.

Why the Country Levies More Restrictions on Cars Than on Firearms

As once stated, “God did not create man equally; Colonel Colt did.”

The following was written in response to a letter posted on GwinnettForum.com titled: "Country levies more restrictions on cars than on firearms." The author of the post wrote, " ... there are more restrictions on a device that is not intended to kill (autos) than there are on one that was designed and manufactured for the express purpose of killing (guns). What's wrong with this picture?"

As once stated, “God did not create man equally; Colonel Colt did.” Guns were also created to defend countries, to win wars against overzealous dictators like Hitler and Hirohito. In my time it was to used attempting to free a communistic led takeover of Southeast Asia, predominately Vietnam. 

I am not diminishing God’s work for I am a Christian. We have to recognize some of His creations are physically superior to others with the slighter needing help to protect him/herself, family and property. (Cain killed Abel with a rock.) Even if the slighter is properly trained in self defense it does not deter the predators from ganging up or using knives, bats, crowbars or any number of everyday items to overwhelm. 

It is not a Constitutional right to drive a car nor even a buggy at the time. It was deemed necessary to have the citizens well armed to ensure they were not enslaved by those elected. It is a Constitutional right, as written into the Second amendment, to keep and bear arms. 

The initial purchase of a gun requires a background check and taxes are paid on the weapon at that time. If the weapon is carried concealed another background check is required, picture made and fingerprinting for the carry “license”. 

There are hundreds of occasions each day when a weapon has deterred a mugging, break-in or saved one’s life. Those without firearms are usually called victims. Most of the time the aggressor is armed with a weapon that can be used with deadly force. For some liberal reason we don’t seem to hear about many of those successful in defending themselves. 

I do agree that some people should know firearm safety but those of us that served probably have just a little more knowledge than others about weaponry. I do not think you should have to take a test before defending yourself or your home. You don’t need a whole lot of training on how to use a 12 gauge shotgun. 

Thanks, 

Steve Ramey

Sgt. U.S. Marine Corps 1969-70

Semper Fidelis et Vigilo!

This post is contributed by a community member. The views expressed in this blog are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of Patch Media Corporation. Everyone is welcome to submit a post to Patch. If you'd like to post a blog, go here to get started.

Tommy Hunter September 11, 2012 at 07:31 PM
Well said Steve! I'll even go as far as to say, in my opinion, that as the Constitution says "shall not be infringed", that the fact "If the weapon is carried concealed another background check is required, picture made and fingerprinting for the carry license" is an infringement on the right to keep and bear arms.
STEVE RAMEY September 11, 2012 at 07:45 PM
Thanks Tommy! I hope we get more "Stand Up Americans" that feel the same. I was trying not to sound like a radical with the infringement part. Congratulations by the way! You will have to visit our Founding Fathers Tea Party and say a few words. The first Thursday of each month in The Flying Machine restaurant at Briscoe Field.
John Cook September 13, 2012 at 05:46 AM
Here are a few quotes that reflect the insight of some of the folks involved in writing the Constitution and the Bill of Rights: Thomas Jefferson, in a letter to George Washington dated 1796, wrote: "One loves to possess arms, though they hope never to have occasion for them." "A free people ought not only be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of Independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government." George Washington Zacharia Johnson, in a speech in the VA Ratifying Convention, 1788 "The people are not to be disarmed of their weapons. They are left in full possession of them." George Mason, VA Ratifying Convention "The British Parliament was advised to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them; but that they should not do it openly, but weaken them, and let them sink gradually . . . . " In 1787, Noah Webster wrote An Examination of the Leading Principles of the Federal Constitution, which contains this quote: "Before a standing army can rule, the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom of Europe. The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States."
Jimmy Orr September 13, 2012 at 02:37 PM
My comments comes from one who has been a proud card carrying member of the National Rifle Assocaition (NRA), since 1960. Back up and under John Cook's comment read George Mason's comment at the 1788 Virginia Convention which I quote in part, "but, weken them, and let them sink gradually." Two hundred and twenty fours years later this does indeed seem to be the strategy of those whose intent is to infringe upon our 2nd. Amendment rights. If you are not a member of the National Rifle Association I urge you to join. The nominal amount you will pay for annual dues will be well worth the expense if you believe in the right to keep and bear arms as per the 2nd. Amendment. John made an excellent post as he clearly points out the reasons behind those who wish to disarm private citizens.
North Georgia Weather September 13, 2012 at 07:26 PM
Agree with Steve. And thank you for serving our country.
John Cook September 17, 2012 at 04:15 AM
Almost all guns are banned in Great Britain along with many knives. Now the debate is which additional knives should be banned, including kitchen knives: http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1411652/posts Also: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2200575/Fuddy-duddy-parents-let-daughter-hold-party-teenager-17-stabbed-death-say-did-event-control.html#ixzz26hHQ7922 Caroline Shearer, 47, said the death of her son should spur a fight back against the growing knife culture. Two months ago official figures revealed just one in every five knife-wielding thugs is being jailed, despite a pre-election promise by the Tories to jail anyone caught carrying a blade. Mrs Shearer told the Mail: ‘Knife crime is getting out of control. Kids are being injured and murdered. Innocent children are dying. Being tough on crime isn’t a sign of an uncaring society. It is a sign of a caring society.
John Cook September 28, 2012 at 11:36 PM
Four Supreme Court justices are age 74 or older. Two are in poor health. If Obama is re-elected and appoints two or four more justices who have no more regard for the Bill of Rights and our Constitution than Justices Kagan and Sotomayor, the Second Amendment will be re-written by new court law defining it in a totally restricted view. In view of recent comments regarding the California video that violated muslim Sharia Law prohibiting blaspheming prophet muhammed, it appears that President Obama will appoint justices who might also restrict Free Speech guarantees in the Bill of Rights portion of the Constitution.
Kent Clarke November 08, 2012 at 08:47 PM
Interesting post here. With Obama been re-elected only time will tell how all of this will really play out. Kent - http://www.mautostore.com

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something