As always, we are greatly indebted to 'A Human Right' for these wonderful photos and graphics.
Here is today's Second Amendment News Roundup:
Snow Flakes in Hell blogs about the importance of a united gun rights community, and the fallout from H.R. 2640. I have been against the bill from the beginning, but I know others disagree. Hopefully this disagreement will not weaken our community in any way:
http://www.snowflakesinhell.com/?p=1247
Front Sight, Press has an interesting takeoff on the notion that 'gun owners are compensating for something':
http://www.snubnose.info/wordpress/rkba/gun-owners-are-compensating-for-something/
Nicki at The Liberty Zone blogs about the unthinkable, but a very real possibility in the thinking of the Founders, and a very real possibility today:
http://libertyzone.blogspot.com/2007/08/guns-baby-guns.html
Red's Trading Post has a poll that asks the question, what do you think should happen to the BATFE? By the way, remember you can contribute to Red's legal defense through Gun Owners of America, which has set up a special fund on Red's behalf:
http://redstradingpost.blogspot.com/2007/08/poll-question-what-do-you-think-should.html
The Jet Pilot has a petition that you can sign which demands the fair treatment of all gun dealers, shop owners, and gun manufacturers by the BAFTE:
http://ajetpilot.blogspot.com/2007/08/sign-petition.html
Traction Control reports that the Islamo-fascists have succeeded in turning the memorial to the brave men and women of United Flight 93, which went down on 9/11, into a memorial of the Muslim terrorists:
http://tractioncontrol.well-regulatedmilitia.org/?p=530
The Bitch Girls blog on the ridiculous state of affairs with regard to the Presidential primaries, which seem to be getting earlier and earlier. There is now a real possibility that Iowa may move its event to December, nearly a full year before the election:
http://www.thebitchgirls.us/?p=7251
The GOA has issued an alert about the McCarthy-Leahy-NRA-Brady gun bill, which has sailed through the House and the Senate Judiciary Committee without even as much as a recorded vote. This means the bill is now headed to the Senate floor for a final vote. This is a travesty, but then, you all know where I stand on this bill. 'Nuff said:
http://www.gunowners.org/a080807.htm
Blogonomicon has this to say about the GOA Alert on the McCarthy bill:
http://blogonomicon.eponym.com/blog/_archives/2007/8/8/3147457.html
A Keyboard and a .45 points to a couple of examples that show that the anti-gun argument is always full of hysterics:http://akeyboardanda45.blogspot.com/2007/08/anti-gun-argument-always-pure-hysterics.html
4 comments:
There are plenty of good reasons to think the deal with HR2640 is a bad one. I might not entirely disagree! From my point of view right now, if NRA loses a lot of membership over this, it's a bad deal.
But when to deal and when not to deal is always a tough call, and I want to make sure gun owners appreciate that. The entire business of politics is deal making, and if you're going to be effective, you have to do it sometimes.
Hopefully someday the courts will place gun rights where our founding fathers meant them to be placed, which is outside the reach of the political process. If that happens, no deal making would be necessary, at least not on the things that really mattered. But for now we're stuck playing the dirty game.
Hiya Sebastian!
Yes sir, I agree that sometimes cutting deals is the best way to go. That's politics. I just didn't think this bill was one we needed to support, but that's the way it goes. We all have reasons for our opinions.
And I fully agree it would be a terrible thing if the NRA loses members over this. That has never been the intent of my opposition to the bill, and I know many other NRA members feel the same way.
As I said, I hope that the whole thing does not divide us. That would be a big mistake.
Supporters of the Second Amendment surely need to stick together. That much is vital.
Regarding the Liberty Zone blog article:
I have much respect and admiration for our military, however, the citizen militia needs to play a more important role in our national security posture. Our founding fathers were fearful of a standing army and for good reason. They understood that a "well-regulated militia" was "necessary for the security of a free state."
I believe it is time to restore the status of the citizen militia to its proper place for the defense and security of our great nation. It is quite unfortunate in today's world that the term militia has such negative connotations.
The future of freedom and liberty in this country depends on our active participation in the revitalization of the citizen militia. I fear that without the citizen militia, limited constitutional government is an impossibility.
I know my views concerning the revitalization of the citizen militia may place me slightly out of the mainstream, and perhaps even slightly out of the mainstream in the 2nd Amendment community. However, why is it out of the mainstream (and why should it be?) to espouse a view that our founding fathers thought at the time to be self-evident? Why was the citizen militia necessary then, but not today, for the security of a free state?
The more and more I read and learn about our current state of affairs, the more and more I am convinced that the only way we will ever restore constitutional government is for We the People to reorganize and revitalize the citizen militia. If there is another way I would be very interested to hear about it.
For more information on the revitilization of the citizen militia:
http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwin16.htm
http://www.newswithviews.com/Vieira/edwinA.htm
You make an excellent point, Brent. The Founders never intended for the citizens to hand over their protection entirely to government forces. To make such a claim flies in the face of everything we know about the men who Framed the Constitution and what they believed.
I agree it is time to recapture their ideals.
Post a Comment