Yesterday President Obama announced 23 executive orders to tighten up gun control. Surrounded by children he promised to do everything possible to prevent another school shooting and to stop deaths from street crime. Obama spoke about liberty as if taking away guns from law-abiding citizens would promote liberty.
Does gun control really stop criminals? Since when do criminals obey the law?
Gun control is simply another move to make it harder for law-abiding people to defend themselves. Gun control is disarming the victims, not the perpetrators.
In the aftermath of the Connecticut school massacre, Mr. Obama vowed to rally public opinion to press a reluctant Congress to ban military-style assault weapons and high-capacity magazines, expand background checks, and toughen gun-trafficking laws. Recognizing that the legislative fight could be long and difficult, the president also took immediate steps by issuing a series of executive actions intended to reduce gun violence.
Gun rights advocates and Constitutionalists, including some members of Congress, assert that Obama is overstepping the bounds of Presidential authority. He is instituting new rules by fiat because he cannot get them passed through the legislative process.
America is headed toward a dictatorship in which one man's will governs hundreds of millions of people. We must take a stand. We must not let this happen.
The Second Amendment states that the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed. People are all people. If you do not want to own a gun, you are free to make that choice, but we need to preserve your neighbor's right to own a gun. The Second Amendment is not about hunting, and it is not even about home protection. It is about placing a barrier in the way of a tyrannical government.
Nevertheless, I feel compelled to point out that anybody who thinks that you do not need 10 bullets to shoot a deer has never shot a deer.
Imagine a scenario in which two or more criminals break into your home, and both have guns. Will your little revolver with five or six rounds be sufficient to stop them? Probably not.
Even so, hunting and home protection are simply the side benefits of the right to keep and bear arms. The real purpose is to remind the government that we are a free people. They cannot ride roughshod over our rights to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness.
That's my opinion. What's yours?