|
Real0ne -> RE: Guns laws and depression meds (2/15/2008 7:19:48 PM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: LadybugBlue
While I do not own a gun and I am on anti-depressants, I do not think that a disease should impede my or anyone's right to bear arms as stated in the constitution. Granted bearing arms shouldn't mean a rocket launcher or a sub-machine gun or assault rifle, but if proper gun safety is practiced and if everyone who has access to the gun knows how to properly use it, I see no problem with them.
If a person wants to kill themselves or others, they don't need a gun to do it. Look at how many deaths occur due to DUI's annually. Violence isn't caused by weapons but by people and a lack of civic morality.
Actually bearing arms meant precisely that!
The whole idea of bearing arms is 2 fold. First for personal protection and secondly to fight off a "despot government" where by arms it is meant that anything a "standing army" has we should have in greater number so that when the last drop of blood hits the dirt the "people" will prevail over the army to create a new government.
That was the intent of the "right to own and bear"
Its spelled out pretty clearly here;
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.
shall we talk about the patriot act? removal of habeous corpus, fisa, etc etc. congress violating their oath of office time and time again? att spying on people and congress sanctioning it!
Sounds like a despot government to me.
|
|
|
|
