Define 'Gun Owner'

[ericire12]

http://www.examiner.com/x-2323-LA-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2009m7d24-Define-Gun-Owner

As an afterthought to my last piece about an L.A. Times editorial against guns, there is this: for all the arguments the anti-violence organizations make, they forget one solid, inescapable truth: only you will live with the consequences of taking their advice, refusing to own a gun or to otherwise prepare for an encounter with violence. Part of the anti-violence movement is, of course, to do nothing. Some advice.

The average household may well understand interest rates, privacy, auto insurance and even food prices, but how the family will meet, manage and survive an encounter with violence is the most neglected area of household management.

It’s important to understand this truth. It’s sort of silly to be a home economics savvy citizen and refuse to learn more about how you might handle an encounter with violence and lose.

For all the castigation editorial boards and so-called anti-violence non-profits hand the electorate for criminal violence, they leave one thing out: who has to live with the silliness of talking them out of fighting back? Well, you do, of course, not them. For all the lies, disinformation and defamation emanating from the anti-gun groups, they don’t have to live with your choice. It is unconscionable for them to talk people out of the optimal actions and choices they have, and hand them a virtual death sentence of sorts and not have to live with the advice.

Do you see what the gun control nuts are doing to the country? Do you see how they don’t have to live with the choice you make in refusing to own a gun? It is an attack on gun owners as if 80 million are committing the violence in the news and somehow justifying earning for themselves the call for banning guns.

Define Gun Owner. Is a thug who steals a revolver from the home of another citizen a gun owner? Is the thug who keeps an automatic in his belt under his bulky shirt a gun owner? Is the woman who holds it for him for six months or four or five robberies or even shootings a gun owner?

For the rhetoric against ownership of private firearms, you’d think the thinking editors against guns were imagining gun owners to be robbers, murderers, rapists, or abductors. Nice.

(I always like to ask these thinkers what they keep by the bed. A bat or a big dog, maybe? Car keys? Spray?  I love to know if they take their own advice.)

Gun owners don’t believe in the iron as much as they do the law of the land and our rights which pre-date it all. Gun owners are the greatest supporters and allies of law enforcement. The idea of being free without having to explain things to others or to obtain permission is a value which happens to be a safeguard of the United States. Those who want to take guns want to dismantle that safeguard; freedom bugs them for psychologic reasons. Understand that gun owners are not the aggressors, gun control is the aggressor in a free society, which has the 80 million gun owners on the defensive. The only reason gun owners are on the defensive is because gun control is on the offensive.

Remarks like how the NRA owns the legislators, or how they exhibit a ‘fanatical disregard for public safety’ [L.A. Times, July 23, 2009 op-ed] and other heated rhetoric and emotion are tragically misinformed from the outset, and editorial boards have little character for owning a gun, or writing for a paper. It’s sort of incongruous for an agency that thrives on a civil right to champion against the civil right of another, whatever the reason. The information of such editorials is wrong, and it is wrong-headed. Where both the second amendment and the first amendment are safeguards of liberty, one can easily see who abuses their right and who does not.

So, how do we define what is a gun owner: anyone in possession of a gun, including prohibited persons? Or is a gun owner someone who is an ally of law enforcement to the point of submitting to and passing a background check, compliance with configuration requirements, respect for and adherence to regulations and, you guessed it, even coming to the aid of a police officer?

It’s a matter of personal character. The thing that really differentiates gun owners is that they prefer to live with their own choices and resist the mandates to live by the choices of others who choose dependence instead of independence. Gun ownership is merely an extension of that. Gun takings, in comparison, are the takings of more than guns, the takings of property, of knowledge, and of sovereign authority to resist those. The terror is that you cannot op-out. In a nation of the free, you cannot opt-out.

Law enforcement’s beat officers know the political difference between a gun owner and an armed thug. Can’t say the same for management throughout the profession, though many Sheriffs affirm concealed carry and stand up for it. Still, 80 million adults in 2009 and 2010 will remember who their public servants are, and more to the point, they will know who their public servants are to be for the next sessions of that public service.

They are already deciding who to read and who not to read.

[Kid Shelleen]

Still, 80 million adults in 2009 and 2010 will remember who their public servants are, and more to the point, they will know who their public servants are to be for the next sessions of that public service.


Amen Brother!!!!