Burch: Leave your guns at the reality checkpoint

Friday, February 15, 2013 at 4:25pm
By Michael R. Burch

In a previous article, I predicted that Franklin alderman Dana McLendon would never see his pipe dream fulfilled of ordinary citizens being allowed to carry guns into government buildings.

Ironically, I just had occasion to visit the Franklin courthouse, where I and my wife, Beth, appeared as character witnesses for a friend involved in a child custody case. Not only were we not allowed to carry assault weapons into the august presences of Franklin’s judges, but Beth was not allowed to carry her purse into the courthouse while I had to remove my belt just to make it past the scanner.

What happened to our unlimited Second Amendment right to bear arms, which should have allowed us to carry machine guns, howitzers, bazookas and flamethrowers wherever we pleased? Beth couldn’t even bear her lipstick and mascara containers into the courthouse. I was fortunate just to keep my pants from collapsing around my ankles.

Not only that, but once we were inside the courthouse, we were not afforded our Constitutional right to speak freely without limitations. We had to wait our turn to testify and couldn’t just say whatever popped into our minds. We had to follow a very strict code of conduct, to keep the judge from finding us in contempt, throwing us in jail, and fining us.

It seems obvious that the people who know the Constitution and Bill of Rights best — American judges — have no illusions that the rights it grants are unlimited.

Nor do Tennessee legislators who hypocritically claim to be the protectors of our First and Second Amendments rights have any problem infringing on those rights, in order to protect themselves.

Security measures have just been upgraded on Capitol Hill, as part of a $15.7 million renovation program. Our hard-earned tax dollars have been spent on scanners, cameras and permanent guard stations. Will ordinary citizens be allowed to carry weapons of any sort into the renovated capitol building? Not on your life. The only people bearing arms there will be trained professionals assigned to protect the people denying us our right to bear arms.

House Speaker Beth Harwell said the upgrades will make legislators and visitors safer without curbing access to the Capitol. But the upgrades will certainly curb our access to Tennessee legislators if we go bearing arms.

The current security upgrades were budgeted soon after Gabby Giffords was shot. Previous security upgrades were budgeted soon after 9/11. It seems obvious that when Tennessee legislators feel threatened, they are ready, willing and able to spend large sums of money and infringe on our rights, in order to protect themselves.

But then why not do everything possible to protect the lives of innocent schoolchildren? Are the lives of adult legislators more sacred than the lives of students? Adult legislators can find other lines of work. No one can force them to enter dangerous buildings. But children are required to attend school. They have no choice but to enter dangerous school buildings, if legislators refuse to make them as safe as possible.

The raging hypocrites on Tennessee’s Capitol Hill have two very different sets of standards. For themselves, the standard is their personal safety, even if it costs large sums of money and trumps our Constitutional rights. But for everyone else, personal safety means nothing. So we have bills that allow guns in bars, guns in parks and guns in trunks. Now there is talk of guns on campuses. Can anyone doubt that the next “logical” step will be guns in high schools, grade schools, kindergartens and daycare centers?

Michael R. Burch is a Nashville-based editor and publisher of Holocaust poetry and other “things literary” at www.thehypertexts.com.

76 Comments on this post:

By: Blanketnazi2 on 2/15/13 at 3:32

Mike! I was afraid you weren't going to show! TGIF!

By: Captain Nemo on 2/15/13 at 4:39

I don't have the time to read it now but will tomorrow.

Same as Blanket said

By: dargent7 on 2/15/13 at 4:57

Mr. B's in the house.
Look, it's a foregone conclusion Tenn. will NEVER ban guns anywhere, for any reason.
Bars, parks, employee parking lots, Hospitals, courtrooms, churches, airplanes, buses,
it doesn't matter WHERE.
When those erzat numbskulls passed "guns in bars", that was the height of stupidity.
Scooter and Moron in the local meth labs danced, but us bartenders thought, 'What the fu!!ck?
You want to come in here, waste my time, cannot drink, but carry a loaded weapon?
Come out to California, people.
We've got more environmental regulations than the International Space Station.
Or Mars.

By: yogiman on 2/15/13 at 5:07

It's one time I agree with you, Mike. It seems most politicians (at all levels) think they are a different breed of humans and are entitled to different laws to go by.

It's like it's okay for California Senator Feinstein to have a carry permit but the common citizens shouldn't.

We've been a nation for over 2 centuries now and I'm wondering how much longer we will be. The politicians have begun feeling they are our superiors and should serve as our 'parents' and tell us how to "grow up". They need to be reminded they are our 'children'.

By: yogiman on 2/15/13 at 5:13

dargent7,

I don't know what the laws are like in California now, but when I was there the gun carry life was normal. I ran a poker table in a bar room and had a gun all the time I was in there... just in case.

But then, we're talking over half a century ago. I imagine laws have changed to the way the politicians want them.

By: Mike Burch on 2/16/13 at 2:54

Everyone,

I am not saying -- and really no one is saying -- that all guns should be banned. But it is obvious that Tennessee judges and legislators are lying through their teeth when they claim to be "defenders" of the first and second amendments. They act like royalty and treat us like serfs.

If it is possible to defend judges and legislators from madmen with guns, then it is possible to defend children. The same methods can be used: limit the places where guns are allowed. Let citizens keep guns at home for defense, but don't let them walk around with assault weapons or concealed weapons.

Use some common sense. But that seems to be beyond the capabilities of right-wing conservatives, who froth at the mouth like Nazis.

By: yogiman on 2/16/13 at 6:49

Mike,

If your argument could be carried out, it would be a good idea. But criminals do not go by common laws and facts are facts: More people have been, and are being, killed in mass murders only where guns are not allowed for the law abiding citizens to carry. Just trace the records.

Another fact would show more people are being saved by the use of a gun than being killed by one, yet you never hear that in the news. Why not, isn't the publicity worth the news?

By: Loner on 2/16/13 at 8:40

Mike, you wrote,"It seems obvious that the people who know the Constitution and Bill of Rights best — American judges — have no illusions that the rights it grants are unlimited."

Did you mean to write: "It seems obvious that the people who know the Constitution and Bill of Rights best — American judges — have no illusions that the rights it grants are NOT unlimited."

Unfortunately, Spellcheck will not catch missing words, wrong words, grammatical or syntactical errors.... or homophone errors.

I agree with your conclusion, TN is obsessed with guns and gunner's rights....like any obsession, it is self-destructive over time.

By: Ask01 on 2/16/13 at 8:58

Every other right mentioned in the constitution has been assigned some limitations and conditions under the law, so why should the Second Amendment be so sacred?

By: Captain Nemo on 2/16/13 at 9:04

As an old gun toting running poker in California, I would shoot anyone that calls me a cheat.

Paul W. Dumas

By: Loner on 2/16/13 at 9:10

Mike, have you read this controversial article:

http://truth-out.org/news/item/13890-the-second-amendment-was-ratified-to-preserve-slavery

The right to keep and bear arms was incorporated into the Confederate Constitution proper, not an amendment....as was the right to keep and own African Negro slaves.

The Second Amendment and the Great Secession were not unrelated items. Some still believe the canard that the amendment was put in place so that armed citizens could justifiably rebel against the elected but "tyrannical" government.

Perhaps, this "slave patrol militia" tradition and the Great Secession-2nd Amendment nexus could help to explain the Southern fetish for the 2nd Amendment, guns and gunner's rights. What do you think?

By: Captain Nemo on 2/16/13 at 9:24

The legislator will never approve any law that will affect them in any manner. Especially if it means that someone in their line of business to let the people they have pissed off near them with a gun. This seems rather silly, that the people they fear are now able to take guns into bars.

This is just another Oxymoron moment it Tennessee history.

By: Ask01 on 2/16/13 at 9:37

On the subject of mental inadequacy in Tennessee, did anyone else see the story about some Ohio State fans pulled over by some of Tennessee's finest because a bumper sticker with the OSU logo was mistaken for a marijuana leaf?

It seems some of the state's law enforcement representatives pulled over and questioned a 65 year old and his wife because of the sticker.

