Comment: Casey Get Your Gun

(See in situ)

In reply to comment: Ummm... Have you looked at (see in situ)

Casey Get Your Gun

Hello Casey, maybe I can help you with the 2nd amendment issue of gun ownership. I’m not putting words into Dr. Paul’s mouth but here is my understanding of his position with a few comments of my own.

Gun ownership is not a state issue as no state of the union may supersede the intent and limitations set by their US constitution and our Bill of Rights. Dr. Paul is of the old school of gun ownership within the context intended by our founding fathers.

Many of today’s politicians want to minimize our right by leading us to believe that gun ownership has something to do with hunting. It has nothing to do with hunting at least not defenseless animals. Or that maybe we aren’t mature enough to own guns carefully; also not true.

Our right of gun ownership is our right of self defense. This right is twofold.

1.. We have a right to defend ourselves, our families, our property, and our communities from direct hostility by anyone whether a common thief or a band of thieves.

2.. We have a right to defend ourselves from the hostility of a government that oversteps its authority and intentionally and maliciously violates our rights. This was the real concern of our founding fathers as they had just fought a long and bloody war and wanted to insure a peaceful but not defenseless society.

Our government is not concerned that we may intentionally or unintentionally harm ourselves or others because we own guns; that is just a ruse. Their real concern is that we may actually try to defend ourselves against the government. A citizenry unarmed is a citizenry controlled.

I think the wording of the 2nd Amendment is pretty clear in its intent: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”

Hopes this helps,