Wednesday, August 26, 2009

Gun Toting Hate Mongers

Beginning late in the Clinton administration I've been noticing a growing gulf of ideals between the two major political parties in the United States. From Lewinsky to Bush Lied People Died, to now, town hall meetings with protesters carrying guns. Are these things just an example of citizens exercising their rights to disagree with government? Or, are we growing more and more divisive in our vision for this great country?

Maybe I'm the only right winger willing to be honest about this subject, but the carrying of guns to protest the health care bill is not a simple, "I'm carrying because it is my right to do so." It is instead, "I'm carrying this gun to remind you that the 2nd amendment exists to allow citizens to rise up against a corrupt government." And I'm a supporter.

Of course we don't want to say that is really what the "gun toting" is about. But it is. And that is okay. That is the purpose of the the right to bear arms, so that in the event of a government growing corrupt, the people have a means to remove them, forcibly if necessary, from their positions of power.

Imagine a world without this right. It really is the teeth in the constitution. Pretend if you will for a moment if all guns were removed from the people of this nation. Then imagine that legislators decide all on their own that they will no longer require an election to maintain power. How would you remove them? You couldn't. They would have the force of the military behind them and you would have no means of defense.

Are you okay with that?

2 comments:

Mookie said...

The Battles of Lexington and Concord were the start of armed conflict leading to our War For Independence, and happened in 1775. It was the result of long standing British troops (stationed and supported heavily to enforce the Intolerable Acts) who, under secret orders of the Crown, were to confiscate arms from Colonial Militias (also known as your average everyday man back then). 1775--first open armed conflict against the Crown, as an act of defense, and well before a Declaration of Independence was ever issued, and most colonists were stil seeking diplomatic solutions. Think about that for a bit.

renaissanceguy said...

I am not okay with a country in which only those in authority may have firearms. We have seen too many horrors in such countries.

An armed citizenry is good insurance against the need for an uprising. Our elected leaders know that they can only go so far.