Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Reader Reaction: 2nd Amendment Vigilance Isn’t Just Some Fringe Hobby For Trigger-Happy Nut Cases

May 8, 2013 by  

Reader Reaction: 2nd Amendment Vigilance Isn’t Just Some Fringe Hobby For Trigger-Happy Nut Cases
PHOTOS.COM

The reader comments that continue to follow from our Tuesday article about one man’s effort to rally 2nd Amendment supporters for a nonviolent armed march on Washington, D.C., range from all-out enthusiasm for the idea to indignant disdain for firearms and their place in American life.

But the majority of comments you’re leaving reveal reasoned and thoughtful reflection on the implications of taking the fight to preserve the Constitutional right to bear arms — in such a very direct (and illegal) way — to the seat of power. Most of them don’t make for the kind of fodder the mainstream media craves in its ongoing depiction of gun rights watchers as mindless fools, trigger-happy gun addicts who fantasize about Taking The Power Back in some John Rambo-style orgy of revolt.

To be sure, readers largely agree that citizens must take their Constitutional rights back from the modern iteration of what American government was originally designed to be. But most readers also assert that this proposed July 4 armed demonstration isn’t the flashpoint for that kind of revolution, and that there are better and more effective ways to hold our leaders accountable to their oaths.

And, as the comments from a few veterans demonstrate, those who defend the idea largely do so with a passion informed by conscience, experience and sacrifice.

Some excerpted highlights of your conversation (so far). Only formatting changes have been made to what readers have written:

  • …NO FIREARMS! That is an invitation to disaster. I can’t think of a better way to convince the statists that the 2nd Amendment has to go, along with private ownership of firearms. This is either a false flag effort to convince middle America that gun owners are gun nuts or just the stupidest idea in a long time, rivaling some of the BHO administration’s stupid ideas.
  • While I can support the march itself I cannot support being armed especially openly. The chances of Bloomberg inserting a ringer with instructions to start something quite possibly including firing shots is just too great.
  • Bad, Bad, Bad Idea. Let the 2nd Amendment “Speak For Itself” Please don’t fall for this “Trap” because that will be all it takes for every anti – 2nd Amendment Agency in this Country to scream “See, We Were Right” Guns must be confiscated from everyone!!
  • You know that this will NEVER remain peaceful despite your best intentions! That does not make the MSM happy or give them a news bite! You are setting up Patriots for Liberal slaughter in the media or bloody on the pavement.
  • I am a STRONG Supporter of the 2nd Amendment!!! But This march has “FAIL” Written all over it! One Itchy Finger and it will turn into a BLOOD BATH! Exactly what the Libs Want! Martial Law and WE all are in for a BAD TIME!!!
  • … IT’S A GOOD IDEA LIKE I SAID, JUST NOT AT THIS PARTICULAR POINT IN TIME. WAY TOO MUCH POTENTIAL FOR THINGS TO GO HORRIBLY WRONG, IF YA ASK ME !!! REMEMBER THE LESSONS OF “LIBERALISM 101″ – “NEVER LET A CRISIS GO TO WASTE”. WELL, HERE’S A PERFECT OPPORTUNITY FOR A “MANUFACTURED” CRISIS………………………………….
  • …The 2nd Amendment does not automatically give credibility and trust to those who open carry. A huge responsibility comes with the right to own and carry guns.

While it’s too long to quote, scroll down and check out BrotherPatriot’s seven-step alternative method for carrying out the march without inducing anyone to violate the law.

Finally, one endorsement of the demonstration that’s hard to read with a dry eye:

This old Vietnam vet will be there. I just hope that I can get some help up the hills in my wheelchair. I can only walk about 300 yards. I will not be carrying a gun, but a Bible and a copy of the bill of Rights will be on my lap.

Ben Bullard

Reconciling the concept of individual sovereignty with conscientious participation in the modern American political process is a continuing preoccupation for staff writer Ben Bullard. A former community newspaper writer, Bullard has closely observed the manner in which well-meaning small-town politicians and policy makers often accept, unthinkingly, their increasingly marginal role in shaping the quality of their own lives, as well as those of the people whom they serve. He argues that American public policy is plagued by inscrutable and corrupt motives on a national scale, a fundamental problem which individuals, families and communities must strive to solve. This, he argues, can be achieved only as Americans rediscover the principal role each citizen plays in enriching the welfare of our Republic.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Reader Reaction: 2nd Amendment Vigilance Isn’t Just Some Fringe Hobby For Trigger-Happy Nut Cases”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Doc Sarvis

    The NRA strategy for gaining money for itself and its gun manufacturers is working. The Second Amendment is NOT under attack despite what the NRA wants the uninformed to believe.

    • NObama_Holder_Reid_Pelosi_2012

      Can always rely on you to spew your liberal propaganda. Anytime there is a bill that contains words such as “control” or “ban”, it means that someones freedoms and liberties are being or going to be reduced. Yes it is under attack when words such as ban and control are in direct conflict with “shall not be infringed”. Apparently you are in capable to know or understand the purpose and the reason for the 2nd Amendment. It has nothing to do with hunting or skeet shooting or even personal defense. Back when the 2nd amendment was written, having a gun was a necessity for most in order to eat and since many lived in remote areas and especially for those who would venture to travel westward definitely needed a gun for personal protection. In short guns were a major part of their every day life for food and protection much like a refrigerator and electricity is a necessity for our daily life. The 2nd amendment is specific and is intended to be in the bill of rights to protect the constitution and this republic from tyranny and dictatorship.

      You know that as well as other liberals, but you ignore the real intentions and purpose of the 2nd amendment. Everyday that goes by and every proposed bill that is introduces is further supporting evidence of the dictatorial intention of this Administration and the democrat party by which submits these bills and the manner in which they submit them.

      • Doc Sarvis

        You may not understand the meaning of “A well-regulated Militia”.
        Not all controls or bans are bad either. Bans on harmful substances in our water, air, and food are not bad nor are controls on worker safety, use of our roads, fair business practices, etc.

        • dagov

          There are many intelligent people who know Constitutional Law that do not share you interpretation of “A well regulated militia”. As for the other off topic issues you insert my only suggestion is to stay on topic and that has to do with gun control not air, food, water etc. Have a great day as I am going on an aquatic marine life survey. (Fishing)

          • DaveH234

            It seems those academics of the constitution even are indifferent when defining the intent of the document. Like in any Democracy, differences of opinion are good for the sake of argument. We should stop calling people gun nuts and gun grabbers as definitions they are more like name calling and ridiculous. Most aren’t nuts or grabbers, seriously.

          • vicki

            Fortunately we are not a Democracy. A place where 50%+1 people can take away any rights they want.

            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N4r0VUybeXY

        • vicki

          We do understand English (as did SCOTUS). As a result we know that the meaning of “A well-regulated Militia” is not a condition nor limitation on our right to keep and bear arms.

          http://www.firearmsandliberty.com/unabridged.2nd.html

        • Michael Shreve

          A state militia consists of EVERY able bodied citizen of the state. Well regulated merely means under the authority of the state.

    • Chester

      Doc, don’t often disagree with you, but too many people ARE shooting at that Second Amendment now. This march has zip to do with the NRA. In fact, they would be among the people speaking against it for the very simple reason that they do believe in abiding by the law of the land. In a city where even concealed carry is highly regulated, and open carry is restricted to police and security personnel, this march will bring nothing but trouble, as a bunch of marchers will have their guns confiscated, and get to spend some time in DC and Maryland jails until they can have a court hearing. Oh, they will NOT get their guns back, and quite likely will lose their gun ownership permits once all is said and done.. Guaranteed none will be allowed to own a handgun again.

