Support for the 2nd Amendment

Posted: April 17, 2014 in Articles

There are many people who are of the opinion that the government should implement more gun control on Americans or that guns should just be taken away from Americans, period. Unfortunately for pro gun-control people, three recent incidents in America and one in China are all supportive of guns. All four of these incidents are connected to the gun issue in some way and in two of the cases, if guns had not been involved, people may very well have gotten injured or killed. There are already strong and sensible arguments for gun freedom and these four news stories all support various such arguments.

The first two stories illustrate perfectly the argument that if guns are taken, crazy people will be just fine with using another weapon of some sort. In the event that a criminal cannot get his hands on a gun, he will be happy to use something else. For example, on April 9, 2014, a sixteen-year-old student at Franklin Regional High School in Pennsylvania stabbed twenty-two other people in the building – twenty-one other students and one security guard. Nobody was killed, but several victims were injured very seriously and required surgery. There was no gun involved, but there was still a lot of blood and violence. In another case, twenty-nine people were killed and over one hundred were injured in China when a gang of criminals armed with knives attacked a rail station. (We’ve already covered this story in our podcast a few weeks ago). Once again, there was no gun involved, but about one hundred thirty people were killed and wounded in the attack. It is possible for violent criminals to use other weapons besides guns, so banning guns would only result in violence with different weapons, assuming the criminals could not get guns off of the black market. There is no point to banning one kind of weapon in an effort to fight violence, because it seems that criminals are fine with using all kinds of weapons.

In fact, on March 25, 2014, one criminal used a syringe as a weapon when faced with arrest for shoplifting in Detroit. Drug addict Joshua Joseph Silva was stealing from a Home Depot when unarmed security tried to arrest him. Silva used a contaminated syringe to stab one of the guards multiple times. Worried that Silva would kill one of the guards, an armed civilian pulled his gun on Silva and ordered him to drop his syringe and get on the ground. In this case, there was a gun involved, but no one was killed. Some people would expect there to be killing just because there was a gun, but that is not what happened. Instead, the person with the gun saved the day and Silva wound up getting arrested. As much as possible, this story had a good ending. The criminal was jailed and the wounded guard was placed under medical care at a nearby hospital, and all because of a concealed pistol that a nearby shopper was carrying. If guns were banned, this story would have turned out differently, and it probably would not have turned out well.

Guns saved the day again in Nevada in April 2014 when a local rancher’s grazing rights were violated by the federal government, specifically the federal agency BLM (Bureau of Land Management). The armed BLM took away the rancher’s cattle and even killed a few. The rancher’s family and locals responded by massing together and marching to where BLM had taken the cattle. With federal snipers overlooking them from a bridge, the crowd was able to take back all the cattle. The only apparent reasons that the federal agents did not fire on the crowd was because there were a lot of supporters for the rancher – (we heard an estimate of one thousand) – some of whom were armed. There was also the presence of media. The cowboys and their supporters were not a hostile crowd – women and children were present; they were simply going to retrieve what belonged to the Bundy’s. In this scenario, guns may have helped to prevent another situation like Tiananmen Square, where a corrupt government crushed peacefully protesting citizens. If the protesters in Nevada had been unarmed and if there had been no media coverage, it is very possible that there would have been a lot of violence. If one side has guns and the other side doesn’t, well, figure out who has total power over the other.

These four news stories, the stabbings in Pennsylvania, the stabbings in China, the armed civilian who saved the day in Detroit, and the armed Nevada cowboys and others who stood up to unjust actions by the federal government, are all examples of why Americans must never give up their right to own and bear arms. Americans must never allow the U.S. federal government to infringe on that right more than it already has. The most important event out of these four is probably the one in Nevada. The 2nd amendment is in our Bill of Rights to ensure that the American people are not helpless against a tyrannical government, should one ever rise. Americans do not have a 2nd amendment so that they can go hunting or even so that they can protect themselves. No, it was put there so that Americans could fight an evil government if the need arose.

Hopefully, people will realize that taking away guns in the name of safety will not help anything and will actually just allow the federal government to exercise total control over the American people.

by Dink

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s