NPR's take on NRA

[A-R]

Don't shoot the messenger

Actually, this isn't as bad as I thought it would be.

http://www.npr.org/2011/01/27/133247508 ... c=fb&cc=fp" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[G26ster]

"He is the distinguished service professor of political science at the State University of New York College at Cortland."

As a native New Yorker, the last person I want to represent my RKBA rights is a New York college professor. NPR sure knows how to pick 'em.

[i8godzilla]

PBS is the most trusted name in news.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/ ... 119930.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No, I don't believe it either.

[The Annoyed Man]

The modern debate about individual gun rights, he says, began in the aftermath of Congress' enactment of the Gun Control Act of 1968, in the aftermath of the assassinations of John F. Kennedy, Martin Luther King Jr. and Robert Kennedy.

"In the 1970s, you see the Second Amendment rhetoric escalate dramatically as an argument against stronger gun laws and to identify gun ownership with American values and historical values," he says. "You find this increasingly heavy emphasis on Second Amendment rights and constitutional rhetoric as part of the argument against enacting stronger gun laws."

How odd that he would make these two statements: 1) that the debate over individual gun rights began after the GCA of '68, as if there was no resistance to its passage before it became law; and 2) that the 70s debate was against the enactment of additional repressive laws, and not as a reaction to the passage just two years before of the GCA of '68. What planet is this guy living on?

[The Annoyed Man]

PBS is the most trusted name in news.

http://www.publicpolicypolling.com/pdf/ ... 119930.pdf" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

No, I don't believe it either.

Just ask Juan Williams.

By the way, they make that analysis based on a survey of 632 voters. That's right... 632. That's a popcorn fart in the wind when compared to all voters, or even all voters in Raleigh, N.C., but they would have you believe that this is a fair representation? Phhhhhttt!

[RPB]

couldn't help myself, and replied

Quoting myself:

Ron Johnson (someothername) wrote:

I'm not an NRA member, but feel I need to correct the above article as bit. Since my relatives were instrumental in the drafting, I'll inform you that "historically" the Second Amendment had the Third Amendment in mind when drafted.

Actually this is a mis-statement: "As a matter of history, we didn't really see anything like the individual point of view emerge until the 20th century,But you didn't need the Second Amendment to ensure that civilians would have the right to defend themselves or to own a gun to defend themselves."



Remember the time period, right after property owners had been forced to quarter armed British Soldiers.

No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

Now, if the soldiers are armed, and the individual property owners were not, how would you withhold your consent?

Since we knew we needed an army, a "well regulated militia" but distrusted standing armies, but acknowledged they were a "necessary evil"

A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the People to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

And since the militia could kidnap or hold a property owner or family member hostage, in order to "gain consent" the individual right of self defense is recognized to not be exclusive to inside one's home.

If Robert Spitzer needs more accurate information than he's disclosing, quite a few of my Relative could inform him about the Mayflower Compact, documents preceding that, and subsequent to that.

Thursday, January 27, 2011 07:35:28 PM

Some of my relatives are Mullins, Alden and Cook, if you notice those names when Googling the Mayflower Compact.... That is how President John Adams had Mayflower roots ... through that lineage. I had to post, I get irritated when some "johnny come lately" purports to know history, "legislative intent" but gives false information. (and no, my real last name isn't "Johnson" but I don't give out TMI on the internet)