Defining who has the ‘right’ to bear arms
Advertisement
Text size: small | medium | large
John A. Suren
Published: April 29, 2008
With the passing of time this has gotten to be a more serious issue. The problem is being compounded by the fact that realism and common sense are not being used. We are not getting the the root of the problem — the GUN. Before proceeding I want to make it clear that I have no problem with people having a “right to bear arms,” as defined in the Second Amendment. It has served us well for many years.
However, we have to better define who should have the “right,” and for what purpose! Our politicians have not done that. We have to leave no doubt as to who the people are who have a right to carry a gun in public — principally the police. That concept has worked quite well and we need to keep it that way.
I get quite concerned, and even frightened, by people who want to carry concealed guns into restaurants and those who think students in college should be allowed to carry them on campus. A gun is a dangerous weapon — if one who has one on his person loses his patience, or self control, the consequences could be quite severe. No prior investigation can determine this possibility!
When serious gun related killings happen, the first thing many people think of is, more security, cameras, etc. The first thing I think of is getting guns out of the hands of people who have no right to have them.
I was shocked to learn that an increased number of people are getting permits to have guns — a staggering increase. They need to give no reason for why they want one. The reason is simple — FEAR.
The fear has been created by our government not doing what needs to be done. If we allow this trend to continue, it will be like the “wild west” days. It is reported that we already have more guns than
people in the United States. Are we going to act like civilized people or barbarians? Has logic and common sense taken a furlough?
JOHN A. SUREN
Manassas
Post a Comment
The commenting period has ended or commenting has been deactivated for this article.
Can't find what you're looking for? Try our quick search:
Reader Reactions
Posted by ( jVA ) on May 07, 2008 at 6:33 pm
What?? Of course there are consequences for free speech.
If I tell my wife that she looks fat tonight, do you think there will be no consequences for me?
If John McCain drops the N-word tomorrow, do you think there will be any consequences for his presidential bid?
Ask George “Macaca” Allen about the consequences of free speech.
Just because we don’t send people to jail for saying bad things doesn’t mean there are no consequences.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( barnun ) on May 07, 2008 at 3:56 pm
but there are no consequences to those who abuse freedom of speech.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( jVA ) on May 07, 2008 at 10:21 am
“you could make derogatory racial statements under your right of freedom of speech, but it doesn’t make it right or even ok. “
Of course it doesn’t. People have the “right” to say whatever derogatory or racist thing they want to. The rest of us have the “right” to ignore and shun those people.
Whether its a gun or free speech, people have to accept the consequences for the things that they say and do.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( barnun ) on May 06, 2008 at 9:24 pm
Jva, I will defend your right to bear arms, but I will not defend your right to pull the trigger when ever you feel like it. I defend the right of freedom of speech but I just feel it gets harshly abused. you could make derogatory racial statements under your right of freedom of speech, but it doesn’t make it right or even ok.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( jVA ) on May 05, 2008 at 12:35 pm
“That is reserved for proper time and place.“
Its kind of funny to see somebody exercising his freedom of speech on a public message board by complaining about freedom of speech…
I think I understand what Barnun is saying though. People do take free speech to extremes sometimes. A good example is that Fred Phelps idiot who exercises his free speech by protesting at military funerals and stuff.
I disagree with you though, Barnun. I don’t think there is a “proper time and place” for free speech. Freedom of speech is one of our greatest gifts in this country, and we have to defend that right whether or not we agree with what is being said or when.
The right to bear arms is an important freedom as well. We have to defend that right even though we know a few idiots are sometimes going to do the wrong thing.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( barnun ) on May 05, 2008 at 10:13 am
Freedom of speech is a far more abused right than is the right to bear arms. remember that we are talking about legal citizens acting within their rights and the possiblity of taking their rights away. With guns, people have the right to own one but they dont have an open right to pull the trigger. That is reserved for proper time and place. Legal gun owners know this. The freedom of speech crowd does not.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( gbear3199 ) on May 02, 2008 at 8:10 pm
My husband and I walked out of a store the other day, and were immediately followed by two young men. I immediately noticed that I was being followed and kept a careful eye on them. I didn’t become concerned until they started to close the distance between us. My husband also being aware of what was transpiring casually revealed the handgun on his side. Those young men immediately took off in another direction and jumped into a waiting car. I don’t know for sure what their intended action was, but I feel confident that the sight of my husband’s firearm, changed their minds. The police CAN NOT be everywhere at once, and unfortunately they are often too late to prevent the crime.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( jVA ) on April 30, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Look I’m as lefty Democrat as they come and I don’t personally own a gun, but folks need to get over the gun issue. People own guns in this country. There is no putting a lid on it now.
Mr. Suren says we should get guns out of the hands of people who have no right to have them. Good luck with that.
How about more jobs? Better mental health care? Better education? All of these goals are more achievable and would go farther in preventing crime than trying to take away my neighbor’s hunting rifle.
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( Concerned Citizen ) on April 30, 2008 at 12:29 pm
Barnum;
I cannot answer all of your questions but I will try to answer at least one: Where were the police?
You can Google video of the VT shootings, and as you can hear the gunman offscreen killing people, you can see so-called “police” cowarding behind trees.
So where were the police?
Report Inappropriate Comment
Posted by ( barnun ) on April 30, 2008 at 9:45 am
Mr Suren states “who have a right to carry a gun in public — principally the police”. so Mr suren would like to take away the right of 301,139,947 US citizens to releive his Fear. Now, how many people were killed last year by a legally owned gun ? And, Mr Suren wants us all to rely on our governement for our personal safety. where were the cops when Cho shot up VT ? That is EXACTLY what you will get by disarming the mass. Look at countries around the world, how terribly violent so many of them are on a daily basis. The US is not even in the same category. It is sad anytime someone wrongfully loses their life but that will still happen once you begin to take away the citizens rights. Personally, I think the abuse of free speech has done far more harm to our society overall. Should we start to discuss limitations on that as well ? Should we interpret free speech to be only available to appointed government representitives ?
Report Inappropriate Comment