Now, besides the fact the symbol was a buckeye, the occupants could have been expressing a belief the drug should be legalized, an expression of free speech. I wonder what sort of boredom level, or perhaps low self esteem issues drove these officers to perform this stop?

I hope these sad examples of Tennessee law enforcement never go to California. When I lived there, it was easy to believe cannibis was the state plant, so numerous were the pictures. These rubes would go crazy.

Of course, looking at the quality of leadership at the top, I suppose one should not be surprised.

By: Ask01 on 2/16/13 at 9:38

Oh, good morning Captain Nemo, Loner. Have a great day.

By: Loner on 2/16/13 at 9:55

Good morning, Ask01 and Cap'n Nemo.

If the story is true, the TN troopers were not only dumb enough to think that the OSU logo looked like a Cannabis leaf, but they were stupid enough to admit that that was their reason for stopping the car...as Ask01 said, it's a free speech issue.

These cops were profiling, based upon a misinterpreted bumper sticker...very bad form.

By: Captain Nemo on 2/16/13 at 10:26

Good morning to the both of you. It is a beautiful day.

I suppose that since Burch came on so late, we will have this for money.

By: Mike Burch on 2/16/13 at 11:55

Loner,

I believe it is correct to say, "I have no illusions that my eyes are infallible." So I think the sentence in question is correct.

I think there is absolutely no doubt that slavery forced the more enlightened founding fathers into terrible concessions. The southern states verified this when they seceded, as five of them wrote formal declarations of their reasons for leaving the Union.

Incredibly, some of the southern states admitted that they would have preferred to remain serfs of King George than give up their slaves! It seems they blackmailed the northern states into making huge concessions by refusing to fight for liberty unless they could keep slavery. Here is an article I wrote on the subject:

http://www.thehypertexts.com/What%20caused%20the%20Civil%20War%20Slavery.htm

Of course with slaves they would have to always be armed and ready to kill. So it is very possible that the right to bear arms was high on their list of demands.

By: Mike Burch on 2/16/13 at 12:02

Yogi,

I think you fail to use logic.

Saying that we cannot have gun control laws because some bad guys would break the law is like saying we should not have speed limits because some bad drivers exceed the limits.

The real question is whether the majority of people are safer with reasonable speed limits. The answer is obviously "yes." We cannot throw out reasonable laws just because there are people who break the law.

We can, however, use metal detectors and other technologies to catch lawbreakers who carry guns illegally, just as we use speed detectors to catch people who drive too fast. If we fine people and send them to jail for carrying weapons illegally, we can reduce gun violence even though we can never get rid of it completely.

We know this can work, because of the 23 richest, most advanced nation, the US is dead last when it comes to gun-related deaths. That means 22 other nations have been able to save the lives of innocent people, proving that we can do the same, if we exercise a little common sense and stop believing things that are not true.

By: Mike Burch on 2/16/13 at 12:12

Loner,

Thanks for posting the article. I will plan on writing an article about the sordid connection between slavery and the second amendment. The state militias were obviously needed to keep slaves in chains and stamp down slave rebellions. The states didn't trust the federal government to defend slavery, so they needed state-controlled militias.

By: yogiman on 2/16/13 at 2:09

Just a thought, Mike. To you too, Loner.

Have you, or Loner, ever thought about what this nation would be like today if slavery had never been allowed? Don't misunderstand, I've never been a believer in slavery and it is still in effect in many nations in this world today.

But if slavery had never been allowed in the USA, we wouldn't have the black Americans we have today. Now, I'd say, ask the black Americans of today if they resented their ancestors being brought to the USA as slaves to become their ancestors. If they hadn't been, the black Americans of today wouldn't be here today; they would be in Africa.

So, considering the lifestyles in both nations today, where would they prefer living today, the USA or Africa?

I imagine they should be proud of the life their ancestors had to live to give them the lives they have today.

By: Mike Burch on 2/16/13 at 2:47

Yogi,

That sounds like saying we should be glad that our daughters have been raped, if we end up with grandchildren as a result.

