Guest post by jhambhm

Okay, I’m finally putting the proverbial pen to paper concerning MY OPINION on what happened in Newtown, CT and the resulting national outcry on the issue from both the left and the right.

I am a firm believer in the 2nd Amendment and the right for an individual to keep and bear arms. Courts have determined that the 2nd Amendment does indeed apply to INDIVIDUAL ownership (i.e. DC Et al v. Heller) so please don’t respond to me that it is for militia. Gun ownership under the 2nd Amendment is not about hunting or sport. It is about providing the citizenry a method to defend themselves from overwhelming tyranny, within and without. In WWII, Emperor Hirohito planned on invading continental US and had tasked his commanders with the assault. One Isoroku Yamamoto, Commander in Chief of the Japanese forces told his emperor that invading the US would never be successful . . .”that there would be gun behind every blade of grass . . ”

I also do not accept the liberal argument that the 2nd Amendment refers to weapons of only that time period (muskets and flintlocks). The Constitution and Bill of Rights was written by some of the greatest thinkers of that time and to suggest that they didn’t consider the future is asinine and insulting to the framers. The documents were written to last in perpetuity and as such I believe that every word, phrase, sentence, and thought was included with much foresight.

There exists many federal and state laws regarding the purchase, retention, and licensing of firearms of all types including handguns, semi-and auto rifles, shotguns. I do not claim to know all the federal regulations and I certainly do not know all state laws for 50 states. I do know that obtaining a firearm is not as simple as walking into a big box store and buying a TV as some liberals would have you believe. Depending on the state and the gun, there is paperwork, waiting periods, and background checks. The rub is that the laws vary state by state. In this instance I will agree that perhaps the feds should have a more rigorous background check that is consistent in all states. Perhaps a background check should include medical records in addition to criminal checks. I argue that it is not the gun but the person that is bad so let’s look at the person with as much a jaundiced eye as we do the gun.

Admittedly, I don’t like the government sticking its nose into my business, but if selling, purchasing and licensing had consistent laws, and mental state/psychotic drug use/alcohol abuse was part of background check, perhaps we’d stop a few more killings. However, law abiding citizens who legally own and carry generally are not the ones committing these horrific crimes. Bad guys sell and buy guns, illegally. Bad guys steal guns. Bad guys kill people. They have broken laws long before they kill. How about we identify the ‘bad guys” earlier in the process?

Liberals will argue “why do you need THAT gun” or “have so many guns”. As I pointed out to a friend, that is irrelevant. Some people hunt, some collect, some simply enjoy shooting; some like me believe that we are ultimately heading towards war on our own soil. It is nobody’s business what I have or how many so long as they are legal. Hey liberal-why do you drive a Mercedes or why do you live in a ten bedroom house? You don’t need that. Or how many abortions have you had (how many children have YOU killed?) Get the idea of personal rights and liberty? There are certain types of guns that ARE illegal.

I somewhat agree with one of the liberal’s arguments-“does everyone need to own a bazooka?” I’ll have to agree that a lot of folks can get sucked into the muck of that argument. If you agree on the ridiculous with them they will drag you down the rabbit hole that eventually ends with “why does anyone need any kind of firearm”. I’d rather discuss revising the FFL (Federal Firearms License) process. Maybe the background checks for this process should be more stringent as I stated earlier. This next statement may upset some of my conservative friends but maybe home/individuals should not be allowed to obtain FFL (unless they are collectors). I don’t know the statistics but I am pretty confident in saying that the majority of guns that get stolen or illegally bought and sold originate with individuals and not the sporting or gun stores.

The twenty year old from CT, who I will not mention by name, was mentally unstable as we have now learned. How long did his mother know this and why did she wait so long in finally trying to get help? Why were her guns THAT SHE LEGALLY owned so easily obtained after her murder? I’m not saying that she got what she deserved but she is part of the problem. It appears to me that she was not a responsible parent or gun owner. Allowing a mental deficient access to weapons is tantamount to handing a drunk the keys to your car. Hey liberals- it’s called PERSONAL RESPONSIBILITY. Maybe the nation needs to be willing to discard old ideas and hold people responsible for their actions or lack thereof. Let’s take responsibility further-Eric Holder, fully aware of Operation Fast and Furious, allowed the US Government to transport and sell arms, violating many laws along the way. Mexican drug cartels & Eric Holder- Operation Fast and Furious, a gun walking scheme intended to trace guns into Mexico was a miserable failure resulting in the injury or death of over 150 Mexican civilians, US border guards, and possibly US citizens along the border. Had Eric Holder not been protected by the present administration surely more deaths would be attributed to this fiasco.

