http://mensnewsdaily.com/2008/07/18/the-brady-campaign-to-define-%e2%80%98sensible-gun-laws%e2%80%99/ Men's Rights Activism, MRA Politics, Analysis, Commentary and Global News Sun, 22 Nov 2009 05:12:59 -1000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 http://mensnewsdaily.com/2008/07/18/the-brady-campaign-to-define-%e2%80%98sensible-gun-laws%e2%80%99/comment-page-1/#comment-64614 Robert Stevens Mon, 21 Jul 2008 01:44:40 +0000 http://mensnewsdaily.com/?p=80382#comment-64614 Leting anyone connected with the "Brady campaign determine what constitutes a " sensible gun law" is like letting an alcoholic run a liquor store. They have no reasonable position, they only want to ban guns. Now I do agree, guns do kill people and some times the wrong people get killed. But these "bleeding hearts" need a lesson on the constitution and why the old guys who wrote it though gun ownership was important enough to put it in the constitution. They did not say it, but strongly implied, that liberty was finally in the hand of the public, who in the event the government got out of control and become totalitarian, the people could use those guns to overthrow them and restore freedom. The founders of our country never envisioned a " crime problem" and or the idea that it was somehow the job of our public servants to do something about it, if we did. You see the "crime problem" is a created one, people get killed and victimized by other people who are out of control because of imorality or because the law has been perverted some much that it is not possible or desireable to control crime. The relatives of the victims start whining and complaining wanting something done about this "created problem". Now instead of going back to common law, based on common sense and the moldy, out dated idea of right and wrong, thereby uncreating the "crime problem". The people who run this country will try and use the situation to get more power for themselves. Some one needs to set these "Brady people" straight, we reduce violent crime by punishing criminals severely, ie death by hanging or something. We put a stop to all the "make believe " crimes ie ones with no victim and release all those who commited these " make believe" crimes, thereby making room for the mean and violent offenders. Second, we stop destroying the family unit, in effect, we cancel the "failed social engineering experiment" and put the family back together, ie Man as the head, woman as the hear and the children as the outgrowth of that union. That right there would seriously impact the so called crime problem. Eighty percent of criminal come from "broken families". Put Daddy back in charge and when he puts down a rebellion in his family unit, back him up fully. When women can nolonger launch a rebellion and destroy the family, you stop a lot of problems before they start. Kids get discipline and are not "petted on the head" for unruly behavior. You a woman usually will not or can not discipline properly. Many career criminals would have been stopped in their tracks, long before they became criminals, if they had been disciplined properly. All that sound like a lot and the truth is, a lot of the "Brady People" are the ones responsible for the criminals they and their families are victims of . This would be hard to do, but rest assured, grabbing guns ain't gonna help, we will wake up oneday and government troops will be goose stepping in the streets and all our freedoms will be gone and the so called "crime problem" will remain. Leting anyone connected with the “Brady campaign determine what constitutes a ” sensible gun law” is like letting an alcoholic run a liquor store. They have no reasonable position, they only want to ban guns.
Now I do agree, guns do kill people and some times the wrong people get killed. But these “bleeding hearts” need a lesson on the constitution and why the old guys who wrote it though gun ownership was important enough to put it in the constitution.
They did not say it, but strongly implied, that liberty was finally in the hand of the public, who in the event the government got out of control and become totalitarian, the people could use those guns to overthrow them and restore freedom.
The founders of our country never envisioned a ” crime problem” and or the idea that it was somehow the job of our public servants to do something about it, if we did.
You see the “crime problem” is a created one, people get killed and victimized by other people who are out of control because of imorality or because the law has been perverted some much that it is not possible or desireable to control crime.
The relatives of the victims start whining and complaining wanting something done about this “created problem”. Now instead of going back to common law, based on common sense and the moldy, out dated idea of right and wrong, thereby uncreating the “crime problem”. The people who run this country will try and use the situation to get more power for themselves.
Some one needs to set these “Brady people” straight, we reduce violent crime by punishing criminals severely, ie death by hanging or something. We put a stop to all the “make believe ” crimes ie ones with no victim and release all those who commited these ” make believe” crimes, thereby making room for the mean and violent offenders. Second, we stop destroying the family unit, in effect, we cancel the “failed social engineering experiment” and put the family back together, ie Man as the head, woman as the hear and the children as the outgrowth of that union. That right there would seriously impact the so called crime problem. Eighty percent of criminal come from “broken families”. Put Daddy back in charge and when he puts down a rebellion in his family unit, back him up fully. When women can nolonger launch a rebellion and destroy the family, you stop a lot of problems before they start. Kids get discipline and are not “petted on the head” for unruly behavior. You a woman usually will not or can not discipline properly. Many career criminals would have been stopped in their tracks, long before they became criminals, if they had been disciplined properly.
All that sound like a lot and the truth is, a lot of the “Brady People” are the ones responsible for the criminals they and their families are victims of .
This would be hard to do, but rest assured, grabbing guns ain’t gonna help, we will wake up oneday and government troops will be goose stepping in the streets and all our freedoms will be gone and the so called “crime problem” will remain.

]]> http://mensnewsdaily.com/2008/07/18/the-brady-campaign-to-define-%e2%80%98sensible-gun-laws%e2%80%99/comment-page-1/#comment-64597 » New Anti “Political Correctness” Forum Sun, 20 Jul 2008 02:54:11 +0000 http://mensnewsdaily.com/?p=80382#comment-64597 [...] of life. Hari Hari, Deepot » 2nd Amendment , Gun TalkLast Update: July 19, 2008 @ 1:04 am EDT Brady Campaign to Define ‘Sensible Gun Laws’ After Heller, The New American Debate About Guns TN: Senator Finney Endorsed by NRA D.C. Gun [...] [...] of life. Hari Hari, Deepot » 2nd Amendment , Gun TalkLast Update: July 19, 2008 @ 1:04 am EDT Brady Campaign to Define ‘Sensible Gun Laws’ After Heller, The New American Debate About Guns TN: Senator Finney Endorsed by NRA D.C. Gun [...]

]]>