Slavery was never "necessary." The early Americans could have offered to pay people to emigrate and work on plantations. Slavery was a way for the rich and powerful to exploit the labor of other people. Bishop Romney did about the same thing when he invested millions of dollars in a Chinese factory compound where thousands of young girls worked long, grueling hours for slave wages. The compound was "protected" by guard towers and barbed wire, like a Nazi concentration camp.

Women should be allowed to choose whom to marry and have children with. Everyone should be allowed to choose whom to work for, and be able to earn a decent wage in return. Students should have the same protections as judges and legislators, who don't allow guns to be carried in their presence.

One big problem we have here in the south is a public that votes for the modern slave owners (Republicans) because the public is ignorant, gullible and unwilling to study history or think independently. The public claims to be "free" but being free requires the ability to think and not vote for one's enslavers.

By: Captain Nemo on 2/16/13 at 3:47

By: yogiman on 2/16/13 at 2:09
Just a thought, Mike. To you too, Loner.

Have you, or Loner, ever thought about what this nation would be like today if slavery had never been allowed?

OR

We can take another look at the situation, yogi. We should be greatful that the Native Americas did not have any immigrations laws. We should be greatful that they let us live in this great country, and not destroy us when the small number of settle first came to this country.
It was good for us that most of the Native People were good and kind to our ancestors.

Don't get me wronge, but I am greatful to see the many dumb posts that yogi spews. I am able to distinguish between intelligent comments of others and brainless thoughts of yogi. If the man (and I am using the word man loosely) would spend some time in a logical pursuit of intelligent thought instead of expelling such garbage, he might be able to learn something. Now if only you could think instead of being an ass, you might learn to be a human being.

By: EddieA on 2/16/13 at 3:49

A novel was published in 2010 that is a satire of the Second Amendment. In the novel, legal guns were confiscated and destroyed in the year 2020. In the year 2024, a political coup d’etat left the United States with one ruling body, the Senate.

Saddled with massive debt and rationing economic resources, the United States
Senate creates the Department of Harvesting. Its purpose is to control the
excess population by harvesting American citizens who attain the legal age of
sixty-five years. Teams of six were sent to harvest usable body parts and
destroy what is left.

When Joseph Victorio is scheduled for harvesting, he protects himself with a
home-made gun. Joseph joins a small group of elderly resistance fighters to
protect themselves and others from the harvesters. Facing overwhelming odds,
their limited resistance has no chance of success. There are more than eighty
thousand harvesters armed with a futuristic weapon – an electrical stunner.

A group of people who called themselves The Sons of Liberty, hid guns, ammunition, food, water and medicine in the year 1986. The guns hidden were the deadliest gun ever created, the Thompson submachine gun. Capable of firing 1,200 .45 caliber rounds per minute, the "Chicago Piano" has an effective range of 100 hundred yards. The electrical stunner has a range of 6 feet, holding 6 charges.

The old folks, members of SAAG, Seniors Armed Against Government, find the hidden guns. Taking out the enemy before the enemy takes out you, the harvesters become the harvested.

By: yogiman on 2/16/13 at 6:42

WOW! Who wrote that for you, dumba$$? It sure couldn't have been you. It was too well written and no misspelling.

By: EddieA on 2/16/13 at 11:53

Yogiman,

You got me! Confession is always good for the soul. The post mainly came from the back cover of the novel.

By: yogiman on 2/17/13 at 6:59

Mike,

Yes, history shows that some slave owners used some of their women slaves to satisfy their sexual appetite. Being their heirs, we had no control over the lives our ancestors lived. You have a choice: Be ashamed or proud. No one in this world has ever had the choice of the race they would be born into.

My point was the way black Americans became citizens of the USA. Would they rather have been born and lived in Africa instead of being born and lived in the USA as their lives have been.

So let's say: Regardless of how they got here, which nation should they consider best for their lives, Africa or the USA?

By: Loner on 2/17/13 at 8:02

Mike, I see what you mean about the sentence I questioned....I was thrown off by the twin double negatives...."not unlimited" and "no illusions"....and I may have been mistaken about the subject of the sentence....you are correct, I misread the line.

