Skip to main content

Gun control

Published June 25. 2018 12:50PM

To those who say that people are trying to take your guns away — I say grow up — or are you too stupid to realize you’re wrong? All they are saying is there is no reason civilians should own automatic weapons, or semiautomatics, silencers or bumpstocks. These are the people killers.

Also, I believe if a parent lets his kid get a gun and it is used to kill people, that parent should go to jail with his kid. Right now it is safer to join the military than it is to go to school. We’re killing the future of this country. This “do-nothing” Congress doesn’t seem to care. I think if they don’t want to do something about guns, vote them out.

Plus, the president said, “Don’t be afraid of the NRA.” They had a meeting and things changed his mind. (All bark — no bite). Students! If you’re old enough — VOTE! Your fellow students are dying. It’s up to you. Now that I got that off my chest, that’s it for now. This most likely will end up in the garbage anyway.

Robert SiesputowskI

Summit Hill

Comments
Robert,
Lest you forget already the powers abused by just the previous administration? IRS Scandal? Look my young friend, revolting against tyranny is the first reason Americans must retain our rights to own high capacity semi- automatic and or automatic firearms.
Just wait and see the atrocities of governmental abuse, which will soon roll out.
They may have failed to teach you about the events of how the newly formed United States of America had fought a bloody war against England and King George III’s tyrannical government. According to our founding fathers, the original, overarching purpose of the Second Amendment was to ensure that American citizens always had the ability to overthrow the existing government. If you think that a modern human ruling party isn’t capable of killing its own people, you are being naïve. I am not naïve, and there is no reason for you to suggest I grow up, or call me stupid, as I respect history, not forget history. I stand strong on my belief that the first and foremost reason that the American people need the right and ability to possess modern rifles and pistols is to ensure that our own government never feels it is more powerful than its citizens. Perhaps you need to spend more time listening to truth and facts of history, than you do hyperbole from fake news.
God Bless America
Well guess what, times change. If you think that having an AR15 will protect you from the government and the full force of their power, you're nuts. Plus I don't really care what the Founding Fathers intended because, again, the world has changed. Answer this, being that you think the Founding Fathers intentions should be gospel, do you believe that African Americans are 3/5 human?
Joe,
You speak of the “three-fifths” clause, which has nothing to do with the idea that black slaves were being described as “three-fifths” of a white person. Article I, section 2, clause 3. Contrary to what some historians claim, the “three-fifths clause” is a clear indication that a number of our constitutional founders wanted to end slavery. The fewer slaves counted the fewer number of representatives. “It had NOTHING to do with the worth of a person and EVERYTHING to do with diminishing the power of” the pro-slavery Southern states. You must be listening to the Democrats again. The goal of the Northern delegates was to dilute Southern voting strength so as to outlaw slavery by constitutional means. The truth must be taught and those who continue to change history need to be called out as "Fake Teachers".
The issue of slavery was a major concern at the Constitutional Convention and was discussed at length in the debates. A significant minority of the delegates to the Federal Convention were staunch opponents of slavery, primarily those who adhered to the Federalist philosophy. We live in a state rich with history, yet the people remain mislead by the progressive teachings from news, schools, and universities. Get the facts before submitting a letter, and making yourself look... ignorant.
As for not caring about the intentions of the founding fathers???? You will find yourself on the wrong side of history, and if the hate filled socialist left stirs us into another civil war, you'll be on the wrong side of that too.
As for me and my house... We will serve the Lord, and defend the "Republic"
I understand all that, but only the most concrete of thinkers is incapable of extrapolating the impact of codifying, in the constitution, a clause that effectively reduces slaves to 3/5ths human. Remember, many of those founding fathers were slave owners themselves so to suggest this was a way to eliminate slavery is reaching at best..more likely it was a way to prevent a block of states from grabbing too much power by simply bringing in more slaves. True morality would dictate that slavery not be legal, but many of us understand that was a different time, driven by a different moral compass. That is why we cannot simply apply what the founding fathers wrote to our current time. I'll use another example: Mike, do you support women voting? The founding fathers didn't. So along with your ideas about fighting the government with a fake military weapon, are you proposing suffrage be repealed?
Show me evidence that the founding fathers had issue with a woman voting because she is a woman.
As one who reads the bible daily, and understands "Marriage as original intent, I see husband and wife, to be considered one. That is the biblical precept. That is the way the founders looked at it also. (Therefore a man shall leave his father and his mother and hold fast to his wife, and they shall become one flesh.)
This gets too deep to get into in this format, and for those not Spiritually enlightened. Another thing to consider with the above in mind, is the founding fathers considered land ownership as a prerequisite for voting. The two that became one, both singularly owned the land together as one. Divorce wasn't so common a thing then.
But, the right to vote gradually expanded to include all citizens age 18 and older, and that's not working out very well either. Bringing "Suffrage" into this only confuses our discussion.
Oddly, the idea of women voting was simply not an idea in anyone's ken - such that there was no thought to even considering the possibility of it.
I don’t know if you realize it but you keep solidifying my point: you can’t simply apply the beliefs of the founding fathers to the country today. I assume you now also believe only land owners should vote?

Saying we shouldn’t change how we regulate gun ownership because of what the founding fathers believed is as lazy an argument as you can have. Even the founding fathers believed the constitution should change with the times and therefore built in ways to amend it.
I don't know why you think people have changed to where original intend no longer applies. This system of government is the best in all the world, yet folks like you wish to change things. Why? What's the change substantiated upon... fact or... hype?
The latest shooting was with a pump action shotgun. I'll bet the media overlooks this one, as there was no "Clip". If you wish to live in a gun free democracy, move, and leave my America alone.
The latest incident is 1 of 30,000+ a year. We are blocked from intelligent discussion on reducing gun deaths by those with lazy arguments. We can have arms and have common sense. Just dismissing those who want lives saved by claiming we have to follow founding fathers intent(which you really don’t know) is contrary to being a good citizen, or a Christian.
I don't disagree with having intelligent discussion, but Democrats stir up protesting idiots who wouldn't know a shotgun from a rifle. Like the kid who wrote this letter, robots without a brain. They only know what they are told. As far as original intent? It wasn't that long ago, there is plenty of documentation, letters, and plain ole history to conclude to the truth. The Truth is shunned. The truth will set you free.
The fake philosophy of "Originalism" gets in the way of fruitful debate. Its saying "Because they said so" as the answer for everything. Problem is, originalists can bend the FF's intent any way they want without having to prove anything. "The FFs intended that abortion is illegal" "The FFs intended there to be no gay marriage". We need to widen our intellect.
Intellect that promotes killing our next generation off for convenience of self, a man sleeping with another man (sexual perversion) in order to please self, and removing God from society, in order to protect "Self" from conviction, doesn't appear to be working out very well. But the intelligent ones will tell me that I'm wrong.... again. Oh... marriage always was, and always will be the union of one man, and one woman. You can change the definition of the word "Gay" to now define a person of sexual perversion, but marriage is a covenant between man and woman before God... Good luck changing that. End of conversation, as you and I are fundamentally divided. The "Sheep" on the "Right" will be rejected by the "Goats", on the left, as those goats care only about "Self". Good day Joe.

Classified Ads

Event Calendar

<<

February 2025

>>
SunMonTueWedThuFriSat
      
 

Upcoming Events

Twitter Feed