Manchin’s gun control
Editor,
I must take issue with the Logan Banner editor’s support of Joe Manchin’s recent comments about gun control. Please allow me to challenge those comments in order.
The opening paragraph was spot on and well stated. However, the second paragraph went completely off the rails. You accurately stated that American citizens have a Constitutional right to arm themselves. But then you set that in juxtaposition with what you call the rights of children to safety. Huh? Can you please give me the sentence in our Constitution that declares a “right to safety”? There is no such thing.
This cavalier way that the press declares things a “right” is unnerving to me. Rights are guarantees of freedoms as enumerated in our Constitution. What you have done is similar to those who declared that Americans have a right to affordable healthcare. There is no such right. We may want affordable healthcare and we may want safe schools, but there is no right constitutionally guaranteed which provides either.
You then go on to infer that the silence of many legislators about the shooting in Connecticut is because they are NRA supported. I would argue that the silent ones are those who understand that evil cannot be legislated out of existence. They understand that freedom is the most costly social experiment ever undertaken and occasionally evil people abuse it.
Next you go on to praise Senator Manchin and suggest that his call for a discussion on gun control is a good thing. How can that be good? The Second Amendment is pretty clear. What is there to discuss? Would you praise Manchin if he suggested it is time we have a discussion about the First Amendment rights of free speech?
To suggest that any of our constitutional rights should be discussed simply because we’ve experienced a tragedy is asking for problems. May I remind you, that it wasn’t our first amendment rights that earned us our freedom, it was the second one! George Washington didn’t debate the British into going home, he shot them. They were unjust and evil in the way they dealt with us, so we overthrew their tyranny. Such tyranny and evil is still present today and could visit us again.
I too wept over the lives of those precious children and teachers who died at the hands of this madman. But, I’m not willing to surrender my freedom to mother Russia because of it. When we surrender freedoms, we are in effect declaring that we believe the government will do a better job of caring for our individual needs than we can do for ourselves. Such thinking leads to slavery. Remember Social Security and Medicare? The government was going to take care of us there too. They are both broke.
Here are some non-political facts for you to consider. Extensive studies about mass shootings have revealed that these evil people target gun free zones. Places like schools, theaters, and government buildings are their first choice precisely because they are gun free. Second, these same studies showed that when these suicidal maniacs are stopped, it is usually by an armed citizen who shoots back. Of course, these instances are rarely publicized because the press is predominately composed of anti-gun liberals.
So, I can’t agree with you or Joe. If it were possible to make a law that would prevent insanity, then we could also make a law that would stop lying, cheating and stealing as well. But, laws can’t change behavior; their only value is to provide a means to punish those who violate them and we already have laws against shooting innocent people. Another law won’t make it less likely to happen again.
Gary Lee Corns
Logan
As for armed guards in schools. First off, how will that be paid for. Schools are already struggling to pay the teachers a wage that doesn't qualify as poverty. Secondly, do you think that security guards are some sort of robot? Do you think that they are not at all affected by emotions that might cause them to snap and take out a school classroom or even the entire school? They would be already armed and inside the school. How many would die before another guard or police officer could put them down? Worse yet, what if some nut job does go into attack mode with no concern for their own safety and just wants to kill as many as they can. Then, during the following volley of bullets, 16 or 17 kids gets hit? Armed guards are just human beings subject to the same flaws as the rest of us. Only difference is that they would be guaranteed to be armed.
Fact is, it is an unsafe world. No matter where you are, you face the fact that your life could end accidentally or tragically. Nobody has a way to completely reign in the mentally unbalanced among us. We can only do the best we can to reduce the odds of death by guns occurring. Tougher gun laws would not take your gun away. Provided you aren't mentally unstable. However, if you are the type that your dog is telling you that Jody Foster would be really impressed if you mowed down a group of Kindergarteners. Well, then you might have a reason to worry. Nothing is perfect though. Nothing. It is just that no decent human being can just stand twiddling their thumbs while children and first responders die. I am all for making it harder, not easier, for the crazy element to get a gun.
Back to the issue of gun control: I find it odd that if Obama is SO against guns, then why does he send his children to a school that has 11 armed guards? It’s odd that no gunman has attacked a school with armed guards that I am aware of…wonder why?
I notice most crime is perpetrated against citizens who are unarmed…wonder why?
Maybe the guns could be used as a crime deterrent! Imagine that Logan Banner and Manchin!
If suddenly all good people of West Virginia and elsewhere gave up their guns, do you think the bad guys would follow suit? Maybe we could test that theory in Chicago and Detroit! Maybe Manchin and the liberals of the Logan Banner could test that theory by taking a walk in the hood. Personally, if I walked in a dangerous part of town, I would consider carrying some kind of protection.
The democrats want to make us sheep and depend on them for everything; that is the fundamental change the left wants. As far as the U.S. Constitution is concerned, Obama hates it so much I'm sure he's had it copied in the form of toilet paper so he can't wipe himself with it daily - between golf games!
I realize that guns used by a deranged human can kill, but guns are the only thing that separates us from the bad guys. You can rest assured that Mexico has some of the toughest gun control laws on earth, but does that stop the banditos from killing innocent women and children? No.
Another case in point, let’s look at Africa where the armies and militias have guns but the people do not. Do you think that fathers would allow their children to be maimed and their wives and daughters raped if they had a means to protect themselves? No.
The bad news for the Logan Banner and Joe is there are LOTS of bad people out there. There will always be lots of bad people out there. The only way to protect oneself from a rogue government or from criminals is with a gun. The founders gave us the right to bear arms for a reason. Look at countries that don’t allow regular citizens to have guns: they are overrun with thugs who not only have guns, but use them to terrorize their citizens.
The city of Chicago, where our beloved leader comes from, is out-of-control because the criminals have guns but the good people do not. Do you think that having tough gun laws is going to stop gang warfare in Chicago?
Should ANYBODY be assured a save passage from their home and back? That would be nice, but it can no longer be insured under any circumstances; remember the police are only minutes – or hours – away in an emergency such as a home or school invasion. The way to insure oneself is to carry insurance (a gun).
It is our constitutional right to have a weapon to defend ourselves and our country. Guns don't kill...people do!