Certainly, somebody needs to set the record straight, Mike....African Negro slavery in the Southern states demanded a police state situation, to operate efficiently; slave patrol militias were formed to intimidate the slaves and to put down any revolts. These militia were state-sponsored terrorists and their existence was constitutionally guaranteed by the infamous 2nd amendment.

The notion that the Founders had put the 2nd amendment in place, so that the people could revolt against a tyrannical government, is pure BS....it was put in place to do the exact opposite, it was designed to keep hundreds of thousands of Negro slaves from revolting against tyranny.

The 2nd amendment led to the Great Secession and that led to the American Civil War.

IMO, the dangerous amendment should have been struck down while the Southern Senators and Reps were boycotting Congress....apparently, nobody in the North connected the dots.....most people still do not see this connection.

By: Rasputin72 on 2/17/13 at 8:11

It is my undetstanding that gun sales are booming since November.

These guns are not being bought by criminals. They are being bought by the productive class to protect themselves from what they perceive as the future.

A percentage of these guns will be stolen by the underclass. I would assume they will be used to kill each other assist in a few robbsries and kill some of the productive class.

My guess is that the stolen guns alone will kill more people in a month than all of the children who have been killed by guns in the last 50 years.

I do abhor slavery and realize that slavery and the remnants of slavery have certainly ruined a very good country.

By: Libertine on 2/17/13 at 8:17

I can't really see the difference in a vetted and licensed handgun permit holder carrying on a public sidewalk, at McDonald's, in a public park or at a public school? I suspect that the letter writer objects to an armed public in general?

By: Captain Nemo on 2/17/13 at 8:40

By: yogiman on 2/16/13 at 6:42
WOW! Who wrote that for you, dumba$$? It sure couldn't have been you. It was too well written and no misspelling.

EddieA, this does not necessary mean you. The old fool calls everyone a dumb-ass. He is our village idiot.

By: Captain Nemo on 2/17/13 at 8:46

Raspy old boy when you become apart of the productive class, then you can stand up for them. Until that time I suggest that you spend your moments looking for an easier mark.

By: bfra on 2/17/13 at 8:55

Raspy needs to focus on Carnival Cruise Lines, they pay no Fed. taxes.

By: yogiman on 2/17/13 at 8:59

An interesting book you Obama fans should check out:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=mtoifLgzpx4/

By: yogiman on 2/17/13 at 9:03

Loner,

Slaves were owned by many black Americans in the "slave days". Do you place them in the same room you're placing the white slave owners?

Wasn't slavery noted in the Bible?

By: yogiman on 2/17/13 at 9:05

Oh, by the way, that book was written 51 years ago by an ex-FBI agent. Where did he get that "crap"?

By: Loner on 2/17/13 at 9:25

The South must have felt cocky in 1861...they had large, well-trained, hardened, state militia; men who were used to doing the dirty work of society...their militia had esprit de corps.

The Southern whites were read the Confederate Constitution at their confederate campfires...they were fighting to preserve the institution of African Negro slavery. They may have been poor, illiterate, inbred whites, but because of their race, they were still one rung up on the social ladder, when compared with the Negro slaves.

The North, by comparison, was ill-prepared to fight in a state militia versus state militia confrontation.

The Southern leaders must have figured that this militia-gap was a sufficient edge to win the war. Who knows.... It may have been the whiskey talking...Liquid Courage....Southern Discomfort. The Great Secession may have been an alcohol-related tragedy.

By: Loner on 2/17/13 at 9:40

Southern revisionists point to the Hebrew Bible as justification and precedence for slavery, as if that removes any guilt or shame from the South.

And they drag out myths and fables too..."lots of" African Negroes owning other African Negroes in the South is one common myth..that and the myth that "lots of" African Negro slaves willingly fought alongside the white Confederate troops....and the myth that this was all about tariffs and taxation, not slavery.

Only the village idiot would actually believe these myths....and the South is full of these types...they are the base of the Tea Party.