Liberals will argue that the means justify the ends but they fail to accept the fact that the government broke the very law that they are sworn to uphold. If this instance is okay then why should we as citizens expect our government to follow due process and rule of law provided us under the Bill of Rights? I’ll even throw you liberals a bone- Iran/Contra was also illegal.

Let’s delve into killing or even mass murder. I argued with some friends the other evening that I could do as much if not more damage with a pickup truck or five gallons of gasoline and the act would be just as heinous. People who are determined to kill will kill. If a gun is available then so bit, if not, they’ll find another way. The following excerpt was found with an easy Google search and I’ve tried to verify the validity. I cannot find any source to refute it. The killer decides to kill and then chooses his weapon. Sometimes the weapon of convenience is a gun. It is the killer that is bad, not the instrument he holds.

By no coincidence all of the worst mass murders in US history have been non-gun.
Worst School Massacre in US history: Bath, Michigan School Massacre. 1927. Murder accomplished with explosives. 44 victims (equal to the Columbine and Virginia Tech massacres combined).

Worst Domestic Terrorist Attack in US History: Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, Alfred P. Murrah Federal Building bombing. 4/19/95. Murder accomplished with a rental truck full of fertilizer based explosives. 168 dead (including many children in an onsite day care).

Worst Foreign based Terrorist Attack in US History: September 11, 2001 attacks on NYC, PA, Pentagon. Murder accomplished with box cutters and commercial airliners

We could delve even further into other mass killings (some liberals will argue justified)-

Jim Jones-leader of the Peoples Temple, best known for the mass suicide in 1978 of 914 of its members in Jonestown, Guyana, and the murder of five individuals at a nearby airstrip. Over 200 children were murdered at Jonestown, almost all of them by cyanide poisoning. NO GUNS

Janet Reno/ David Koresh- between the actions of these two individuals are responsible for the death of 54 adults and 28 children in the 51 day standoff between the Branch Davidians and the Bureau of ATF. One military vehicle and fire was the weapon. Other than the initial failed raid on the compound . . . NO GUNS.

The bottom line is that there will always be a wide assortment of opinions, many heated. From my viewpoint, most liberals wring their hands and evoke emotion with little logical thought to the issue. Likewise, most conservatives are quick to quote the 2nd Amendment but cannot successfully argue why they believe what they believe. Liberals insist that abortion is a right as upheld by the US Supreme Court. Roe v Wade has lead to atrocities almost unspeakable. According to CDC statistics (and bear in mind not all abortions are reported) the number of abortions since Roe v Wade have exceeded the number of Jews killed during Holocaust. In order to ease their conscience they claim that an unborn baby is not a person but simply a mass. Babies are dismembered and vacuumed from wombs. Some are partially born and then have scissors thrust into their skulls-all in the name of choice. I am not saying that I want to outlaw abortion though I do think it has become more of a convenience and people are desensitized to what it is. I am trying to draw a parallel for my liberal friends…. When they exercise their “rights” it results in horrific things 100% of the time. My 2nd Amendment right may result in horrific things. Why is their privilege to kill more sacred than mine to own and carry a gun that will statistically never be used to kill.

MY right to keep and bear arms is guaranteed by the Bill of Rights. Who is the true monster?

Both sides need to see the issue as it is-evil men do evil things and they will use whatever means are available to them. Bottom line is that we need to address mental incapacity and violence in America, before abandoning the Bill of Rights.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *



  1. Excellent piece…already passed this on, will continue to do so on and off today.

    Btw…your juxtaposition regarding Roe vs Wade and abortion is priceless via my viewfinder in life.

  2. Bravo!

  3. I read it, and I liked it.

  4. PAmadwoman says:

    Excellent! Passing this one on.

