Here is a nice little Op Ed in USA today on the subject.
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."The fact that ALL American's don't inherently know what that means is beyond idiocy to me:
- How can ANYONE believe that our founding fathers thought there needed to be something in the Constitution so the MILITIA could have guns? The idea was to FORM the militia from private citizens with guns. That is how they raised their armies in those days.
- Has ANYONE read Jefferson? "The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants." The right to bear arms is EXPLICITLY in there to allow the PEOPLE to put together militias to ATTACK the Government! Those guys just fought a revolution against oppressive government. They understood the truth that power corrupts very well. They built a government full of checks and balances -- an armed populace was seen by them as just one more check. They well understood that liberty was something that was likely to require citizens to die to protect from time to time. They also understood that an armed populace just might deter some of the tyrants.
- The Constitution was ratified in 1789, does ANYONE believe it would have been ratified if people thought that their guns could be taken away legally by the Federal government under that document?
There are plenty of racist lefties -- Hitler, Obama, Mao, Stalin, etc. Being racist has NOTHING to do with being "right wing".
What do Nazi's have to do with guns? Well, just like other lefties -- USSR, China, etc, one of the first things they like to do is round up the guns. The idea of an armed populace doing a little refreshment of the tree of liberty with their tyrant blood isn't all that appealing to them.
So, back to USA today:
"Banning civilian ownership of all automatic weapons and all semiautomatic weapons that hold more than six rounds of ammunition. Six rounds is enough for any serious hunter, let alone a gangbanger."
"A ban with no loopholes or grandfather clauses on any gun that doesn't meet these standards or isn't brought into compliance within two years, with the penalty thereafter of a hefty prison term for anyone found with such weapons."
"An improvised explosive device is a weapon of terror; so is a military-style assault rifle in a civilian's hands. It's time we treated them the same, and the Supreme Court is not going to be of much help on that."
So, I have a 10/22 that is semi-automatic and intrinsically holds 10 rounds in it's magazine. It ought to be banned and I ought to go to prison if I don't give it up? I'm not even sure an IED is a "weapon of terror" -- is C4? is a grenade? Any CAN be, but I see nothing intrinsic in either the IED or an assault rifle. How about a semi loaded with liquid natural gas? How about an airplane?
One can tell a facist because they see "civilians". We are CITIZENS, we are the PEOPLE from which what government we have is to receive it's power. The government is to have it's power at our pleasure, not the other way around. Weapons in the hands of the wrong government have FAR more terror potential than weapons in the hands of CITIZENS.