Obama: Unclear on the Concept of Law?
Barry Artiste, Now Public Contributor
Well certainly Obama's stance may backfire in his promises to eradicate guns from the citizens of the United States, contrary to the Supreme Courts decision allowing citizens the right to bear arms.
I state in my Opinion Obama is unclear of the concept of Law, his quests to rid criminals of guns though admirable, should direct his quest more so to Life imprisonment at Severe Hard Labour for those who commit crimes with guns.
In my Opinion again, If death results from a Handgun in the act of a Crime by a career criminal, perhaps after a Jury reaches a Guilty verdict, it will result in an immediate Bag em and Tag em off to the morgue for the criminals.
If Obama thinks a US Citizen banned from owning a Gun is going to protect themselves in their homes with Eating Irons in a Criminal Home Invasion Gunfight, perhaps Obama has never faced the business end of the barrel of a gun by a criminal. Perhaps he should! Then and only then will he know how helpless a victim is,wishing they had a Gun to defend their family, but do not, when all the Victims have to defend themselves is a "Prayer to their Maker" followed by "Heart Wrenching Screams" as they and their "Loved Ones" lay DYING!
As they saying goes, Banning Guns will ultimately result in only criminals having guns.
But don't try tell that the Libby's of this world, they obviously aren't listening. Obama included!
Better to be in fron of a jury of your peers defending your actions in killing a criminal, than having the criminal mounting endless appeals defending his right to walk among us.
Currently the value of a human life in Canada is 10 years in prison, and a reduction of the sentence with good behaviour, especially if you all of a sudden find "Jesus in your Heart" after the fact! Comforting perhaps to the Parole Board, but little soltice to the family of the victims who sentence lasts a lifetime.
In my Opinion, Bag em and Tag em. Let God or Satan sort it out with Convicted Career Criminals who Murder. Letting them back out into the streets, makes all of us citizens complicit in the next murder they commit.
Harsh Reality, Yes, but for the Harsh Times we live in, life imprisionment (10-20 years) in cushy surroundings aint the answer either!
You cannot address crime prevention without getting rid of assault weapons and handguns. I consider them a threat to national security, and I will go door to door if I have to, but I'm gonna convince Americans that I'm right, and I'm gonna get the guns."
That passionate outburst occurs at the climax of the 1995 movie, An American President. At that time, gun control was a liberal cause only slightly less sacred than environmentalism or affirmative action.
Learned law professors wrote articles explaining away the Second Amendment: "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed." The professors explained that those words did not safeguard the right to own guns. They safeguarded the right to join the National Guard.
So much for that! On Thursday, the Supreme Court held down an important ruling confirming that the Second Amendment means what it seems to mean: There exists an individual right to own guns. It can be limited in reasonable ways, just as the First Amendment to free speech can be limited. But it cannot be annihilated altogether.