      • Dave

        The march has EVERYTHING to do with the NRA. The NRA is in the top 5 most power lobbys on the Hill. It is their marketing dollars that fool the willing to believe that background checks, allowing law enforcement better methods of sharing data and tracking the sales of firearms is an attack on the second Amendment. The NRA just had their show in Houston and they were spreading fear and lies for the purposes of getting idiots to part with their money to buy more guns and to keep Wayne LaPierre in his almost $1,000,000 a year salary. The man is a serial liar. in 2008, the liar said Obama would come for your guns as soon as he is elected and all Obama did in that first 4 years was allow gun owners to take their guns on Fed Land. NRA BS strikes again. Then Newtown hits and a nutty women amasses a small arsenal and teaches her mentally handicapped son to shoot a legally obtained AR-15 while allow this same son to play 1st person shooter games knowing that her son has issues. The kid goes to that school and recreates the video game in real life. If the assulat weapons ban and reductions in magazine sizealong with mental health check and background check at the point of sale were in place, maybe a few of those kids would be alive today.
        The 2nd Amendment is NOT back and white. I like most people in this country support the assault weapons ban and limiting the size of magazines. That is not the same thing as taking away your second amendment rights when you can still own handguns, rifiles and shotguns.
        It is sick and twisted to think that on the one hand, a person supports the military and law enforcement for being brave to do the work that they do for us, then on the next, they are just waiting to disarm you and take over. That is the NRA/Conservative fear/spin machine working overtime to create this hysteria. We need to have common sense, not a free for all in this country.

        • laidbackrebel

          Dave, there is significant evidence that the Sandy Hook massacre was a government sponsored “false flag”, just to cause elevated emotions, and open a door to gun confiscation, one step at a time. If you do the research, as I did, you find many discrepencies, in the official version of the event. I believe that this agenda driven gang would do anything to further their achievement of total enslavement of the people. Yes,…I am saying that I believe Obunghole ordered the murder of these teachers, and children. He would call them “collateral damage”, necessary to accomplish total gun confiscation, which is his eventual goal. If you give an inch, he will take 100 miles.

          • Dave

            Out with your proof. Otherwise that is just a wild assertion. I believe you are lying. I don’t agree with Obama on all the issues issues but he is a loving family man and there no way he orders the killing of small children to forward getting rid all guns when that isn’t even close to what he is suggesting in his proposals.

          • Nadzieja Batki

            How do you know that O is a loving family man? Tyrants also had “nice families” as history has shown, what is written and shown for photo ops may not be reality.

          • Dave

            Nads,
            From every bit of information I have ever read. Do you have anything to the contrary?
            Any photos of any child beatings?
            So Obama is a tyrant? How is that?

          • vicki

            Please share your research. Not everyone here has the time to dig into complicated coverups.

          • Jeff

            I don’t think you’d want the results of lb’s “research” on your stoop lit on fire, would you?

          • Jeff

            Really? I think there is far more significant evidence you are insane. If proof were offered that your accusation that Obama murdered those people is completely off base, would it change your opinion of him at all? Of course it wouldn’t because you are nuts. Get over it. He’s Black; he’s a Democrat; and he got elected President. He’s smarter than you, and better than you in every way. And don’t forget, he’s Black!!!

        • Eddie G.

          Well Dave, you make a lot of noise for someone who has never met Wayne LaPierre personally. I have and he and I had quite a chat at an NRA gathering in Casper,WY some years ago. Wayne is an absolute gentleman whom I think even dogs won’t bite and he’s an eloquent speaker as well. He’s no more a fear monger nor liar than the moon is made of green cheese. You want to meet a fear monger and great prevaricator then look no farther than your hero Obama. Wayne hasn’t the ability or capacity to be anything Obama represents. Wayne has been tireless for years in traveling the country crusading the freedoms our constitution gives us. He’s a dedicated all American who loves his country and has disdain for leftists like you and your Messiah who take potshots at the NRA with your own lies and distortions. Go ahead and rebuke me but I don’t have to lie because I’ve my information about what a great organization the NRA is first hand from the man who runs the show. He didn’t brainwash me like your media and chosen elected do you, I’m old enough to recognize the truth when I hear it. By the way, the NRA has the highly successful Eddie Eagle program teaching kids in schools where invited to do so, about firearms and firearms safety. “When you see a gun,don’t touch,go tell an adult” That’s accomplished more good than your feel good gun laws and bans ever have and will. Nuff said!

