shopify traffic stats
Quantcast

Gun rights initiative in the works

Committee to Preserve the Second Amendment will be meeting to discuss placing the Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance on a county initiative for the people to decide.

image_pdfimage_print
by Tom McKirgan
Coquille
On February 17th the Coos County Commission addressed the Second Amendment Preservation issue. Concerned Coos County residents packed the meeting room, many (save one) speaking in support of it, including Sheriff Zanni.

After the vote, the audience erupted in disbelief, anger and absolute disappointment in Commissioners Sweet and Cribbins’ outright refusal to protect any of our Bill of Rights.

It’s obvious to many that these two are illiterate of the Constitution and of their duties as elected officials. They do not understand or agree that their primary duty is to protect the rights of their citizens.

Instead, they make despotic backroom deals with special interest groups to secure their own futures and inappropriately vote on things they’re personally involved in.

As for myself, I’ve had enough of them running our county and Constitution into the ground. These two inept federal sycophants are a serious threat to our very liberty because they simply will not act to protect it!

The Committee to Preserve the Second Amendment will be meeting to discuss placing the Second Amendment Preservation Ordinance on a county initiative for the people to decide.

The meeting is open to the public and will be at the Bandon library located at 1204 -11th St. SW on Saturday March 14th at 11:00 AM. 2A supporters are strongly encouraged to attend.

For those who missed the treachery, you can watch it here.
http://coosmediacenter.pegcentral.com/player.php?video=275b16624213635deff19912c585466e

 

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

5 Responses to "Gun rights initiative in the works"

  1. Chris B  February 25, 2015 at 7:22 PM

    Mark M,

    Let’s review the rest of the 2nd Amendment that, by the way does not give us the right, we were born with it. The 2nd Amendment was included to A:Restrain the Government and B: As Madison said at the Great Debates, remind the people of their rights with something tangible that they could read when they fall asleep as they do from time to time and as apparently you have. By the way; every one who will do is part of the Militia, which is the whole people. The rest of the 2nd Amendment, which you chose to edit says “the right of the people, to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Infringed literally means undermine or REGULATE you idiot. It was defined exactly the same in 1791 when the B of R was ratified. All 20,000 plus gun laws on the books are illegal and unconstitutional. I have more than a passing knowledge of the Constitution and the history of it, but don’t have time to educate you right now. The rest of your rhetoric is just argumentative, but as you are sipping on your Kool Aid, here’s a thought. Are you opposed to fire alarms in schools, or fire drills. There has been no kids killed in a School fire for over 50 years. Since more guns definitely equals less crime, and it is I believe our duty as parents and good citizens to train our children at an early age the proper use of firearms; why not bring back training in schools. Most Schools used to have gun ranges in the basements and….no school shootings. I know your collectivist mind probably doesn’t like facts to get in the way of your boo hoo feelings, but get over it, I have. You sir, are what Lennin referred to as a useful idiot. Try drinking Tea instead of Kool Aid. It will increase your I.Q. and it tastes better.

    Reply
    • MarkM  February 26, 2015 at 5:18 PM

      Chris,
      We might be born with rights but they don’t mean a darn thing unless there’s a strong government around to secure them. Just ask the folks in North Korea.

      In no way, shape or form does the Second Amendment provide to “restrain the government.” Quite the opposite. As someone with more than a passing interest in the Constitution, you’ve probably read a good bit of it, including the enumerated powers of Congress in Article 1, Section 8 where it says Congress shall have the power

      “To provide for calling forth the Militia to execute the Laws of the Union, suppress Insurrections and repel Invasions;”

      That means in plain, simple English that the militia is to protect the Union, not attack it. In fact, the Second Amendment says the very same thing itself: the militia is “necessary to the security of a free State,” you see, not a free people. That’s what it says.

      You can quote Madison all you like, but it doesn’t really matter. All that really matters is what the Constitution itself, as ratified by the thirteen colonies, says. But someone who loves the Constitution as much as yourself already knows that.

      The Second Amendment’s independent clause does indeed say the right to bear arms “shall not be infringed” as you point out. I would ask you why Madison (at the direction of the Constitutional Convention) wrote the primary, conditional clause about the militia? Why not just say, “The right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed” and be done with it? End of story. Why conditionally muck it up by bringing the militia into it?

      Keep in mind that today there is no such thing as a militia. Militias were transformed into the National Guard by the Military Act of 1903. When we did have militias they were always used to defend the state, usually against rebellions from its own citizens, most notably by George Washington in the Whiskey Rebellion in 1794. Seems some folks didn’t like paying taxes back then just as they don’t like paying them today. Too bad. You gotta pay your taxes. Back then the militia helped see to it. You have no right, Constitutional or otherwise, to rebel against the United States. That’s what Lincoln taught the Confederates.

      I’ll give you marks for consistency at least for admitting that every single duly passed arms regulation is Unconstitutional. Probably less than 1% of your fellow Americans share that view with you. The rest of us don’t think it’s a good idea for a second grader to take a loaded firearm to school, or a mentally ill person to carry a loaded firearm on an airplane, or heck, for your neighbor to keep a nuclear dirty bomb in his garage. But you do. Great. Be sure to include those items in your petition.

      I know what you mean about not having enough time to correct all the nonsense on the internet, but I’ll agree with you about gun education classes in public schools. They are a good idea. We used to have them in Oregon in 1998. That was the year Kip Kinkel went on his little shooting spree at Thurston High School. Not quite the panacea you suggest. Also, you are very, very wrong to suggest that more guns equals less crime. More guns equals more shootings. Every time.

      If you’re thirsty to drink up some more truth, I’m happy to oblige.

      Reply
  2. MarkM  February 24, 2015 at 12:49 PM

    fred, Loaded guns are now allowed in National Parks.

    http://www.nbcnews.com/id/35484383/ns/us_news-life/t/new-law-allows-loaded-guns-national-parks/#.VOzUb_nF-So

    Also, handgun restrictions in Chicago and Wash, DC were overturned by the SCOTUS.

    No legislation restricting gun use or ownership never even made it out of committee either in Oregon or in Wash, DC.

    I’ll stop there because you’re probably thinking about unicorns by now.

    Reply
  3. fred  February 24, 2015 at 8:51 AM

    Dear Mark M: Without using every word in the dictionary; without causing me to stop for a lunch break while reading your stuff; please, for the benefit of all, summarize “more gun rights and freedoms” under the reign of King Nobama. Thanks.

    Reply
  4. MarkM  February 23, 2015 at 5:51 PM

    Tom, take a breath.

    Let’s review the initial clause of the Second Amendment:

    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,

    Are you in a Militia? Is it “well regulated”?

    Upwards of 90% of Americans believe they have a Constitutional right to regulate firearms, primarily through backgrounds checks.

    Do you think it’s OK for felons of violent crimes to own guns? Most Americans do not. Do you think it’s OK for the mentally ill to own guns? Most Americans do not.
    Do you think it’s OK for domestic abusers to own guns? Most Americans do not.
    Do you think it’s OK for children to play with loaded firearms? Most Americans do not.
    Do you think America has a problem with gun violence? Most Americans do.

    How about some easy ones–
    Do you think people should be allowed to bring loaded guns on airplanes?
    Do you think children should be allowed to bring loaded guns to school?
    Do you think people should be allowed to bring loaded guns to public meetings, legislative sessions, courts of law, or Congressional hearings?

    If you answered No to any of the above, you believe in regulating firearms. Good for you. That’s your Constitutional duty.

    By the way, you enjoy more gun rights and freedoms under the Obama Administration than you did under the previous one. That might make a nice “whereas” for your ordinance.

    Reply

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.