2nd Amendment

[Nelson Ward]

"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."

Much ado about nothing has been made of the first stanza of the 2nd Amendment by anti-gun people.

A well regulated (well trained and well armed) militia (every man and or woman who is physically able and also a citizen), being necessary to to the security of a free state, (the right to protect your freedoms, your property, your safety, your rights, state's rights), the right of the people to keep and bear arms, (notice it says the right of the PEOPLE, not the militia), shall NOT be infringed. (not by the Federal Government, not by State's Government, not by ANYONE unless convicted of a felonious crime by a court of law).

"No Free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." (Thomas Jefferson, Proposal Virginia Constitution)

"A militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves...and include all men capable of bearing arms." (Richard Henry Lee)

"...to disarm the people - that was the best and most effectual way to enslave them." (George Mason)

"Americans have the right and advantage of being armed - unlike the citizens of other countries whose governments are afraid to trust the people with arms." (James Madison, The Federalist Papers #46 at 243-244)

This is also confirmed in the Freedman's Act of 1866, where Congress affirmed that newly freed slaves'  right to keep and bear arms could not be infringed by the several states.  If Americans did not have the right to keep and bear arms, and if this did not include the states, why would Congress confirm that ex-slaves' rights could not be infringed by the states in the Freedman's Act?

Which arms can the People own?   According to both George Mason and James Madison;

"The People shall have arms equivalent to that of what any infantryman can carry on his person."

See http://gunlaws.com

CA Gun Laws Summary

What Are the Gun Laws in California? (May not be completely accurate)

From NRAILA

http://crime.about.com/od/gunlawsbystate/p/gunlaws_ca.htm

http://www.handgunlaw.us/states/dc.pdf

 

Calguns.net

NRA National Rifle Association

One of the foremost defenders of Second Amendment rights

www.nra.org/

NRA web link - https://membership.nrahq.org/forms/signup.asp

CRPA web link - https://store.crpa.org/categories.php?category=Membership

CCRKBA web link - http://www.ccrkba.org/?page_id=1581

 ...  join them today!

Key CA State Legislation

Much of our Second Amendment postings are done on ...

https://www.facebook.com/DayOfResistanceVenturaCounty

Good Second Amendment Resource

http://www.restoreamericanliberty.com/firearms.html

good links

NATIONAL RIFLE ASSOCIATIONNRA INSTITUTE FOR LEGISLATIVE ACTIONGUN OWNERS OF AMERICA2nd AMENDMENT FOUNDATIONJEWS for the PRESERVATION of FIREARMS OWNERSHIPCCRKBA - THE COMMON SENSE GUN LOBBYSTATE GUN CARRY GUIDESCARRY CONCEALED.NETUS CONCEALED CARRY
HANDGUNLAW.USI CARRY .ORGGUN NEWS DAILYWILSON COMBAT - Custom FirearmsBLUE FORCE GEAREVERY CITIZEN A SOLDIER

Second Amendment Activist Tools

 

 

What is the  Second Amendment Committee?

find out: http://libertygunrights.com/aboutus.html

 

2nd Amendment TV

http://www.2ndamendmenttv.com/

Because self defense is a sacred right

Contacting Congress

 

 

Must-See "GunBanObama" Website Now Active As we enter the home stretch of this year's critically important election, two things are certain: First, the winner of the election will have a profound effect on your Second Amendment rights, and second, it's crucial that you know where the candidates stand on the Second Amendment so that you can make the right choice. One thing we do know: Barack Obama continues to be a serious threat to gun owners. When it comes to Obama's stance on our Second Amendment rights, you need to be fully informed about what he has said and done during his entire political career. READ MORE >>

 

 

 

Note to readers/posters: Reader comments are in chronological, indented sequence, with the newest ones on the higher-numbered pages below.  You must be registered on this site to post. You may have to scroll/page down to get to where you want to be. 

 

[Ventura Patriot]

Subject: FW: Blacklash!

Owners of McMillan MFG. of Phoenix, AZ

 

Subject: Owners of McMillan MFG. in Phoenix

McMillan produces rifles for our Military and local Police Officer Snipers.

 McMillan Mfg in Phoenix, Arizona, was contacted by Bank of America and informed that they will no longer be allowed to use their services ( Bank of America ) because they are in the firearms business and support the second amendment.

