arms' are 'offense weapons' merely being peacefully held in check until and unless required to be deployed.

Just something to think about...

And their deployment would be in defense of our rights...

At least, that is how I see it.

For instance, if they forcibly try to disarm the public, the public has a right to defend itself. I do not believe in the initiation of force. I was always taught to never start a fight but to do my best to finish it.

Also, how can an inanimate object be evil?

A Jedi uses the force

for knowledge and defense. Never for attack.

Technically "attacking" someone who is attacking you is defense.