• December 22, 2014

Hidden agenda behind some of president’s gun proposals

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Sunday, January 20, 2013 4:30 am

To the Editor:

Once again the president has used political theater as a substitute for meaningful action on the gun control issue.

His decision to ban so-called “assault weapons” is music to the ears of the ignorant and to the “no guns for anyone crowd.” 

In the totality of his announcements as to how he plans to curb gun violence, there are some reasonable measures.

The background check for persons who intend to purchase a weapon of any kind sounds reasonable.

But, there is a hidden agenda in that proposal; background checks require more personnel and resources.

That means money, and money is what this is all about.

Sellers and customers will foot the bill for the checks.

Registration fees will follow, and transfer fees will surely be next.

All the fees and charges will be borne by the law-abiding citizen who buys guns for protection, sport or investments.

This is not the end of the argument; it is the end of personal liberty, because the right to keep and bear arms is seen as most vulnerable to those who seek to dismantle the Constitution in order to realize their personal ambition in “changing the basic structure of America.”

Once the Bill of Rights and other amendments are identified as being archaic, or irrelevant, the entire government can be restructured as a socialist oligarchy.

If saving lives was the issue, real measures would be enacted and enforced.  

Any crime committed with a gun would automatically earn a life sentence, any crime where the victim was shot or killed would be an automatic death sentence. Poor aim should not be rewarded.

If the president wants to use executive orders to bypass his wimpy Congress, let him do it to wield real power and make all gun crimes federal crimes without appeal.

Don Fender

Killeen

More about

More about

More about

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
  • 2 Don't Threaten or Abuse. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated. AND PLEASE TURN OFF CAPS LOCK.
  • 3 Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
  • 4 Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 5 Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 6 Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.

Welcome to the discussion.

3 comments:

  • Bubba posted at 8:43 am on Mon, Jan 21, 2013.

    Bubba Posts: 758

    The hidden agenda is confiscation. The precursors are demonization of guns, vilification of gun owners, followed by registration, culminated by confiscation and imprisonment of resisters. Usually with the help of the useful idiots and sheep who go along with this plan as they say things like "This isn't so bad" or "it's no big deal" as the rights of the citizens are successively stripped of their freedom and rights as the overreaching, power-mad government gets more and more powerful.

     
  • Viktor posted at 8:08 pm on Sun, Jan 20, 2013.

    Viktor Posts: 317

    All the fees and charges will be borne by the law-abiding citizen who buys guns for protection, sport or investments? So what? Protection costs money if you choose guns as a mean of self-defense. Those who can spare cash to buy guns for sport and investments in this economy should consider themselves blessed. Just pay the fees! It's what law-abiding citizens for all kinds of licenses and priveleges anyway.

     
  • Eliza posted at 6:09 pm on Sun, Jan 20, 2013.

    Eliza Posts: 899

    What does the government not understand about the words - not be Infringed upon - ?

    To my understanding,it would mean any member of government who insist upon doing away with any part of the 2nd Amendment because of insistence that some citizens are breaking the law by their legal ownership of certain weapons. This,if done, would by rights, be breaking a law in itself.
    What is going to be allowed,for one group to break a law in order to supposedly stop others from breaking one.

    The country has lived with this Amendment since its beginning,why does it seem to be such a problem all of a sudden?

    No matter how much its tried to be proved that any citizen who owns what the government and people who have probably never even owned a gun,describes as a 'dangerous' weapon. It has been proven its only a possible danger if its in the wrong hands,such as a criminal,or a mentally sick person such as the person who killed the children in Ct. or the people who killed the innocent Mexican citizens with the guns which went over the border during Fast & Furious. With one of the last ending up killing one of our own U.S. Border Guards. Who was at a disadvantage himself with a lesser fire power to counter what he was up against.---

    Weapons can be totally removed but,your criminal class will still be able to get guns,and your criminally insane will find some way to do harm if they want to bad enough.
    It's a foolish idea from any, to want to remove any kind of protection the people may need to protect themselves .
    We have people coming across our borders everyday ,some from all over the world,we never really know what is coming across with them until its too late.
    To infringe on the peoples protection in case of a possible crisis, is not doing a favor but, could put a hindrance on the country's citizens in time of turmoil.