You are currently browsing the monthly archive for January 2013.

This may seem petty. But, I need to say it. I am sick and tired of reading all over blogs, forums and news websites that people have the right to bare arms. It especially annoys me when it is written in response to statements by gun control advocates. These statements are often worded like this: “Read the Constitution. The Second Amendment says Iright to bare arms. What part of shall not be infringed don’t you understand?”

I tell you all now, the Constitution says nothing about bare arms. Those who angrily make this statement to show the anti-gun people how wrong they are, just make us all look foolish. Their assumption that gun owners are a bunch of ignorant loudmouths is proven for all to see. Your implied assertion that you have, unlike them, read the Constitution becomes immediately suspect.

“Baring arms” is what you do when you wear a sleeveless shirt. No jurisdiction in the U.S. has passed any law infringing upon your right to bare your arms. Maybe some establishments have a dress code that disallows bare arms. Other than that you can bare arms just about anywhere you like.

The Second Amendment states that the right to keep and BEAR arms shall not be infringed. “To bear” is a verb synonymous with “to carry”. “To bare” means “to expose”. As an adjective “bare” means naked or unadorned. There is a major difference in meaning between the words “bear” and “bare”.

It doesn’t make any difference to me if you are a poor speller in your personal correspondence. But, if you are going to publicly (and the internet is public) call others out for their ignorance of the Constitution, learn the proper terminology. If you are passionate about the Second Amendment, you should know what it says and what it means. If you haven’t even bothered to learn the right word, how dedicated to this right can you be? If you are unable to write at a second grade level, why would others believe you are intelligent and responsible enough to carry a gun? You just give the Liberals another laugh at the ignorant backwoods stereotype they believe is the face of gun owners.


I abhor the term “Gun Violence”. It is, unfortunately, one that is all too common, especially in recent weeks.

I detest because it misses the point entirely. Violence is violence. I believe we have a fundamental problem with violence in America today. Family violence, school violence and violent crime are all around us.

“Gun Violence” places the blame on the instrument rather than the pereptrator. It makes violence committed with a firearm seem somehow worse than all the other violence that is perpetrated against innocent people every day.

Laws proposed to prevent “Gun Violence” fail to differentiate between family violence, other crime and mass murder. Years of work by behavioral scientists show that the psychology of mass murderers is entirely different from other types of killers.

Mass murderers are particularly driven to commit their crimes of slaughter. They often plan for days or weeks ahead. While they may take advantage of an available weapon, they WILL find a way to carry out their agenda. They are usually intelligent and resourceful. They have the ability to research, plan and gather supplies.

Mass murder is not a crime committed impulsively by someone who just picks up whatever is handy. Laws do not deter the mass murderer; they usually plan to die during their slaughter. If one plan is thwarted, they make another. I firmly believe these killers will simply use bombs, start fires or use other means of destroying a large number of people quickly.

The plan of the Columbine killers was to use bombs. The guns were backups. Had the bombs detonated as planned, the shootings would be a footnote to the school explosion deaths.
The Newtown killer planned to buy a rifle to commit the murders. After being turned down at the store he where he wnet to buy it, he decided to take his mother’s guns. I have no doubt that if he had been unable to get those, he would have made yet another plan.

It is foolish to believe gun bans will stop mass murder. Even if they were effective, the laws would only change the method used. The fact is, gun bans or not, those intent on mass murder will find a weapon. We can’t stop these killings until we look at the whole picture objectively. We need to find out what is causing so many individuals in our country to decide to committ mass murder. As long as we look at the weapons above all else, mass murder will keep happening.

Other crimes where guns are the weapons need to be looked at from the point of view of type of crime as well. Gand violence, domestic violence, armed robbery, rape and every other violent crime will continue with or without guns.

I’m not saying there should be no regulation of guns or who can own them. I’m simply saying we need to look deeper to stop the violence. The easy answer is rarely the best.

Twitter Updates

%d bloggers like this: