Click here to view La Crosse Area Weather
Home > Opinion > Story
 Advertisement 

Published - Monday, July 07, 2008

POST COMMENT | READ COMMENTS (17 comment(s))

Constitution protects our right to bear arms


.
The U.S. Supreme Court’s recent affirmation of the “Right of the People” to bear arms was long overdue. Our U. S. Constitution was written to guarantee that the civil rights we have would not be abridged by any government entity. After the lessons learned from the tyrannical rule of the British and the resultant Revolutionary War, the last thing our forefathers wanted was a government that could remove our rights with the stroke of a pen.

Our Constitution is so important that all our elected officials and all our military and police forces take an oath, before God and country, to defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. This is where things go awry. In the D.C. example, the government decided to deny the civil right of self-defense. Maybe these officials had their fingers crossed when they took their oaths of office. This oath does not expire when they leave office; it is an oath for life. How can the people of the United States trust any politician who would violate this basic oath of office?
We may be too far removed from the horrors of World War II, but we need only look at Bosnia, Tibet, Darfur and other spots around the world to see that genocide begins with gun control. If you haven’t noted the United Nations’ efforts at removing all arms from private citizens world wide, it is time to pay attention. The twisted up handgun in front of the U.N. Building should be a clue. The Second Amendment covers our right to defend our country as well as ourselves. Gun control denies the tools we need to do it.

This ruling is being viewed by some as only a ruling on “reasonableness.” Any gun law that denies access and/or use of arms by any honest citizen is unreasonable and violates the Constitution. Ammunition is part of any firearm. Bullet bans, high taxes on arms, waiting periods, processing fees, limitations on the number of arms purchased, magazine restrictions, restrictions based on mechanical actions, all violate the Second Amendment.

All forms of gun registration at any level of government violate the Constitution. (A federal law to protect firearm owners was passed during the Reagan administration forbidding registration).

So-called reasonable laws already deny criminals, those judged mentally incompetent, those dishonorably discharged from the military and most non-citizens from purchasing arms. But a criminal, by definition, is one who does not obey the law. A gun law that denies an honest citizen the right to defend against these criminals just creates more victims.

There is still much work to be done. The 2004 terrorist attack on a school in Beslan, Russia, showed us we must find a better way to defend our school children from all threats. One of our former sheriffs often said, “The wolf does not hunt where the sheep are armed.”

The Second Amendment was worded so as to not exclude modern weapons and ammunition. Just as the First Amendment does not limit the news media to only quill pens, an offset press, and horse and buggy delivery, advances in the development of arms are not limited in the Second Amendment.

There is a lot of good in the world but there is also great evil. Given the least opportunity, any government will erode civil rights to make its people more dependent on it. This is the start of enslavement. They is why we have our Constitution.

Even beyond the face value of restoring our Second Amendment, the U.S. Supreme Court showed a renewal of individual rights: “the Right of the people.” This is an important precedent when other individual rights issues come before the Court.

Harold Jerue is a lifetime member of the National Rifle Association.
.



 Advertisement 
 Tell us what you think...

 Comments »

notme wrote on Jul 12, 2008 9:28 AM:

" We've been "tuned" in for quite some time. 48 states allow carry, and NONE of them has ever considered repealing their carry laws. There has NEVER been an incident where a permitted individual who was lawfully carrying was shot by an officer or shot an officer. Kind even said the fear tactics are unfounded, but Welch still refuses to accept the facts. "

Michael Welch wrote on Jul 10, 2008 12:21 PM:

" The old phrase is 'The proof of the pudding is in the tasting' so we shall obviously see. Fear is a tactic readily employed re: immigration and 'terrorism' but mustn't when it comes to the ubiquity of guns in US society hmmm? AND as I wrote re: Ronald Reagan -- Stay tuned!... "

notme wrote on Jul 9, 2008 7:25 PM:

" And as I posted on the other thread, 48 states have carry laws and the officers there are NOT in anymore danger. Even Ron Kind came out and said these types of fear tactics are unfounded. "

Michael Welch wrote on Jul 9, 2008 1:09 PM:

" The 'Ludlow (Colorado) massacre' occurred in 1914 when Colorado militia was sent by the state's governor to break the strike. Twenty people, mostly children, were burned and suffocated by the attack on the miners' camp. Federal forces were eventually ordered in by President Wilson so to stop the violence. My point is not that the country's main 'fear' ought to be of its own government -- though that has proven to be a legitimate fear in many respects -- but that the armed citizenry is not necessarily 'safer' or 'freer,' any more at least. As for the result of the supremes' ruling, as I wrote on another site, time will tell. If that result is considerably more gun deaths -- especially of law officers -- then there WILL BE more gun CONTROLS... "

