Friday, December 21, 2007

The Logic of Gun Rights

H/T: Nancy K. Mathis of American Daughter.

Back in September, the National Rifle Association (NRA) held a two-day conference in Washington, DC called Celebration of American Values. One of the featured speakers was presidential hopeful John McCain. In his presentation he discussed three specific points on which opponents of Second Amendment rights twist logic.

Below is a partial transcript of McCain's speech.


In my years in Washington, I’ve seen what I call three myths used by politicians to excuse their support for gun control.
First is the big city myth, that it is acceptable, even necessary, to fight crime in big cities. If you have a crime problem, they say it’s really a gun problem. So instead of increasing police patrols, instituting tough sentences for lawbreakers and other measures that would actually address crime, we restrict ownership of guns and limit the rights of law-abiding citizens.
We’re meeting today in a city that represents the worst of this myth. The citizens of the nation’s capital do not enjoy the right to bear — to keep and bear arms. That’s why I’ve co-sponsored legislation repealing the ban on firearms possession for law-abiding citizens in the District of Columbia. The Second Amendment is not just for rural Arizona; it’s for all of America.
The second myth is that of the bad gun. This was at the core of the debate over the so-called assault weapons. Proponents of this myth argue that some kinds of guns are acceptable for now, but others are not if they have certain features like a pistol grip or an extended magazine. I will continue to oppose those who want to ration the Second Amendment based on their views of what guns it applies to.
Finally, there’s the hunting myth. The hunting myth: If you show your bona fides by hunting ducks or varmints or quail, it makes up for support of gun control.
This myth overlooks a fundamental truth: The Second Amendment is not about hunting. It’s about freedom.

I'm not real keen on McCain as a presidential candidate becasue of his stance on illegal immigration and border control...but I love him for what he says about the 2nd amendment.

Go John!


3 comments:

AmericanDaughter said...

Hello, fellow traveler, and thanks for spreading the word.

I see that you live in one of my favorite places. I live in the metro DC area, but back in the day, I managed a project related to the developmental testing of tactical Army FEBA sigint system ... guess where!

What I remember best about Fort Huachuca and Sierra Vista (besides the warm friendly folk, of course) is the FOOD. I think I gained ten pounds while I was working there.

Some of the happiest days I remember...

barb michelen said...

Hello I just entered before I have to leave to the airport, it's been very nice to meet you, if you want here is the site I told you about where I type some stuff and make good money (I work from home): here it is

Anonymous said...

During the markup to Quarter Fixedness 2267, the restaurant check proposing online gambling ordinance, contestant Spencer Bachus over again referred to an article in the Orlando Patrol as heralding the incipient dangers of Internet gaming. Bachus said the paper bemoaned the lure Internet cafes posed to children, and argued this meant accepting online casinos means subjecting kids to risk.

Bachus repeated the citation a include of times during the execution of the deliberation alongside the Quarter Financial Services Panel, as if he had discovered a hard quiddity of episode gaming proponents could not refute nor digest. But the Alabama Republican had either accidentally or pointedly muddied the dampen with misleading information.