Our Second Amendment rights
Jan 18, 2013 | 1042 views | 4 4 comments | 9 9 recommendations | email to a friend | print

The general conversation today by the public is gun control. I recently saw on a bumper sticker: “Gun control is two hands on your weapon.” Having said that, Joseph Stalin banned guns in Russia in the 1920s. Adolf Hitler banned guns in Germany, also in the 1920s. Because of that, when Germany invaded Russia, the Russians almost were occupied by Germany.

In 1776, the American colonies revolted against England because of no taxation without representation. And that’s how the United States became what it is – a nation of free people. In 1942, the Japanese attacked the United States but did not invade the continental United States, because there were more people with guns on the West Coast, and the Japanese knew it. They did not invade, and because of the Second Amendment rights, we are not speaking to the Japanese today.

We cannot protect the general public from deranged or mentally challenged people, such as Timothy McVey in the Oklahoma bombing. (Do you remember that? And that wasn’t using guns.)

If you think this sounds familiar to what’s happening today, it is. And it is possible. Our founding fathers were far smarter than we think they were. When they gave us the Second Amendment rights, they knew that someday, there would be a political faction that would want to eliminate it.

If you agree, write your political representatives and express your thoughts. If you don’t, we won’t have Second Amendment rights or any other rights at all.

Joe Masturzo

Comments-icon Post a Comment
January 21, 2013
Mr. Masturo-

Hitler banned guns, but then had enough guns to invade Russia who didn't? Is that why Germany lost the war, because Hitler banned guns in the 20's? Where do you get this information. Hitler wasn't even in a position to ban guns until he was appointed Chancellor in 1933 (He was never elected for those of you who like to whine that Obama is another Hitler). The Japanese didn't invade the United States because they weren't interested in occupying the United States. What they wanted was for us to get out of Asia and S.E. Asia. It had nothing to do with a bunch of farmers with rifles. At any rate, this could be a long history lesson which I would recommend you take at the local college.

When the founding fathers came up with the 2nd Amendment we had just gone through a revolution and they were still concerned the British might come back (which they did in 1812). Plus, the "Arms" they were referring to were muskets that took a minute to load, not assault weapons that can fire off 20 shots in the blink of an eye.

All of the above everyone knows. We need to regulate bullets, and there is nothing in the 2nd Amendment that I know of that talks about bullets. Anyone buying bullets needs to be licensed, and anyone buying more than 100 bullets needs a thorough background check before taking them home. You can't get on a plane nowadays without a background check, and I see no reason, if you're a law-abiding citizen (and not insane) why you would object to this infringement on your precious little 2nd Amendment rights.
January 19, 2013
Mr. Masturzo, in response to your letter to the editor, I would like to preface my response by saying I respect your First Amendment right, as you should mine, hopefully. Now about the Second Amendment.....I would first like to ask you if you are either misinformed, or missing the point entirely. No one, I repeat, no one is coming after your guns. What is being attempted by our President is to make an effort to rout the heinous crimes and slaughter of innocent victims that are perpetrated through the use of assault rifles and clips with capacities of over ten rounds. That doesn't seem like much of a sacrifice to me. I am a lifelong sportsman and hunter, and have never seen the need to have more than three to five rounds in my deer rifle, in fact, I rarely use more than two on a hunt, and have always managed to keep my freezer full. If you, Sir, think you need to pack thirty rounds with you, I sincerely hope that your pasture is one helluva good distance from mine.

This business about assault rifles and high capacity clips is ridiculous. I can see NO practical use to even own one.

I fully support the Obama administration in their efforts to ban these types of weapons. And, as most of us know, the NRA responds this week with a vile, disgusting ad about the President's children. Mr. LaPierre has been crowing about "the government's gonna take all of your guns". Not so by the longest shot (pun intended). These weapons that belong ONLY in the hands of those whose sworn duty is to protect us, not those among us who seem very insecure about getting their guns taken away.
January 19, 2013
January 19, 2013
Plus 1