I am fine with you re-posting it.  Thanks for your support.

Kelly D. McMillan

Director of Operations

McMillan Group International, LLC

1638 W Knudsen Dr

Phoenix , Arizona 85027

McMillan Integrity-Global Vision

http://www.mcmillanusa.com/

http://www.facebook.com/McMillanGroupInternational

 

McMillan Fiberglass Stocks, McMillan Firearms Manufacturing, McMillan Group International have been collectively banking with Bank of America for 12 years.  Today Mr. Ray Fox, Senior Vice President, Market Manager, Business Banking, Global Commercial Banking (Bank of America) came to my office. He scheduled the meeting as an "account analysis" meeting in order to evaluate the two lines of credit we have with them. He spent 5 minutes talking about how McMillan has changed in the last 5  years and have become more of a firearms manufacturer than a supplier of accessories.  At this point I interrupted him and asked "Can I possibly save you some time so that you don't waste your breath?  What you are going to tell me is that because we are in the firearms manufacturing business you no longer want my business." 

"That is correct", he says.  I replied "That is okay, we will move our accounts as soon as possible.  We can find a 2nd Amendment friendly bank that will be glad to have our business.  You won't mind if I tell the NRA, SCI and everyone one I know that BofA is not firearms-industry friendly?"  "You have to do what you must", he said.  "So you are telling me this is a politically motivated decision, is that right?"  Mr. Fox confirmed that it was.  At which point I told him that the meeting was over and there was nothing left for him to say.

I think it is important for all Americans who believe in and support our 2nd amendment "right to keep and bear arms" should know when a business does not  support these rights. What you do with that knowledge is up to you. When I don't agree with a business' political position, I cannot, in good Conscience support them. We will soon no longer be accepting Bank of America credit cards as payment for our products,

Kelly D. McMillan

Director of Operations

McMillan Group International, LLC

623-582-9635

1638 W Knudsen Dr

Phoenix , Arizona 85027

McMillan Integrity-Global Vision

http://www.mcmillanusa.com/

***
 

Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everyone stands around reloading.

We the People, are the Rightful Masters of both Congress & the Courts, not to Overthrow the Constitution, but Overthrow the men who pervert the Constitution.

[David M Stewart]

We ( older than 60 or even 55) were taught that America was a land where we were all created equal and that our rights came from our Creator and were inalienable.  We now have a situation where the government and its minions are become more equal than the rest of us.  The Government is trying to force the condition where nobody "needs" an AR15 with large capacity magazines but somehow those in Government need them. Equal is as Equal does.  Our forefathers and  founders had to assert their ownership of their lives and fortunes and it looks like that cycle is coming around again.

"Shall not be infringed" has no wiggle room.  We each need what we each decide we need.  Period.

[Ventura Patriot]

Dear Steve ,

President Obama and his anti-gun pals know the first step to CONFISCATING every firearm in America is registering them. 

Not just "some" guns. But every single one. 

That's why every speech and comment from Barack Obama, Dianne Feinstein, Joe Biden and the other anti-gun loudmouths, starts with a demand for "universal background checks" or "expanded background checks" or "grand-fathered gun checks." 

Don't be fooled. Those background checks are gun registration. 

Time and again anti-gun state and federal bureaucrats have been caught keeping records of the checks, including the name of the gun owner and the specific gun purchased. 

Besides, would you ever want to trust Barack Obama or Eric Holder? 

Of course not! 

That's why the National Association for Gun Rights is standing opposed to ALL efforts to give the federal government more information on gun owners. 

But after an appearance by NRA President David Keene on CBS, the Associated Press stated: 

"The head of the National Rifle Association says the organization has no problem with tighter background checks of gun purchasers. 

[Keene said] the NRA is 'generally supportive' of them."

And sadly, that's not even close to the worst of it. 

Steve , believe me, I wish I didn't have to write you this email. 

In a moment, I will give you a link to NAGR's No Gun Ban petition that I urge you to sign immediately. 

If you've already signed the petition, please read this entire letter and then forward it to every pro-Second Amendment friend and family member you have -- preferably with a personal note urging them to join the fight. 

You see, this may be the most important letter I have ever sent you. 

And if you and I are going to win this fight -- the biggest danger our Second Amendment rights have faced in a generation -- we have to be willing to look all of the facts square in the face, even those we may not like. 