          • Dave

            I am sure if you agree with Wayne, he is a charming fellow and people in powerful positions never lie right?. Wayne has been crusading for his own wallet and power while drumming up fear so people go out and buy more guns.

            Case in points

            http://www.motherjones.com/mojo/2013/05/nra-lie-obama-gun-control-registry-survey

            http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/plum-line/wp/2013/01/11/the-morning-plum-the-nras-big-lies/

            http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/frame_game/2013/04/_80_percent_of_police_oppose_background_checks_no_the_nra_is_lying.html

            There are not too many lobbying groups that have more power on Capital Hill than the NRA. Their money dwarfs the gun control groups and at every turn, the NRA goes out of its way to weaken laws already on the books and to stop anything that is common sense when it comes to gun safety. The goal of the NRA is more money and power on Capital Hill and gun sales. Wayne needs something to justify his almost 7 figure salary as his group thwarts the will of the American people.

          • tinker2

            While bashing the NRA, who has set the standards for “Hunter Safety Courses” and the standards for Police firearms training ? There are other standards that many police departments rely on as a steady standard to maintain.

          • Jeff

            In the past, they also recognized the need for reasonable background checks. In the past, they weren’t totally dominated by the money of the gun manufacturers. In the past, Republicans were led by Lincoln, not Limbaugh.

          • Jeff

            I understand Mussolini could be quite a gentleman over tea as well. So what? Wayne LaPierre works for the gun manufacturers, not his members. Most NRA members do not agree with the gun nuts on these blogs who think even the most reasonable measures to prevent the next Adam Lanza from amassing an arsenal to kill innocents will lead them to the Gulag. Governing a modern society involves more than playing word games concerning the 2nd Amendment. Do we really want to live in a society where every nutcase can have a military-style weapon with virtually unlimited ammo? My suspicion is the majority do not. Apparently you do and will work tirelessly to bring about Wayne LaPierre’s dystopic vision for America.

        • independent thinker

          “The march has EVERYTHING to do with the NRA.”
          I suppose you will be posting proof that the NRA is backing the march.

          • Dave

            The propaganda the NRA puts out have no impact with the “believers” that Obama is out to get their guns at all… You are right…OK… IK, you win.

          • Jana

            Why don’t I trust Obama? For one his own record!

            Hale DeMar, a 52-year-old Wilmette
            resident, was arrested and charged with misdemeanor violations for shooting, in the shoulder and leg, a burglar who broke into his home not once, but twice. Cook County prosecutors dropped all charges against DeMar.

            In March 2004, the Illinois Senate passed Senate Bill 2165, a law introduced in response to DeMar’s case, with provisions designed to assert a right of citizens to protect themselves against home invasions, such that self-defense requirements would be viewed to take precedence over local ordinances against handgun possession. The measure passed the Illinois Senate by a vote of 38-20.
            Barack Obama was one of the 20 state senators voting against the measure.

            On Nov. 9, 2004, the Illinois Senate voted 40-18 to override Blagojevich’s veto. Again, Obama acted against the bill.

            Governor Rod Blagojevich vetoed the bill. Nov. 17, the
            Illinois House voted overwhelmingly, 85-30, to override the governor’s veto and Senate Bill 2165 became law.

