It seems that no matter how ignorant of the Bible people are, there is one verse that everyone knows. No, it’s not John 3:16. Some people still don’t know that one; however, everyone seems to know Matthew 7:1, wherein Jesus says, “Judge not, that ye be not judged” (KJV). In fact, the less of the Bible people know, the more they’re prone to know and repeat this verse. If we had a nickel for every time someone accused us of “intolerantly” violating this verse, we could pay our server costs and possibly quit our day jobs. - Kim Olsen
David K. has sent us an erudite look at the positive side of gun ownership:
There are several reasons why responsible, law abiding citizens should have the right to own any type of firearm the want. As a matter of fact I think it should be a requirement of every responsible, law abiding US citizen to own a firearm, but that will never happen. Let me address some of the reasons why I feel this way.
1. The saying IS true that "when guns are outlawed only outlaws will have guns". Think about that for a minute. Since their invention millions of firearms have been produced and if laws were passed banning ownership of firearms criminals would be able to obtain them one way or another to use in their criminal activities.
2. Although it will never happen just imagine, if everyone over the age of 21 was required to take a firearm safety course, learn how to properly handle and use a firearm and be required to carry one with them and have one available in their home what that would do to petty crime like muggings, robberies, home invasions and so fourth. A criminal would think twice before confronting someone who is probably armed.
3. If there were no guns whatsoever, people would still kill and harm others and the weaker would be even more susceptible to falling victim. Just look at past history before the invention of gun powder. Someone wanting to kill someone else WILL find a way.
4. Lets look at the recent theater shooting in Colorado. Had the shooter not had access to firearms he might have used explosives instead, killing even more people than he did. But, if the majority of the people in the theater had been armed themselves, even though he was wearing body armor someone would have gotten off a head shot and put him down before so many was killed or wounded. And being the coward he was would probably not have carried out his attack had he known he would have met armed resistance.
5. And, while many people including yourself I suspect, think it would never be possible consider what would happen if the United States were invaded by one or more foreign countries. If our military troops were spread thin in several small conflicts such as for example: Iraq, Afghanistan, Somalia and Syria and as an example North Korea, Iran and a couple other countries maybe China included decided to invade the US mainland in an unexpected and undetected attack, would our remaining troops be able to ward off an overwhelming attack without help from the general "armed" citizens? If you think so just rent the movie Red Dawn and watch it. This alone is why every law abiding household should own at least one assault weapon and a few thousand rounds of ammunition for it.
And by the way, I only became a member of the NRA last week due to the current negotiations going on at the United Nations on limiting the small arms manufacture, ownership and trade disguised as the UN Arms Trade Treaty which would eventually limit American citizens ownership, trade and modification (attaching a scope to your deer rifle yourself would be illegal) of even hunting and sporting firearms.
Once the gun control lobby succeeds in banning assault rifles, hand guns will not be far behind, then next will be shotguns that fire multiple projectiles in a single shot followed by all high powered rifles like used in hunting and it would eventually be illegal to own even a single shot .22 caliber rifle. Give an inch and they will take a mile.I guess it's a good thing I'm not the one who draws the line because it'd be at "law abiding, sane, American citizens who have been trained and licensed to own such firearms" strict requirements and limits should be placed on fully automatic weapons but not as restrictive as they currently are and require that ammunition be traceable to the purchaser and hold them accountable for any misuse.
We appreciate David's input, but do have a few short comments. We find his idea of labeling ammunition intriguing, but have no idea how it could be accomplished. We have several young friends who shoot targets and complain about the cost of ammo for a .22 rifle. Identifying the source of ammo would be a further deterrent to those who shoot targets, skeet, or trap; however, no hobby is inexpensive. As with anything in life, you pay to play.
Our original blog referred to a ban on only assault rifles. Several readers defended ownership of these and mentioned the possibility of a "Red Dawn." If the unnamed enemy makes it as far inland as north Alabama, they're certainly well-trained and well-armed. A shooter with an assault rifle could take out scores, perhaps even hundreds, but what then? He would soon be killed himself. His family would be left either to the enemy's hands or to scrounge for themselves for months or years. Why not join intellectual forces with those who defend our shores? Use a sword to chop off the tentacles of an evil creature, and he will grow more. Chop off the head with cunning and well-laid plans, and you win the war.