You see, President Obama and his anti-gun pals are pushing hard for "universal background checks" on ALL gun sales and transfers -- even just handing a hunting rifle down to your son. 

It doesn't take a rocket scientist to figure out the only way to enforce the scheme is for the federal government to keep a national gun registry of every gun and every gun owner in America. 

That's why the Feinstein Gun Ban forces owners of all grandfathered weapons to register their guns in a national database. 

And if the NRA is signaling a surrender on handing President Obama and his anti-gun pals more information about American gun owners, I shudder to think what deals may get cut as the anti-gun hysteria gets whipped to a frenzy just before a House or Senate vote. 

Since their President came out publicly in support of a new "background check" national gun registration scheme, the NRA did issue one public statement pointing out some of the dangers I told you about weeks ago. 

I was hoping that would signal a change in direction. 

But now The Hill is reporting: 

"Sen. Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.) said Thursday [January 24] that he was working on a bill with Senate colleagues and the National Rifle Association (NRA) that would implement universal background checks, a major component of President Obama's proposed gun-control reforms . . . 

'I'm working with the NRA, to be honest with you, and talking to them.'"

Of course, the NRA is now denying all of it -- denying they're "talking to" one of their anti-gun, "A-rated" Democrats about expanding gun control. 

I hope that's true, but this story has gone back and forth so many times, it's making me seasick. 

This is the absolute WORST thing that could result out of the Newtown tragedy! 

Full-scale national gun registration under the guise of background checks?!?! 

But unfortunately, this is not the only place where the NRA is signaling pre-emptive surrender. 

Just a few days ago, news broke that President Obama was enlisting "Obamacare" doctors to begin snooping on gun owners in the name of taking away guns from those with "mental illness." 

After going dark on Facebook for days after the Newtown tragedy, the NRA signaled its support for a national mental health database at its December 21 press conference. 

In fact, the NRA's Executive Vice President, Wayne LaPierre, stated: 

"We have a completely cracked mentally ill system that's got these monsters walking the streets . . . 

"How can we possibly even guess how many, given our nation's refusal to create an active national database of the mentally ill?"

As I'm sure you agree, no one ever wants to be forced to deal with an armed madman. 

But don't be fooled. 

The "mental health" issue is a ruse to hand government bureaucrats the power to STRIP Second Amendment supporters of their God-given right to keep and bear arms, without trial or conviction by a jury of peers. 

38 states have some sort of mental health database, and they're already being used to strip law-abiding Americans of their Second Amendment rights. 

In fact, studies show that over 100,000 military veterans have been stripped of their gun rights already just from acknowledging stress on returning from war. 

And one former Surgeon General estimated that 46.4% of Americans will have mental health issues at some point in their lives! 

That should give you some idea of just how many law-abiding Americans can be stripped of their gun rights with "mental health" charges alone. 

But how long until the gun-grabbers start adding folks they denote as "threats" to public safety to any Federal "Mental Health" No Gun Database? 

Just a few years ago, the Department of Homeland Security issued documents calling those with the "wrong" Presidential candidates' bumper stickers on their cars possible terrorist threats. 

Now, one West Point think tank is warning about "far right" threats from those who support "civil activism, individual freedoms, and self government." 

Do you really trust President Obama to play fair with the massive new power he'd have with a National Mental Health Database? 

I don't. 

But sadly, this is the way the NRA has operated for some time. 

After the Columbine tragedy in 1999 -- and the media frenzy that followed -- the NRA sent similar signals to the Clinton Administration. 

NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre even stated his organization supported the very so-called "Gun Free Zone" policies that ensure bloodthirsty lunatics never run into armed opposition when they go on a rampage. 

At their 1999 convention in Colorado, Wayne LaPierre stated: 

"First, we believe in absolutely gun-free, zero-tolerance, totally safe schools. That means no guns in America's schools, period."

On May 27, 1999, in testimony before the Subcommittee on Crime of the House Judiciary Committee, LaPierre said: 

"We think it's reasonable to support the federal Gun-Free School Zones Act."

As for background checks? Also, at their 1999 convention, LaPierre stated: 

"We will consider instant checks at gun shows when, and only when, this Administration stops demanding new gun taxes and stops illegally compiling the records of millions of lawful gun buyers."

