I recently read an article written by a man making a common sense case for gun rights. He maintains that sporting purposes isn't the only legitimate reason for owning a firearm. Self defense is just as legitimate with the increasing lawlessness we are facing in this country.

The root of the problem is lawlessness, not the number of guns in circulation. Increased lawlessness means more crimes involving guns, to be sure. But, guns do not cause crimes, people do. If we are truly interested in fighting crime, we should be investigating its root causes instead of trying to take guns away from people who would use them legally.

I would like to point out that "Sporting purpose" , is right out of the Adolf Hitler play book on concurring people and neighboring nations.

Ill give you a sporting purpose , to have a fighting chance at a decent resistance when they are coming to gas you and everyone you know because you have a big nose and to many vowels in your last name.

See Finster, here's somebody who doesn't necessarily see it as preaching to the choir.

No I am definitely the Choir but I will give you a few Amens during that sermon .

I know by your posts, you are the choir. I'm just giving Finster a hard time.

I think the author's comments were aimed at the anti-gun crowd. I think there are some in the "Choir" who just look at gun ownership as it being their second amendment right, which it is. But, there's more to it than that and that's the sensible approach as well.

Or if they are turning you into a slave to the national debt.

The "root" cause is modern day parents, and a messed up society. Everyone has an inherent right to self defence.

Innit interesting that the same folks and entities who oppose gun rights, support less incarceration, more lenient sentencing, unregulated immigration and drug legalization? Almost as though decreasing crime isn’t actually their goal at all...

Everything you mention points to less crime prevention.

Just think, if everyone were taught the Ten Commandments and obeyed them a lot of the crime would quit.

I think the constitution should be re written as far as the second amendment goes.
You see,"infringed " is clearly to big of a word for a democrat to understand.
Its like hanging up a WET PAINT sign ... there will be one moron sticking his fingers in it to see if it may have dried by now.

I recently read an article written by men making a common sense case for gun rights, there was the main article and a few admendments.

Well, I always thought that the point in the 2nd Amendment was to protect the citizens from the government. I don't see how that interpretation changed in the 25 years since I took civics but apparently for most it has.

Anyone that truly understands the 2nd, knows what it is for and what it's intentions are. Not giving you a hard time trapper, just agreeing with you. It's intention is for defense. Defense from others and defense from our own government. This notion of using it for hunting (by the idiot anti's) is preposterous, that was not it's intention or purpose. I'm not saying to not preach it. By all means preach it loud and preach it often.

Well said Michael! I'm sick of people trying to water down everything that most of us hold sacred!

That was just government's of the old day's,they are not like that anymore. The governments of today are just here to help and protect you.

I'm sure they all used that line,until the day came they had total control.

http://www.usdebtclock.org/

Buchanan attempted to display the cultural indifference in today's society. The media would have no part of it!
...They still won't!