The government doesn’t want your gun; it wants your mind

A second-grader is suspended for molding a Pop Tart into the shape of a gun. Another, for pointing a balloon like a gun. We (sane, right-thinking people) marvel at the idiocy that occurs in our schools in the name of “protecting the children.”

To fully understand what’s going on in our schools (and to combat it with the right weapons), we must understand the school administration’s motivations. If we accept the schools’ assertion that it’s all about “protecting the children,” we are deceived and defeated at the outset. Continue reading

This anti-gun argument fails the ‘common sense’ test; yet we argue, anyway

This article, although an interesting history lesson, completely misses the point. The liberal “the Founders could not have foreseen…” argument (and the attempts to counter that position, for that matter) only have relevance if the framers of the Constitution had any intent at all to limit the type of arms that could be owned by the populace, or for what purpose.

It presumes that, had they known that tanks and bazookas and nuclear weapons were in this country’s future, they surely would have restricted those to the government alone.

They did not intend to do so, of course. They were intelligent enough to write in such restrictions, if any were intended. To the contrary, their intent was for the People to have at least the same firepower as the entity against which the firearms were necessary to defend– a tyrannical government.

In fact, because their purpose was for the people to be armed equally as well as the new government and, had they known that such weapons would soon be in the hands of that government, they certainly would not have limited the people of today to muskets and bayonets…. or, for that matter, ammo magazines of less than seven bullets, or to no guns at all.

Blog: What Did They Imagine?