            And yet another point about Obama and his stance on gun control:
            ***Concealed carry OK for retired police officers ****

            Obama voted for a bill in the Illinois senate that allowed retired law enforcement officers to carry concealed weapons. If there was any issue on which Obama rarely deviated, it was gun control. He was the most strident candidate when it came to enforcing and expanding gun control laws. So this vote jumped out as inconsistent.

            When I queried him about the vote, he said, “I didn’t find that [vote] surprising. I am consistently on record and will continue to be on record as opposing concealed carry. This was a narrow exception in an exceptional circumstance where a retired police officer might find himself vulnerable as a consequence of the work he has previously done–and had been trained
            extensively in the proper use of firearms.“

            It wasn’t until a few weeks later that another theory came forward about the uncharacteristic vote. Obama was battling with his GOP opponent to win the
            endorsement of the Fraternal Order of Police.

            From: ON THE ISSUES

        • steve Manista

          Wayne LaPierre doesn’t have to justify his salary to anyone because the NRA is not a charity organization it is supported by over 5million Americans paying dues and that is exactly what anti-gun lobbyist don’t have. Bloomberg spent almost as much money as the NRA spreading his message and you know why it failed? He did not have 5 million americans plus millions more who are not members writing their senators and Reps asking for no more gun control. The true power of the NRA is the millions of people who support them and the NRA just carries their message to the government. Even if they are just fear mongering for the gun industry and convincing people to willingly spend their money on firearms so what it is still up to each individual in the end if they want to buy a firearm unlike anti-gun groups who would take every firearm from every non police military or security agency by force if they could. The difference between gun rights groups and anti-gun is that gun rights groups believe that all law-abiding citizens have the right to own whatever firearm they wish because they are law-abiding and will not cause harm and the anti-gun groups believe that they are better than the rest of us even their supporters and that only a person in uniform and themselves should be allowed to have firearms. The difference between the supporters of these two groups can be seen in the comment sections of articles like the one this article is referencing. The pro gunners are mostly saying things like “While the march is a good idea people being armed will only cause problems” while a similar article on a anti-gun progressive webpage has comments like “I hope that someone shoots another person so we can finally take the guns from these crazy rednecks” So you tell me who is more civilized just from judging by the average comments on both sides? Also if you care about corrupt charity orgs than you are looking at the wrong org because the NRA is not a charity and they work hard for use all of use including you even if you don’t support or agree with them in the end they are fighting for your rights as well and they have earned compensation for their hard work. http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/bl_charities_salaries.htm

          I could go on on how the UBCheck bill was bad but i will let you go over it in it’s entirety and decide for yourself. Pro tip: it isn’t just what we were told it was and the NRA was more or less right and that is just going off the language of the bill itself http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1KeBp2CbCys

          • Dave

            5 million members vs 350 Million citizens is a very small minority but that minority has majority sway in Congress and its wrong. The NRA does not care how many people have to die. Their record is only caring about their own power and the fear that drives gun sales.

          • steve Manista

            Thats the beauty of a constitutional republic, the majority does not dictate to the minority and each individuals rights are placed above the majorities opinions. “The NRA does not care how many people have to die.” I will say two things about that. 1. What side of this debate has had legislation already written and ready to go but has waited untill “The proper time” so it will pass aka after a tragedy? A. The anti-gun side 2. Has the anti-gun side ever actually suggested anything that would make a real difference or has it always been about restricting the law-abiding? Say what you want about the NRA but at least they have suggested things that could make a real difference in a school shooting scenario aka armed guards. But the response to it was “Muh chilliuns i don’t want them nur any guns at all” Does it suck that we need armed guards? yes. is it a realistic solution that both can possibly solve the problem while not restricting our rights? Yes. Also in case you haven’t noticed the NRA and the entire gun community is almost always on the defensive and for us to have a “Compromise” both sides have to give up something but the anti-gun side never offers anything its just take. Like in the last set of gun control legislation one bill would treat CCW permits just like drivers licences it makes perfect sense, if your are trusted to drive a car in all states with your driver’s license then why shouldn’t you be trusted in all states to conceal carry if you have a license? Or the other bill that would have allowed better prosecution of felons attempting to buy guns legally that was a bill that would have only affected criminals because “common sense” gun control would only affect criminals right?
            On the UBGCheck bill there is another reason why gun owners don’t want it and it is not because we are against background checks. With FFL dealers because they are licensed by the Federal gov they have the right to mandate BG checks but thats not what this bill was about. It was about mandating to the individual requiring them to perform a BGcheck on a private sale including a fee and it is simply not part of the Federal govs power to make laws like that.

