"Assault Weapons" Ban Push, Story 1

Submitted by Bill St. Clair on Sun, 25 Jan 2009 14:31:11 GMT  <== RKBA ==> 

CNN covers an attack in Miami. Fortunately, nobody was killed, but one of the nine injured was in critical condition yesterday. A tragedy. But CNN's front-page headline for this story is "Gunman used AK-47 to fire on crowd, police say". The story itself is titled "Victims say masked gunman responsible for Miami shootings." Looks to me like this will be used as "evidence" in the push for a new "assault weapons" ban.

"It was like a war zone," resident Joan Rutherford told WSVN. "I witnessed this guy laying there with his face, looked like it was completely tore off. His eyes was all I could see, and he had a grip on some money and gasping and trying to lift his head up to say something."

Police Chief John Timoney said that at least one man with an AK-47 "discharged numerous rounds, then ran around the corner. There were some more rounds discharged there from an AK-47 and another weapon."


"These are weapons of war, and they don't belong on the streets of Miami or any other street in America," Mayor Manuel Diaz said.

Weapons of war they may be, Mr. Diaz. But be careful with your wish to ban them, or the war will be on you, and rightfully so. The Second Amendment justifiably guarantees that every free man has uninfringed access to all of the horrible implements of war. If your wish is to enslave us, at least be honest about it.

Add comment Edit post Add post

Comments (1):

"Assault Weapons" Ban Push, Story 1

Submitted by humandesign on Mon, 02 Feb 2009 15:46:55 GMT

We need to step back a moment, many mistakes have been made along the way here. First off, EVERY SINGLE WEAPON IS AN ASSAULT WEAPON. Name ONE defensive weapon used with the intent to not assault...? If any administration or propaganda special interest group thinks that military weapons belong in the battlefield, then we'd all better hand over any knives, axes, bows, slingshots, fireworks, and handguns too, because all of these things were born from military development. We need to stop this absurd, “ASSAULT WEAPONS” clarification, with a meaning that other weapons are not. It’s amazing too how somehow the 2nd Amendment is tied to hunting and self-defense only. Who made that distinction? We the people, today, are a militia, in our cities and counties. We should and must stand up to protect our homes and cities, as an organized militia; and we have that right. But we’ve laid that responsibility at the hands of a police system that makes it very clear their job ISN’T to defend, protect, and serve the people.

In Nunn v. State, 1 Ga. 243, 251 (1846), the Georgia Supreme Court construed the Second Amendment as protecting the “natural right of self-defence” and therefore struck down a ban on carrying pistols openly. Its opinion perfectly captured the way in which the operative clause of the Second Amendment furthers the purpose announced in the prefatory clause, in continuity with the English right:
“The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed, or broken in upon, in the smallest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying a well-regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free State. Our opinion is, that any law, State or Federal, is repugnant to the Constitution, and void, which contravenes this right, originally belonging to our forefathers, trampled under foot by Charles I. and his two wicked sons and successors, re-established by the revolution of 1688, conveyed to this land of liberty by the colonists, and finally incorporated conspicuously in our own Magna Charta!”

“The right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not such merely as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed.”

That details the intent of the 2nd amendment our forfathers intended. That military weapons are the ones suitable for our possesion.

- The Rev. Al Sharpton visited Miami Thursday to promote peace in Liberty City and encourage witnesses to talk to investigators about last week's unsolved mass shooting -- one of the worst in Miami history. -

"inclusive in this must be...that we ask the president and the congress to renew the assault weapons ban that expired under president bush. it must be a national ban, it must now, and it must be the cry of the civil rights community all over this country." - rev. sharpton

"no community is safe. as long as an ak or assault rifle is in our community." - rev. starling

i absolutely agree with what starling said. i believe that there should be an assault weapons ban in all inner cities. it's apparent that crime in inner cities is uncontrollable. it's apparent that people in the inner cities don't care about the rampant crimes caused, which is perpetuated by the "i aint a snitcher" ideology of inner city residents.

however, it is insulting and idiotic to group the rest of the law-abiding and peaceful, responsible gun owners across the nation with the criminals of inner cities. what happens in inner cities should never be referred to or tied to the rest of the country.

This is not a battle over whether or not we can have guns, it’s a battle of opinion from the ruling class on what types we can have. If their opion is stronger than gun owners, than we the people must find a way to make our opinion over shadow thiers.

Edit comment