I was reading about that FOX reporter who lied about a home invasion as her motivation for purchasing a gun as means of protection and it got me thinking about our rights and what has changed.
Our Constitutional rights were first ratified on December 15th, 1791 so when I hear someone saying our rights have been what they are for centuries as basis for why they shouldn't change, I can't help but think of things that were acceptable back then that are taboo now. One example is marriage at young ages as early as 10 years old.
I am not saying the age of marital consent should be lowered, nor am I saying our Gun rights should be infringed. I just find it fascinating when someone argues "its always been like this" and then on a different issue argues for change because things "have changed since then".
Originally Posted by: Zero2Cool
IMO the problem is that people seem to think that it is the gun buyer who should have to explain why they are buying a gun. If the lady wants a gun, and she's an adult, she should be able to buy a gun.
I don't own a gun. I don't expect to own a gun again before I die. But if I were to (try to) buy a gun, and some nimrod asked me why, I'd tell them the following:
1. Because I don't trust the state. And because I don't trust the state, I want those who would run my life through the use of state power to be aware of what might happen if they piss too many people off.
And, incidentally,
2. Because I want to piss off nimrods who ask why I want a gun.
Of course, #1 would more likely get me more state attention and stop anyone from selling me a gun even if said state didn't stop me first.
But, like I said, despite my disgust/anger/frustration/general pissed-off-edness at the state, its lackeys, its valuers, and its apologists, I don't expect to ever have a gun in my possession again.
As for your other thought about change, Kevin, there's no problem with changing things per se. But part of the wisdom of the founders, which we have abandoned, is putting a serious burden of proof and action on those who would restrict the ways in which we pursue happiness. Just pointing out that "things have changed", that "we've learned a lot since then," or similar excuses people use for taking away prior practices isn't enough. You, or the Congress or your favorite change advocate or your fourth cousin and member of the Women's Temperance Union want to change what people can do? It's your job to go through the slogging that it takes to amend the Constitution, etc.
It's not the job of the person who has disgusting habits of owning an assault rifle or picking his nose or nagging about the rights with which he's been endowed by his Creator.
Sorry.
Or shouldn't be. :study: :pirate:š¤¬ š :cussing: :study:
And do not be conformed to this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind, that you may prove what is that good and acceptable and perfect will of God.
Romans 12:2 (NKJV)