          • Jeff

            Let’s see if you change your mind when someone close to you is one of the victims of the next Adam Lanza and his right to carry any weapon he wants anytime he wants to.

          • steve Manista

            Honestly I will only blame the person who pulled the trigger for it is not the tool to be blamed but the evil intents behind it. It seems in the whole “Gun violence” debate(pro gun rights people don’t view it as that because they understand that just because some one dies from a gun it isn’t somehow worse than if they died from a hammer or knife) wants to blame the tool and by ridding the tool the problem will disappear. I would say look at the UK they now require that you are 18 and have ID in order to buy cutlery(kitchen knives and utensils) because of the massive increase of stabbings. The problem is not “Gun violence” it is violence and the primary cause of violent crime is due to income disparity. The highest concentrations of violent crime(throughout the world) are in low income areas due to the fact that the people there have no choice but to turn to crime in order to make a have way decent living. Provide real opportunities for people “To get out of the ghetto” and the violent crime will start to drop faster than it already is (most Americans don’t seem to realize that violent crime has been dropping steadily for the past 20 years and is half of what it was in the late 80s early 90s due to the media hype of the “Gun violence” issue).

          • mnkysnkle

            Dave: Your capacity for stretching the truth borders on “downright lie”. You also seem to be lacking in rational reasoning. I don’t own a weapon other than a couple of pellet rifles, some knives and a couple of bows. But, I also know many gun owners, some of which happen to be family members. Not many are members of the NRA. I would say less than 1 in 10, but could be nearer to 1 in 20, and they are all strong proponents of the 2nd.. You said: “5 million members vs 350 Million citizens is a very small minority but that minority has majority sway in Congress and its wrong.”…. WRONG!! Keep in mind that there is an estimated 350 defensive guns in circulation (owned) in America. Do you REALLY think that the “5 million” are the only people who put pressure on our congress? And do you REALLY think that this “5 million” is a minority? And do you REALLY think they are the only ones who own all those 350 million defensive weapons? There’s an old saying that for every “1” person that takes a stand and protests, there are a thousand who will back him/her up. As of now, they prefer to be silent, but they are still here.

          • Jeff

            And most of those gun owners recognize the need for common sense measures to keep guns, and certain guns especially, away from certain unstable folks.

        • tinker2

          IF the facts were considered = Some of our elected” officials and a few “appointed” ones HAVE stated they want to register all guns and/or eliminate the private gun ownership in America. The Background checks were to be for gun registry and the “Trafficking Bill” would have made it a criminal act for me to “pass-on” to my kids, guns that my grandfather shot. They have gun safety training and are hunters. IS THAT a criminal act ? Chicago, New York City, and Washington DC have the tightest gun laws – AND the highest crime rates in the USA. The politicians who yell loudest about gun CONTROL surround themselves by armed guards.
          >) Even while on vacation to other countries <( I thought it was supposed to be "leadership by example" and NOT "Leadership by privilege."