Michael Welch wrote on Jul 9, 2008 12:57 PM:

" United States military forces have been employed on US soil as 'nationalized' guard or 'militia' but the distinction is technical. Troops have been mobilized to occupy American cities and have been used against numerous strikes BEFORE and -- mainly -- AFTER 1878. That a trained, federalized military force with sophisticated weaponry is readily available to executive power IS historical and even as recent as the 1960s, when tanks were in the streets of Detroit. The 'law' as such has never been a 'barrier' to the enhancement of power in this country as well as in others... "

notme wrote on Jul 9, 2008 6:59 AM:

" I will adjust my comments, the miners' strike mentioned happened in 1927. However, that was a state malitia, not FEDERAL troops, thus my origianl post still holds. "

notme wrote on Jul 8, 2008 5:14 PM:

" And the "old west" comparison is a typical liberal fear tactic that has proven to be false. 48 states allow for personal concealed carry of some type and we aren't having "old west shoot outs" so you can stop the fear tactics already. "

notme wrote on Jul 8, 2008 5:11 PM:

" Mr. Welch, the instances you cite occurred BEFORE the Posse Comitatus Act of 1878. That federal law made it illegal for federal troops to be used for police actions on American soil.

Looks like you are the one who lacks knowledge of American history sir. "

Michael Welch wrote on Jul 8, 2008 12:21 PM:

" Re: the court decision no one actually 'knows' what the ramifications will be. If shootings increase and especially in deaths of law enforcement officers there will be a strong backlash against this apparent 'blanket' right. Most folks don't want a society in which they MUST have a gun in their homes in order to be protected. The old west by the way was marked by random and immediate gun violence -- guns were used in almost any situation and perceived provocation, usually fueled with alcohol. The 'romance' was later imagined but bystander deaths were common. This is unlikely to return in any full sense but even in a graduated way it would create a public clamor for gun CONTROL... "

Michael Welch wrote on Jul 8, 2008 12:13 PM:

" The American military has OFTEN been 'used' on American soil -- were you ever taught about a 'minor' conflict called 'the civil war'? Even George Washington assumed command of a federalized militia in order to FORCE the recalcitrant farmers of western Pennsylvania to pay the tax on their home brew. Soldiers have been employed against strikes as the hammer to destroy union organizing. In Colorado during a miners' strike of nearly 100 years ago troops surrounded and BURNED the homes of strikers WITH THEIR WIVES AND CHILDREN INSIDE. You really don't know very much about your country's history do you?... "

notme wrote on Jul 7, 2008 6:04 PM:

" Mr. Welch, you couldnt be more incorrect. The United States military itself can/will not ever be used on American soil. The reason we need to be armed, is because the Democrats havent done one thing to get guns out of the hands of criminals. Further restrictions will not accomplish this; they will simply make it difficult or impossible for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves. The courts have consistently held, that government is under NO OBLIGATION to protect the citizens so the responsibility of security and defense falls to the individual. "

notme wrote on Jul 7, 2008 6:02 PM:

" Having read the entire decision, what the court said was that the constitution doe/is not a list of rights, but rather a document that specifies what, if any, infringement the government could put on our innate rights. In the case of security and defense, that right may NOT be infringed. The court further ruled that, as a handgun is the most feasible way to exercise this right they can/should not be ban. The court also ruled that although many municipalities have ordinances prohibiting the discharge of a firearms, those ordinances should/could not be enforced if a firearm where discharged for the purpose of security or defense. "

Michael Welch wrote on Jul 7, 2008 11:50 AM:

" So many folks are killed daily by firearms that it may hardly matter what the 'supremes' have wrought -- though I suppose if it happens to YOU or someone you actually care about, you MAY feel differently. As far as going off into 'the hills' re: John Milius' inventive film 'Red Dawn' in order to fight tyranny a la 1776 I hate to tell you but your government is SO well armed that you can certainly achieve your 'goal' of cold dead fingers wrapped around your favorite deer rifle as 'they' blast the livin' s--- outta ya pod'ner! Rots o' ruck!... "

ryeguy wrote on Jul 7, 2008 6:59 AM:

" Mr. Jerue, I think this means you should hold off on any purchases of rocket launchers, RPGs, shoulder launched SAMs, automatic AKs, automatic Uzis, or even that nice sawed off Winchester 12 gauge pump, for your personal protection. The court decision suggests that these might indeed be reasonable to regulate. "

ryeguy wrote on Jul 7, 2008 6:54 AM:

" This is not a free ticket to concealed carry. It just says that the government cannot restrict all guns from all people. It still allows for states and communities to impose restrictions that are "reasonable." I would also remind the readers that this decision actually is consistent with the Democratic Partys platform in 2004, which included a plank endorsing the individual-rights view of the Second Amendment with some restrictions: "We will protect Americans' Second Amendment right to own firearms, and we will keep guns out of the hands of criminals and terrorists by fighting gun crime, reauthorizing the assault weapons ban, and closing the gun show loophole, as President Bush proposed and failed to do." (http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_planks.html) "

ryeguy wrote on Jul 7, 2008 6:45 AM:

" Hold yer horses there Mr. Jerue. Even the majority, in a sharply split 5-4 decision, stated, "Nothing in our opinion should be taken to cast doubt on longstanding prohibitions on the possession of firearms by felons and the mentally ill, or laws forbidding the carrying of firearms in sensitive places such as schools and government buildings, or laws imposing conditions and qualifications on the commercial sale of arms. The majorty opinion also said that prohibitions on carrying concealed weapons would be upheld, and, according to reports, suggested that the right to possession did not apply to dangerous and unusual weapons that are not typically used for self-defense or recreation. Like machine guns, say. "

blogger wrote on Jul 6, 2008 9:55 AM:

" Score a victory for the gangbangers and the paranoid fringe. The SC ruled against outright bans but left the door open for regulation. Resolution of differences by lethal force creates problems, doesnt solve them. We already have enough death on the streets by idiots taking out their frustrations by killing, now the NRA seems to want to get into the action. They gloss over that in the process of protecting hearth and home many unintended deaths occur when family members are shot by mistake (collateral damage?). Aim straight Mr Jerue. "


PLEASE NOTE: Comments on stories that frequently update through the day disappear with each update.
The comments above are from readers. In no way do they represent the views of the La Crosse Tribune.

Click here to report offensive or inappropriate comments. Please identify the comment you're concerned about, the story to which the comment was attached, the date of the comment and the person who made the post.

 Post a comment (150 word limit) »

Log In - If you have already signed up with The LaCrosse Tribune, please sign in now!
Member ID:
*Password:
  Forgot Your Password?
 
Sign Up - To encourage intelligent and meaningful conversation, The LaCrosse Tribune requires all commenters to register before posting comments. It's quick, it's easy, and it's free! Just fill in the information below to get started!

**Your Member ID and password will be required to log in. Your comments will appear under your user name.

Do not use usernames or passwords from your financial accounts!

Note: Fields marked with an asterisk (*) are required!

Create a Member ID:
*Choose a password:
*Re-enter password:
E-mail Address:
Year of Birth:
 

(children under 13 cannot register)

First Name:
Last Name:
Company:
Home Phone:
Business Phone:
Address:
City:
State:
Zip Code:
 

NEWSPAPER ADS

LACROSSE JOBS

TOP HOMES

HomeSeller
Top Homes



 
 
Dailies
La Crosse Tribune
Winona Daily News

Weeklies
Coulee News
Courier Life News
The Chronicle
Houston County News
Tomah Journal
Vernon Broadcaster
Westby Times

Regional
Inside Preps
My LIVE! Entertainment
Best of River Valley
Business Report
Healthy Living Today
Strictly Golf
River Valley Bike Trails
River Valley Blogs
River Valley Outdoors

Shoppers
Tri-County Foxxy

Marketplace
Newspaper Ads
Local Website Directory
7 Rivers Rentals
HomeSeller
Wheels Website
Outdoor Motors
Work For You

Portals
La Crosse NET
Winona NET

Classifieds
River Valley Classifieds

Links
Lee Enterprises

About Us | Classifieds | Contact Us | Terms of Use | F.A.Q. | Privacy Policy | Requests | Search | RSS | Videos | Advertiser Directory | Add to My Yahoo!
Copyright © 1997 - 2008 The La Crosse Tribune. All rights reserved.
Material from this site may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or distributed. A Lee Enterprises subsidiary.