The best and brightest of the South were sacrificed in the Civil War...the cowards, the shirkers, the lunatics and the mentally handicapped did not go off to fight the Yankees...they stayed behind to breed...we see the results here today.

By: Captain Nemo on 2/17/13 at 9:53

By: yogiman on 2/17/13 at 9:03
Loner,

Slaves were owned by many black Americans in the "slave days". Do you place them in the same room you're placing the white slave owners?

Wasn't slavery noted in the Bible?
_______________________________________________________________________

yogi uses this as an excuse to make some feeble point. He even uses the Bible to back his argument that it is alright to own slaves. What yogi does not take into account is that Blacks did buy other Blacks to set them free. Often they would but a family member or members in order to set them free.

Now what is your point…pin head?

By: Loner on 2/17/13 at 10:06

Isn't it odd that the Founders did not trust we, the people, with a direct popular vote for our President...and originally, we were not trusted to directly vote for our US Senators...the state legislators used to appoint them....given this general mistrust of human nature and the masses, it seems strange that these same Founders would trust the general public with the the constitutional right to keep and bear arms.

By: yogiman on 2/17/13 at 10:07

Loner,

Are we to presume you was living in the South in the days of slavery? Do you mean there was no black slave owners? Why was it given as news in writings of history?

We, of today, had nothing to do with slavery, but we're still paying for it. May I now ask; are you throwing your argument because your ancestors were slaves of a black slave owner. I understand they got 50 acres of land for every slave they owned and most people want all the land they can own.

By: yogiman on 2/17/13 at 10:17

Loner,

The 17th Amendment is one I believe should be repealed. When the senators were appointed by the States, they followed the states "orders". When the 17th Amendment was passed, the Senate gained control to equal the House... convince the voters you're for them.

They've pretty well proven they're representing their "bosses" that are "donating" to their campaigns. Why should it take millions to run for a job that only pays ~150,000? Who are they representing, us or their contributors?

By: Loner on 2/17/13 at 10:27

Yogi...you have been had....you have been misled....you have been duped....if you had a brain, I'd say that you were brainwashed.....the Founders knew that the masses contained lots of gullible, easily misled people - people like Yogi - so they erected barriers to direct democracy...but foolishly left open avenues for armed rebellion....state militias should have been outlawed from the beginning.

In hindsight, we can see, if we are willing and able to look, that the nation should have a been defended by a US ARMY and US Navy from the very beginning, a force created by Congress, not in the state legislatures.

The Slave states feared that such a federal army would not perform slave patrol duty; hence they insisted on state autonomy on this critical point. This Southern demand should have been denied...sometimes, compromise results in tragedy.

The Founders were gifted and visionary men...but only human, they made mistakes and one of them was the 2nd amendment...it's gotta go.

By: Captain Nemo on 2/17/13 at 10:31

If he had the brains I have. Then he would be stupid.
Paul Wade.-

By: Rasputin72 on 2/17/13 at 10:48

My grandfather who died in 1961 at the age of 95 thought that slavery was one of the most abhorrent practices that the United States ever produced.

I remember hearing my father laughing at one of his rememberances of childhood. He asked his father "If slavery was wrong why was slavery of the black people ever allowed."

My father said that he was quite small at the time and that after a long pause, my grandfather probably knowing that this was a complex question coming from a small boy, said "Some people probably thought negroes looked like slaves and the practice evolved from there." My father then asked my grandfather if he or his father ever owned slaves? My grandfather said. "We not only did own one, we probably could not have afforded one if my father had the desire."

By: yogiman on 2/17/13 at 11:18

Loner,

The government was placed in their positions by our constitution to "follow the orders" of we, the common citizens. When the government takes over as our superiors, we [the citizens] have lost our nation as it was originated by our founders for the freedoms we've had for many decades.

If you have done any research, and you know Barack Obama, you can only be one of two things: A fellow communist with him, or a fool by not understanding what he is doing to this nation. And as I have stated before, he is the least of our worries; congress is our biggest worry because they have fallen right in line with him. You can't see any differences between the parties of the legislative branch now.