          • Dave

            Tinker,
            Do I really need to explain the difference between public officals and the general public as far as threats are concerned? Really?
            The officals who have said they want to get rid of all guns are not in the mainstream and this liberal doesn’t support that idea one iota.
            NYC, Chicago and DC do not have armed checkpoints do they on the way in and out of the city do they? No… The crime rate has to do with the amount of people in a very small area so that comparison is non-sensical.
            I have no problem with a registry because like a car, it helps know who has the gun when crimes are committed with it. It helps law enforcement do a better job. I am sure the Mother of the Newtown shooter was a fine person, that does not mean her son is able to handle guns and that responsibility… and it is a RESPONSIBILITY.

          • DaveH234

            Tinker really did fail to read the proposals for background checks. The statement is 80% crap they read from some right wing liar.

        • Michael Shreve

          The NRA is a SINGLE issue LOBBYING organization that conducts firearms training and hunting classes.

    • me

      not under attack? gun buyer checks are ok with you? they already check you when you purchase a firearm, be alright if they threw away the information after you purchase a firearm. they could keep every purchase just like a registry and when the time comes for seizure follow up. obunhole and some of his coherts all say noone should have guns. this is not an attack? he is pushing hrd to pass gun laws. no threat? what happened to freedom of choice. owebunhole wants to take it away. what happened to land of the free? its going away fast.

    • Eddie G.

      If you believe the Second Amendment is not under attack by leftist idiots and a Marxist POTUS, then you believe in the Tooth Fairy and Santa Claus too. The uproar over Sandy Hook School was the excuse needed to bring on the attack because children were the primary victims in numbers. Some 20 of them, I believe. Why simpletons like you when seeing a murder especially a mass one think the NRA is jumping in for monetary gain insults my intelligence. Yet it’s ok for the president and congress to stoop so low as to cash in on a family’s shock and grief to push an anti firearm ownership agenda against law abidng citizens for political gain in your book. As for the manufacturers, they are in a legal business making a legal product, whereby encouraging lethal use against innocents especially children to sell more product is the dumbest conclusion I’ve ever heard. [comment has been edited]

      • independent thinker

        “If you believe the Second Amendment is not under attack …”
        Of course Doc doesn’t think the Second is under attack, He supports each and every one of the ideas that make it harder on the law abiding citizen to obtain a firearm. His thoughts on the matter are so twisted he thinks a reduction in freedom is somehow an expansion of 2nd amendment rights.

    • tinker2

      Why do several senior politician continually say that the background checks are the, “First step to gun registration and removal.” Feinstein and Clinton WERE promoting gun control of American people and “eventual elimination of private ownership of guns. What about the “United Nations Small Arms Treaty” . That will result in an international gun registry. Read the “fine print”. You can believe what the proponents of the gun control crowd want you to think OR you can find out the FACTS for yourself. I prefer NOT to be a “sheeple” and follow the Judas Goat to servitude. IT’s like the college students signing a petition to ban pressure cookers after the Boston bombings. SO MUCH FOR BEING INFORMED .

    • Guest

      And what rock are you living under, Doc?

    • Michael Shreve

      Could have fooled EVERYONE with an I.Q above 50.

  • Mike Brandt

    I believe the American people need a show of force to keep our elected leaders in line. But these people want a reason for marshall law. And I believe all the mass shutting have been planed in part for marsall law to be pull in place. So a armed march does sound like a good idea to demomstrate against their push to restict our 2ND amenment rights , I believe they would love to have a ringer in the protesters to start shutting. So for that reason you should be very careful in who is in any protest.

    • Michigan_REB

      Start with a public execution for Obama for treason for attempting to circumvent the constitution and violate our rights.

  • dagov

    As a citizen, Marine (1953-58) and supporter of the Constitutional right to bear arms I commend the efforts of the organizers , however I feel as many others have expressed, the “gun grabbers” will orchestrate a negative action to throw the patriots under the bus. Our nation is blessed by God (however He must be running out of blessings by now) and if would just follow Him we would be much better off. I encourage the march but without guns as the District does not allow open carry. There will be plenty of opportunities in the coming months, maybe years, for this to take place especially if martial law is enacted.

