It's the Criminal, Stupid!

The Second Amendment is constantly under attack by the very people that argue that Flag burning is a right granted under the First Amendment. You can use the most racist language you want because it is guaranteed under the First Amendment. If you were to interpret the Second the way liberals interpret the First, than you would be forced to own a firearm.

     The phrase "the right of the people" occurs in the 1st and 4th Amendments in the same way as in the 2nd Amendment. The term the "people" is also in the 9th and 10th Amendments. To claim that "the people" in the 2nd means only the state would by the same reasoning be used to eliminate the individual liberties of "the people" peaceably to assemble, petition, and to be free from unreasonable searches and seizures. There is no question that the Founding Fathers intended to guarantee the right to keep and bear arms to all law abiding citizens.

     So why this relentless attack? Why is there such a misunderstanding about what the Founding Fathers of this country meant? Did they craft nine Amendments so well and then slipped up on one of them. I think not. The Founders were very precise in their language and had a better understanding of English than most people today. This attack is coming because of the lies and misinformation the HCI [Handgun Control Inc.] types foster on the public with the help of the liberal media. For example:

     HCI LIE ":...the NRA actually defended the sale of the AK47 military assault rifle used in the [Stockton California] massacre".

     FACT: The firearm used by Patrick Purdy in his heinous crime, the Model 56S, a copy of the AK47, was a semi-automatic rifle functionally identical to the millions of rifles owned by hunters and sportsmen across the United States. It was not converted to full-auto nor was it "easily convertible". That particular semi-automatic is no more "powerful" or more "rapid fire" than any other semi-automatic hunting or target rifle owned by millions of Americans.

     The real lesson to be drawn from the Purdy crime is that Purdy was a criminal who should have been in jail rather than let free to roam the streets. Purdy had been arrested for the crimes of drug possession, solicitation for sex, illegal possession of dangerous weapons, receipt of stolen property, attempted robbery, criminal conspiracy, firing a pistol in a National Forest, and resisting arrest. His plea bargains on these charges resulted in misdemeanor charges only, not the felonies with which he was charged. Purdy's last contact with the criminal justice system resulted in a probation that described him as a danger to himself and others. His lack of a felony record meant he could pass the 15 day waiting period and police background check required under California to purchase firearms.

     HCI exploits tragedy to ban guns; the NRA supports prison initiatives and reform of probation and plea bargaining to jail violent offenders.

     HCI states that the only purpose for a gun is to kill. Lets examine that for a moment. There are 70 million guns owned legally in this country. In 1991 there were 14,265 gun related killings [1991 FBI Uniform Crime Report UCR, pg. 17, table 2.9]. Of those deaths 80% plus were crime related. If legal gun ownership is such a problem why is the percentage of guns owned to guns used to kill .0048%? That is 48 hundredths of a percent.

     As illustrated in the Purdy example the problem is not legal gun ownership but the holes in the criminal justice system. As the 1991 UCR figures point out it is not the legal possession of a gun that is the problem ITS THE CRIMINAL STUPID!

     'Nuff said?