    I love that you pointed out some non-gun examples of mass murder. It’s probably just as true (this is a hunch, not statistics) that the non-gun instances of one-on-one murders and wrongful deaths exceed those involving firearms — even removing drunk drivers and aborted babies from the picture.

  5. Most of your post is accurate, except for Waco. There guns involved, and the government was the one with the fire power. The Branch Davidians may have been nut jobs, but they were minding their own business.

    Janet Reno can be held responsible for the deaths of those people, not David Koresh.

    We don’t need any more of these bull-dykes like Reno and Napolitano and their penis envy running things.


    STALN,HITLER,LENNIN,MAO,AHMIN,CASTRO,CHAVEZ, and the rest of the evil tyrants did one thing they disarmed their citizens just before they rounded them up for either massacare or putting them all in concentration camps and gulags

  7. Concur with most of your editorial.

    I, for one, am not going to be a one plank voter…ie, overturning row v wade, fiscal accountability, gun rights or foreign policy or religion or immigration.

    I’ll take the best candidate we can find that satisfys most of my concerns.

    Personally believe that securing the borders, defunding O-care and fiscal responsibility are the most important and immediate issues…my personal red lines.

    The rest I have an opinion/belief but are tied to religion or a personal preference and that is not a high priority for the immediate and imminent cause of this great Republic.

    Just my opinion.

    Blistered, out!

  8. IMO gun control won’t and cannot happen. We the people will keep ample pressure on our politicians. I do not want the country to be distracted that this is the only issue.

    Blistered, out

    • Once they have Gun Control all other issues are irrelevant, you’ll have no say as the 2nd was in place to protect the 1st.

  9. They need total control of guns by 2014 because they know this effort now will cost them in the House and maybe in the Senate. They have never been this close to controlling the American People and they know it. Reid will use the Nuke Option in the Senate in a flash if the house rolls over and it will be close. We have a Congress of Cowards, its that simple. Lighting a fire under your own Congress people is Key to stopping this to a great extent. O will probably use EO’s as he has in the past and our spineless Reps have done nothing and they will continue that way as long as WE let them. Its a rich life being in Congress on either side. Most become very wealthy in a few terms no matter which party you are in. “Boner” has demoted Tea Party people because they didn’t play the game, it was a shot across their bow, lets see if they run or fight him. Again its all up to the people to stay in contact with your Reps.

  10. Joe Stalin says:

    “This next statement may upset some of my conservative friends but maybe home/individuals should not be allowed to obtain FFL (unless they are collectors). ”

    The FFL was designed to be ubiquitous and inexpensive. FFLs existed pre-Gun Control Act of 1968 when we were able to purchase Colt 1911s for delivery to your door via Railroad Express and semi-auto G-3 assault rifles were delivered via US Mail to your home. Do I need to remind everyone that a major anti-gun initiative of the Clinton Administration was to drive small FFLs out of business? The fee for the FFL was a nominal $10 and now it is $200 for three years! Clinton succeeded in driving a considerable number of FFLs out of business. I’m sure this made all the stocking dealers quite happy as now they could drive the price up for American consumers. Yes, as my Economics 111 teacher said: “What do businessmen fear most? Is it Communists? No, it’s COMPETITION.” Remember, some American gun manufacturers didn’t want competition from foreign military surplus and so the US gun makers were quite happy when they were cut off. Sen. Bob Dole guided through legislation to allow at least some older foreign surplus weapons like the SKS and M-1 Garand in.

  11. Jarod Smitreski says:

    The second amendment to the U.S. Constitution guarantees every American the right to bear arms. Has any law ever been so ambiguous? What are arms? What does it mean to bear them? At least with the first amendment we know exactly where we stand: Freedom of speech. It couldn’t be any clearer. But, the right to bear arms leaves the second amendment open to different interpretations. We need gun permits to carry a concealed weapon. Do we need knife permits? No. Yet both can, and often do, cause death. We can own a gun, or a rifle, or a sub-machine gun, or a machete, and dozens of other tools to kill, even our own bare hands. So, gun control is a debate in our country that makes no sense unless you broaden the ban or acceptance to include all instruments of death.^:

    Hottest article on our personal web page