I don't know if they still had them in your childhood, but there used to be State Guards in our nation to protect their states. We had a National Guard then to protect our nation if we was invaded.

If memory serves me correctly, the State Guard was "thrown out the door" when Governor Wallace of Alabama used the Alabama State Guard against Dr. M. L. King.

While we still have the National Guard, why have they reached the point they are being sent overseas to combat instead of being on a "standby" in case of an attack by an enemy?

By: Ask01 on 2/17/13 at 1:09

Excellent points, Loner.

I believe many growing up in the South were fed romanticised stories of the 'Old South.' These stories were initially created, I believe, in the years immediately following the Civil War to assuage the guilt and shame of those who lived in this time and to insulate future generations from the harsh realities.

Slavery was an abomination. Human beings were bought and sold like property, families split up, sold to different buyers. A smart slave owner treated his 'holdings' humanely and cared for them, not out of kindness, but of out concern for the investment and to keep them as docile as possible. Many, however, are reported to have employed brutality and torture instead.

The other reality was the poor whites were probably little better off than the slaves, but they did have their freedom. While the poor whites were regarded as mere 'white trash' by the wealthy, at least having the slaves around did give them someone to whom they could feel superior.

I believe these stories were told so often, again and again, they were believed by several generations and evetually accepted as fact.

As with the plight of the Native Americans, it is only in recent memory that America has begun to come to grips with the difference in the sugar coated version of history and accepted the bitter truth.

I respect your opinion about the Second Amendment, but I admit I do have different views. I believe that the Second Amendment has a place, but as with all the other amendments, particularly the first 10, known as the Bill of Rights, limitations have been enacted and conditions set for the exercise of those rights and I believe the Second is no better than the others.

If, however, the weapons advocates will not agree to and accept compromise, a total ban might be the only option.

I believe those promising an uprising are treading dangerously close to treason, inviting charges of inciting insurrection and advocating the overthrow of the government by force.

Every day they post more to justify my beliefs.

By: Rasputin72 on 2/17/13 at 1:52

These are the markings of a Republican;
Middle aged white men
Hypocritical
Military retirees
Old
Corporate executives
Rich white people
Conservatives
Polarizing people

These are the markings of a Democrat;
Underclass
Hand outs
Reckless spenders
Diverse
Young people
Green people
Open minded
Naive

By: EddieA on 2/17/13 at 3:02

Captain Nemo,

Thank you for your post. I did not take Yogiman's comment personally and I actually took his comments as a compliment. In the 2010 novel, people are at the mercy of the government because legal guns were confiscated and destroyed. To control the excess population, the elderly are hunted by the harvesters.

The discovery of guns, ammunition, food, water and medicine, hidden by The Sons of Liberty in the year 1986, changes everything.

The novel is available for checkout at the Nashville Public Library: "The Harvesting of Joseph Victorio".

By: yogiman on 2/17/13 at 3:03

Ask01,

History teaches you more about today than the lives we are living today. History shows that every dictator convinced so many of the people to relinquish their weapons. After they got those, they then took the rest of the guns because the people couldn't provide a conflict.

If you are favoring Barack Obama because of the party you think he belongs to, you're in for a helluva surprise.

I suggest you check out some sworn statements about his past. Then ask yourself: Has he changed in favor of the United States? If so, what makes you think so?

As I have posted before, I'm not advertising his book "Dreams from My Father", but you will find him to be a different man in that book than he is acting to be now.

It may not mean anything to you, but it has been shown where Obama is a homosexual dope addict earlier in life. Has he changed to the "good ol' boy" of today?

I can't find it feeling sorry for you and your "soul mates" on this site, but I do feel sorry for your children and heirs on down the line.

Check out chasvoice.blogspot.fr/2012/05/obama-his-ex-lovers-obscene-vid.html/

Are they lying?

By: yogiman on 2/17/13 at 3:10

Thank you for accepting my comment, EddieA.

It was meant to be derogative. I'm simply trying to educate the people on this site about the man sitting in our Oval Office illegally, and it's simple; fact are facts. All you have to do is check them out.