    • Eddie G.

      Sensible comment dagov, as a lifelong gun nut and knifeknut because I love to shoot and collect knives, I think a loaded gun doesn’t belong in a protest march. Flared tempers betwixt the pros and antis could lead to bad consequences. Take your gun to the range or the hunting ground but participating in peaceful assembly means leave the gun at home. Carrying the bible and a copy of the constitution en masse would have the libs jumping up and down in such a froth it’d be fun to watch. It gets a better message across to a low IQ congress to leave our God and guns alone.

  • Fred

    Doc, you are incredibly naive and gullible. Baaa Baaa, follow the rest of the sheep to slaughter.

    • Doc Sarvis

      And all you can do is call me names as opposed to proving your position.

      • Average_Joe56

        Uh Doc,
        Please point out where you were called any names, as I can’t seem to find them. Are you feigning indignation? ( first you must find some dignity)
        You were accused of being “naïve and gullible”, a far cry from being called names.

  • Average_Joe56

    Something similar has been tried before back in the 30’s (different circumstances), it was known as “The Bonus Army” or “Bonus Expeditionary Force”. It did not end as intended. It did not end peacefully.

    http://www.eyewitnesstohistory.com/snprelief4.htm

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bonus_Army

    • Michael Shreve

      They camped out and that GREAT general MacArthur, under presidential orders, charged them with fixed bayonets and gassed them. The troops were WILLING participants.

  • me

    why don’t everyone participating buy a cheap softshot pistol and put it in a holster and carry it too the demonstration. if the cops try to arrest anyone they could shoot themselves in the shoe. wouldn,t the cops feel like real dumbasses arresting people for carrying toy guns?

  • me

    they say japan did not attack this country in world war II because of all the privatly owned guns. we have the largest citizen army in the world. over one third of the people in the country. can you imagine what the 2014 election is going to be like. any gun control and there will be enough pissed off gun owners voting for the first time there would be real change. change for the better. too bad there has been too many uncaring citizens in the past. more than half of the crap ging on right now would have probly never happened if people cared and voted. big money would never would have gotten into our elections and decided who we got for elected officials. everyone should go online and check out the “obama deception” online. it has a little peice in it who selects our presidents. if the uncaring citizens would have voted and voted wisely, we would have ntot gotten to where we are.

    • Dave

      No, thats not how it worked “me”… Japan attacked Pearl Harbor and they hoped that their declaration of war would have been delivered to Washington before the attack, it didn’t. So we were loaded with resolve to win the war. Japan did not invade the west coast not because of our guns… They simply could not because of resources… The Japanese Army was in China, South Asia and Japan is a small island with very little resources, they could not supply an occupation force in the United States which is why Japan hoped to crimple the US Navy in one blow in the hopes that the US would sue for peace. Please don’t try to revise history to make your political point. You get caught by people like me who know better.

      • ChuckS123

        I heard that the Japanese government did fear that they would face gunfire from every farmhouse if they invaded the US.. They might have thought it possible at some time. They did invade and occupy some of Alaska’s islands.

  • http://www.coreyspofford.com/ YEROCDROFFOPS

    If you can’t exercise your rights in the capital and home of those servants in which are entrusted to protect those rights, you are not free. It is as simple as that.

  • Craig Wettstein

    What’s wrong with starting the march in VA, with guns, bibles, and copies of the constitution for TV purposes. Prior to entering DC, have a warehouse ready to secure the guns, and replace them with signs reading, “If there has to be a next time…..Our guns won’t be left in VA”!!!

  • Robbie

    Report today about a grannie who takes her 3 and 5 year old grandchildren to the store in Texas. On the way she sees an ad for Cricket rifles and decides to buy one for the 5 year old. She also buys him some ammo. Not much point in having a gun with no bullets. The kid loads up and as they leave the store he blows away his sister. Kind of neat eh? No need for regulating guns for children or ownership!

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.