April 20, 2013

More stuff to think about

In the wake of the Newtown and Colorado shootings some have taken the position we need to look hard at the Second Amendment. We need to ask if private citizens really need guns. In fact, Connecticut and New York have put in place laws that will certainly bring about lawsuits that argue Second Amendment questions.

If the Boston Terrorists prove to be motivated by their religion what then? After all, the 9/11 attacks were carried out by religious fanatics.. So was the ill-fated attempts by the shoe bomber, the underwear bomber and the Times Square bomber. Will those who argue we must limit our Constitutional Freedom to possess firearms for the public good also argue we must limit our Constitutional Freedom of Religion for the public good? Should we be taking a hard look at the First Amendment?

Of course, I am not advocating for a limit on our First Amendment Rights, I am just asking what is the difference?

3 comments:

Fuzzy Curmudgeon said...

I wonder if terrorists would actually try to pull something like this stunt in a city where people are lawfully allowed to carry concealed weapons, and defend their property with deadly force under the castle doctrine?

Cowering, er, taking shelter in my home and hoping the bad guy doesn't kick in my door before the cops I called via 911 can arrive doesn't sound very American to me.

Ed Bonderenka said...

The difference is the focus of the liberals and nothing else.

Woodman said...

Any cowering I would be doing would be from trigger happy heavily armed police. Damned if I would stick my head out of a window looking for anything.

The lock down was to protect citizens from police tanks, not terrorists.

Consider everything here that is of original content copyrighted as of March 2005