Why citizens must own and carry firearms

Why citizens must own and carry firearms

This is a discussion on Why citizens must own and carry firearms within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; Thought this was well said. I hate it when people use a tragedy to try and make policy, but this piece isn't hysterical and doesn't ...

Results 1 to 14 of 14

Thread: Why citizens must own and carry firearms

  1. #1
    Senior Member Array TonyW's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Ohio
    Posts
    791

    Why citizens must own and carry firearms

    Thought this was well said. I hate it when people use a tragedy to try and make policy, but this piece isn't hysterical and doesn't (IMO) degrade what happened to these people.

    ----------------------------------------------

    http://www.townhall.com/columnists/B...carry_firearms

    Why citizens must own and carry firearms
    By Ben Shapiro
    Wednesday, July 12, 2006

    At 2 a.m. on Sunday, 27-year-old Alan Senitt was murdered. Senitt, an aspiring British politician, Jewish activist and Democratic volunteer, was walking home a female companion in the Georgetown area of Washington, D.C. when he was accosted by Christopher Piper, 25, Jeffrey Rice, 22, and a 15-year-old. Piper, who had a gun, immediately grabbed Senitt's female companion and pulled her away to rape her. Rice, who had stated earlier in the night that he was desperate to "cut" someone, slit Senitt's throat. The three thugs then hopped into a getaway car driven by Olivia Miles, 26, and sped off into the night.

    Only hours later, the police arrested the four suspects. Apparently, two of the suspects matched the descriptions of perpetrators of two recent robberies, and the police had already obtained an address for those two suspects. So why did Alan Senitt have to die in order for these animals to be arrested? "I can give you my 100 percent word everything was done within the confines of the law," Lt. Robert Glover of the police department's violent crimes branch told the Washington Post. "We cannot make an arrest without probable cause."

    Now the police have their probable cause. Rice was found with Senitt's ID and the woman's cell phone on his person, and his shirt covered in Senitt's blood. The suspects are in custody. And Alan Senitt is dead.

    Our Constitution mandates that citizens may not be deprived of life, liberty or property without due process of law. One of the requirements of due process of law is that arrests not be arbitrary. It is likely true that the D.C. police did everything within the confines of the law to pursue the suspects. What the murder of Alan Senitt demonstrates is that the confines of law cost lives when citizens are unable to protect themselves.

    Law enforcement is by its very nature reactive. The police cannot arrest people before they have committed any crimes, a la "Minority Report." Citizens should not expect that the police will be able to prevent all crime -- there must always be an initial crime in order for police to prevent subsequent crimes. Until Ted Bundy murdered his first victim, the police had nothing for which to arrest him; at the very most, law enforcement could only have saved Bundy's later victims. Someone always has to suffer before law enforcement can get involved.

    Citizens are left with two choices. They can either rely on the kindness of criminals, or they can protect themselves. The choice is obvious. Yet liberal cities continue to rely on the kindness of criminals.

    Washington, D.C. is famous for its insanely restrictive anti-gun laws. It has been illegal since 1976 to have an assembled and loaded firearm, even in your home, in D.C. Carrying a handgun for self-protection is against the law. For some reason, Democrats seem to be unable to explain the dramatic 72 percent rise in the D.C. homicide rate between 1976 and 2001, even as the national homicide rate plummeted 36 percent over the same period. Certainly Christopher Piper had no problem carrying a gun and using it to rape Senitt's female companion. Criminals, it seems, engage in crime. And law-abiding citizens pay the price.

    The basis for every right in our Constitution is the right to self-preservation. John Locke, the founders' favorite non-Biblical philosopher, explained that if a government " endeavour[s] to grasp themselves an absolute power over the lives, liberties, and estates of the people; by this breach of trust they forfeit the power the people had put into their hands for quite contrary ends, and it devolves to the people, who have a right to resume their original liberty."

    When a government seizes citizens' ability to protect themselves, that government becomes a usurper. It is for this reason that the Second Amendment guarantees both the individual right to self-defense and the communal right to fight any deprivation of the right to self-defense.

    Would Alan Senitt have bought a gun for self-defense? The question is irrelevant in D.C.; Senitt had no choice in the matter. As it stands in D.C., only criminals have the right to choose. And the police can only respond to 911 calls.
    <a target="_top" href="http://www.cybernations.net/default.asp?Referrer=TonyW"><img src="http://i227.photobucket.com/albums/dd188/18932471/imgad2-1.png" border="0"></a>


  2. #2
    Distinguished Member Array SubNine's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Anchorage Alaska
    Posts
    1,970
    I don't know how the government can't see that the law they created made D.C. into a prime feeding ground for criminals. Criminals don't care about the law, they don't abide by the law, and criminals love poor and defenseless victims, it makes it effortless for them. Then the government ponders over why crime is so high in D.C., and they just can't seem to figure it out. I swear, law-makers are getting more dumb as the days go by.

  3. #3
    VIP Member
    Array falcon1's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    6,484
    Thanks for the post, TonyW...a very well-written article.

  4. #4
    Distinguished Member Array randytulsa2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    1,548
    Well-said. Excellent post. Tragic and completely unnecessary event.

    I've griped, bitched and moaned about D.C. before. A city founded to be a monument to freedom denies it to all those within its borders who obey the law.

    That is really execrable.

  5. #5
    Assistant Administrator
    Array P95Carry's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    South West PA
    Posts
    25,484
    I had seen that Tony and would have posted had you not done so.

