While I was going through my own hell fighting for justice for Matt, 59 mothers were told their child was dead. The 2nd Amendment was added to the Constitution during a time when mass killings was not a daily occurrence like it has become in the 21st century.
This “Right to bear arms” was adopted on December 15, 1791. In 1791 our country was dealing with Muskets NOT an arsenal of assault weapons!!!
According to the NRA “times have changed and so have guns”. I’d like to know where in this 2nd Amendment did assault rifles, AK-74, AK-47, FN Scar and every other semi automatic weapon used for mass killing fall under the 2nd Amendment?
The “Right to bear arms” was meant to protect an individual person. The right to keep and bear arms was meant for personal defense, not the mass killings of innocent men, women and children.
Yet, even after the continued massive loss of life, the NRA continues to defend this out dated right.
Since when did the right to bear arms include the right to mass killings? At what point in time did the right to bear arms come to include weapons of war? At what point in time did it become acceptable to “bear your arms” to destroy the lives of others?
I hoped that after the shooting in Washington where those who have power to decide on how we are enabled to “bear arms” that laws would have been put into place to regulate this obsolete right “to bear arms”.
In the concept of defending myself and property the right to “bear arms” should never include the use of an assault weapon. I cannot think of one reason that anyone other than the military or the police would have the need to purchase or carry a weapon with the capability of mass killings.
Yet, here we go again. Your average Joe was able to purchase military grade guns and wipe out 59 innocent lives injuring hundreds. Really, is this the “Right to bear arms? I think not.
Presently, Paul Ryan is defending rolling back the regulation that would potentially restrict those suffering from mental illness from purchasing guns using the premise of “protecting people’s right”.
Seriously, what about the rights of children who go to school? What about the rights of concert and movie goers? What about the rights of his own colleagues playing a friendly game of baseball?
What about the rights of those of us who choose not to bear arms? Don’t we have the right to live in a world where we don’t have to fear being gunned down by someone who had the right to “Bear Arms”????
Bark less wag more