Topic: OBAMA: ‘IMPORTANT’ SECOND AMENDMENT RESPONSIBLE FOR HIGH HOMICIDE RATES (Read 890 times)

0bama hates freedom of speech, so are all big government supporters like him. I love freedom of speech so I can't be one of his supporter. If you love more gun control, just like 0bama does, good for you...

Also I am a big supporter of "reading is fundamental". Spend more time on the first post, click on the link for the original article... As they say: Get Involved!

 

Willi, so what? What's your point of view here? Why do we care? The ability to have guns around plausibly does contribute to homicide rates. Of course most homicides are probably conducted with unregistered guns...but if we didn't have as many guns around, manufactured, sold, there wouldn't be so many to buy on the black market OR they'd be too expensive for most people to buy.

In the UK a knife fight is a big deal because most guns are illegal. Likewise their homicide rate could be linked to the knife fighting. But they probably also have a much lower homicide rate.

What is YOUR point of view on this?

Sounds like you support Obama by posting HIS point of view on this.

Gun owners no longer willing to take it lying down

https://www.freedomsphoenix.com/News/172169-2015-03-10-gun-owners-no-longer-willing-to-take-it-lying-down.htm

http://www.vinsuprynowicz.com/?p=2436

Never said it was illegal, just that civilians dint have these tools. And you'll have a 30 million dollar paper weight with no armaments and very likely no knowledge or training to operate it. There's a word for this: irrelevant.

Actually, it's 100% legal to own all of that... You're just not permitted to purchase the armaments to put on them. So if you have $30 million you can go right ahead and buy a F15.

And violent rebellion when all else fails. That's what the founding fathers intended with the second amendment. The problem is times have changed a great deal in the last 300 years. In the late 1700s, every citizen was armed, and with the same weapons technology as any government army troop - the musket. That's simply no longer the case in the twenty first century. A relatively small percentage of the population is armed now, and NO citizen can come anywhere near matching the firepower at the government's disposal. Attack helis, fighter jets,  tanks, napalm bombs, and so on.

The harsh reality is that if our government decided to become hyper-tyranical tomorrow,  there isn't a damn thing Johnny Gun-nut could do to stop them other than throw his life away for the cause. And that sacrifice would be in vain unless there were witnesses who brought it to media/net attention.

In the gunpowder age, our best defense against tyranny WAS a well armed populace.
Our greatest weapon against tyranny in the information age isn't a gun, it's information. It's the internet,  it's the cameras in our cell phones and the speed of information. Truth is a far more powerful ally to liberty today than bullets ever were. Keep that in mind if you want to be taken seriously by anyone when debating this issue.

TL;DR the second amendment is obsolete. Sorry, fellow Americunts, but that's reality.

It's important to not ignore this kind of rhetoric but keep in mind that it's just rhetoric. Just because he wants it doesn't mean it's possible for him to make it law. The entire congress is led by his opposition so it would be VERY difficult for him to get anything through.

And the People always have the final say - through the vote, through the protest, through civil disobedience.

Quotation: "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."

Sources consulted:
1.Papers of Thomas Jefferson Digital Edition
2.Thomas Jefferson: Papers and Thomas Jefferson: Biographies collections in Hathi Trust Digital Library
3.Thomas Jefferson Retirement Papers


http://www.monticello.org/site/jefferson/strongest-reason-people-to-retain-right-to-keep-and-bear-arms-quotation

Without the 2nd amendment the 1st amendment might never had survived all that time...

Well, for all we know without the second amendment millions might have been killed by despotic governments over the last two hundred + years.
And the people killing each other do not have the right to have them now. Most of the murders in the US are criminals killing criminals.

Speaking at Benedict College in South Carolina on March 6, President Obama said the “Second Amendment … is important,” that it is “part of our culture” and “part of who were are.” Then he quickly added, “But what we also have to recognize is, is that our homicide rates are so much higher than other industrialized countries–by like a mile.”

So, the Second Amendment is important but…

Moreover, Obama hinted that the individual right to bear arms–the very right protected by the Second Amendment–is the result of a Supreme Court interpretation. On June 22, Breitbart News reported that The Washington Post espoused this same liberal talking point, claiming that the Supreme Court created an individual right to keep and bear arms via the District of Columbia v. Heller (2008) decision.

In other words, prior to 2008, there was no individual right to keep and bear arms. It wasn’t what our Founding Fathers intended and it wasn’t what generation upon generation of Americans from 1791 to 2008 believed and lived by. It’s all based on a decision by a group of justices.

In his speech, aired on C-SPAN, Obama said:

We have a long tradition of gun rights and gun ownership in this country. The Second Amendment has been interpreted by the Supreme Court to mean the people have the right to bear arms. There are a lot of law-abiding, responsible gun owners who use it for protection or sport. They handle their weapons properly. There are traditions of families passing down [hunting] from father to son, or daughter … and that is important; that’s part of who we are. But what we also have to recognize is, is that our homicide rates are so much higher than other industrialized nations–by like a mile.

And most of that is attributable to the easy, ready, availability of firearms, particularly handguns.

However, the gun control lobby’s relentless claim that America’s homicide rate is so much higher than other industrialized countries breaks down under scrutiny.

For example, in August 2013, Breitbart News reported on a study in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy which showed that the murder rate in heavily gun-controlled Russia was approximately 20.52 per 100,000 people in 2002. A high point for America was 6.6 per 100,000 people in 1993, and that rate fell to 3.2 per 100,000 by 2011, after the number of privately owned guns in America went from 192 million in 1994 to 310 million in 2009.

So, 20.52 per 100,000 people are murdered in Russia versus America’s 6.6 per 100,000–later to be 3.2 per 100,000–yet, according to President Obama, America’s murder rate is, “like a mile” higher than that of other industrialized countries.


http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/03/09/obama-important-second-amendment-responsible-for-high-homicide-rates/