    It is a tragic and appalling case and for sure - DC wants to get its head out of the anti-gun clouds and take stock of what people require and deserve with regard to defence options.

    Quite how the average Joe in DC is supposed to stand even half a chance at protecting himself is beyond me and yet - as ever - the thugs will reign supreme - armed, of course!

    Total denial of basic American rights.
    Chris - P95
    NRA Certified Instructor & NRA Life Member.

    "To own a gun and assume that you are armed
    is like owning a piano and assuming that you are a musician!."


    http://www.rkba-2a.com/ - a portal for 2A links, articles and some videos.

  6. #6
    Member Array Al.40cal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    In the Trenches
    Posts
    139
    One day they'll wise up and see that the citizen needs' to be able to defend themselves. To bad it's already too late for so many helpless individuals.
    It comes a time in your life when you run across someone you should have never @#$$% with. Allow me to introduce myself!

  7. #7
    Distinguished Member Array SixBravo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Prescott, AZ
    Posts
    1,692
    I lived outside DC for 14 years. There is nothing else to say except "What did they think was going to happen?"

    Liberals may ask "well why aren't police arresting all these people who carry guns illegally?" Which is completely ironic because the ACLU are the ones who fight so often for the police to keep from harrassing people who look normal. Trust me, DC police have got better things to do than search around for bulges in peoples pants.

  8. #8
    Member Array xercise2nd's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Pennsylvania, northeast
    Posts
    246

    Why carry?

    (Note: Not sure if this is the right spot to start this, but -- hey! -- got to start some where!)

    A good report from a bad situation: Well written new article in the defense of self-defense is found at http://www.worldnetdaily.com/news/ar...TICLE_ID=51024

  9. #9
    Moderator
    Array Rock and Glock's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Colorado at 11,650'
    Posts
    12,716
    Good summary. Too bad he's not more "mainstream" and "PC" so he'd get wider copy:

    Citizens are left with two choices. They can either rely on the kindness of criminals, or they can protect themselves. The choice is obvious. Yet liberal cities continue to rely on the kindness of criminals.

    Washington, D.C., is famous for its insanely restrictive anti-gun laws. It has been illegal since 1976 to have an assembled and loaded firearm, even in your home, in D.C. Carrying a handgun for self-protection is against the law. For some reason, Democrats seem to be unable to explain the dramatic 72 percent rise in the D.C. homicide rate between 1976 and 2001, even as the national homicide rate plummeted 36 percent over the same period. Certainly, Christopher Piper had no problem carrying a gun and using it to rape Senitt's female companion. Criminals, it seems, engage in crime. And law-abiding citizens pay the price.

  10. #10
    Member Array Jungle Work's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2006
    Location
    South of Ol' Tascosa, two miles from water, twenty miles from Hell
    Posts
    288
    The District of the Congo is a savage place that I will not travel to since I can not carry leagally there anymore.

    Jungle Work

  11. #11
    Senior Member Array mzmtg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2005
    Location
    Acworth, GA
    Posts
    502
    I call BS on the whole story.

    Everyone knows it's illegal to have a handgun in DC.

    Sheesh.

  12. #12
    Senior Moderator
    Array MattInFla's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2005
    Location
    Central Florida
    Posts
    4,857
    If you want to be able to protect yourself in DC, get a job as a liberal columnist for the Post. Write lots of anti-gun articles, and say that only police should be able to have guns.

    Then, you can shoot unarmed kids in your pool with an unregistered handgun and walk away scot-free. They call it the Carl Rowan Doctrine.

    Matt
    Battle Plan (n) - a list of things that aren't going to happen if you are attacked.
    Blame it on Sixto - now that is a viable plan.

  13. #13
    Member Array LibertyGal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Pennsylvania
    Posts
    127
    Quote Originally Posted by MattLarson
    If you want to be able to protect yourself in DC, get a job as a liberal columnist for the Post. Write lots of anti-gun articles, and say that only police should be able to have guns.

    Then, you can shoot unarmed kids in your pool with an unregistered handgun and walk away scot-free. They call it the Carl Rowan Doctrine.
    Yes, how ironic that the elite seek to deprive us of what they themselves would never do without. Rosie O'Donnell & other celebrities with their armed bodyguards, Congress with their armed security force, governors with their armed state police escorts . . . I wouldn't be surprised if Sarah Brady herself has an armed contingent when she goes to a speaking engagement . . .

    LibertyGal
    Requiring a license makes it illegal to do something that was lawful before the license was required.

  14. #14
    Distinguished Member Array dimmak's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2006
    Location
    TN
    Posts
    1,752
    Love to have my kids see all the landmarks, but I guess they'll have to watch the History Channel....
    "Ray Nagin is a colossal disappointment" - NRA/ILA Executive Director Chris W. Cox.


    "...be water, my friend."

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. What percent of Colorado citizens carry?
    By mitch77 in forum Open Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: September 22nd, 2009, 01:35 AM
  2. Concealed Carry, Firearms Purchase, and LEO Hiring
    By brocal01 in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: August 19th, 2009, 10:12 PM
  3. What Other Countries Allow Their Citizens To Privately Carry Firearms?
    By dlclarkii in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 47
    Last Post: August 3rd, 2009, 05:58 PM
  4. Idaho Teens carry firearms around town
    By buckeye .45 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: May 21st, 2007, 10:21 PM

Search tags for this page

every citizen must own a gun

,

seniors have the right to carry a gun protect theselves

,

the facts why a citizen must carry a gun

Click on a term to search for related topics.