And in an Outdoor Life magazine interview in 2000, the president of the NRA again confirmed their belief that all firearms sales go through the Brady system.

Steve , this is what bothers me so much. 

It's not that NRA doesn't understand what's going on. 

They've known good and well anti-gun Presidents and bureaucrats break the law to illegally record, track and trace guns and gun owners. 

And yet they're signaling a willingness to hand THIS President even more power? 

The same administration that proved it was willing to look the other way while bloodthirsty Mexican drug gangs stockpiled firearms and walked them across the border -- ultimately resulting in one U.S. Border agent's death? 

If you agree with me that we must fight for our Second Amendment rights tooth-and-nail, I'm going to be counting on your help in the coming days. 

For now, I'm asking you to please sign your No Gun Ban petition, if haven't already done so. 

 

I believe -- like our Founders -- that you and I have a God-given, inalienable right to keep and bear arms. 

I don't know about you, but I don't believe God-given rights are negotiable -- so I'm not about to see them whittled away. 

I've already instructed my staff that -- with your help -- the National Association for Gun Rights will fight any scheme the gun-grabbers throw at us . . . 

. . . even those gun control initiatives the anti-gun national media deems "popular." 

I don't believe our gun rights should be determined by popularity contests. 

If you agree, please sign your No Gun Ban petition TODAY. 

The one way to win this fight is to turn up the heat on Members of Congress. 

You and I must ensure they know that ANY vote on ANY scheme to gut our right to keep and bear arms will mean political pain . . . 

Pain at the ballot box. 

Pain Second Amendment supporters all over the country will be prepared to deliver; if necessary, even if the NRA "blesses" some deal that gives more power to the Obama Administration. 

Because -- and know this, beyond a shadow of a doubt -- NAGR will never bless deals the NRA struck that violate our Second Amendment rights.

And we won’t give politicians a pass who vote for this kind of garbage, even with the NRA’s blessing.

That’s why I’m asking you to stand firm . . . Now, while the heat is on.

All this depends on numbers. You and I must generate as much heat on Congress as possible. Standing together, I am convinced we can win. 

If you haven't signed your No Gun Ban petition, please do so. 

If you have, please forward this letter -- along with a personal note if possible -- to all your pro-2nd Amendment friends and family members asking them to join us. 

And finally, please chip in $10 or even $20 today to help the National Association for Gun Rights fight back against the gun-grabbers. To donate please just CLICK HERE. 

 

This fight is just too important for compromises and half measures. 

Your generosity today will help me mobilize even more gun owners from all over the country. 

For Freedom,

Dudley Brown
Executive Vice President

[Ventura Patriot]

Feinstein's plan bans any gun with a 'grip'?

Also ignores criminals, mentally ill, drugs, causes. It is purely, training, safety issues. It's all about CONTROL.

Read more at http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/feinsteins-plan-bans-any-gun-with-a-grip...

[Ventura Patriot]

Not all Sheriffs are rushing to defend our Second Amendment Rights

The Civilian Disarmament Dialectic

by William Norman Grigg

The Opinion page in today's Idaho Press-Tribune published side-by-side op-ed columns by Canyon County Sheriff Kieran Donahue and Ada County Sheriff Gary Raney on the subject of proposed civilian disarmament measures. (The essays are hidden behind the paper’s ridiculous paywall.) The comparison is quite instructive.

Sheriff Donahue, who has played to his constituents by joining the ranks of Second Amendment Refuseniks, condemns Barrack Obama’s civilian disarmament as “political posturing,” while professing his confidence that “Congress would not be so foolish as to let anyone strip us of our Second Amendment [sic] rights.” He also regurgitates the long-stale and always-unedifying talking point that the country deserves a “meaningful dialogue” on gun-related violence.

Donahue adroitly misdirects the reader from what should be the central question: What would he do in the event that Congress were so foolish as to enact gun confiscation laws?

More: http://lewrockwell.com/grigg/grigg-w308.html

[Bobby Florentz]

Open Letter from Sheriff Kirk M Taylor to Pueblo County Citizens

Posted: Wednesday, January 30, 2013 8:48 pm

Dear Fellow Citizens:

I currently sit on the Board of Directors for the County Sheriffs of Colorado and I am also a member of the Legislative Committee. As such, it has become apparent with the recent tragedies and subsequent dialogue that some form of gun legislation will be proposed this year. We have been working diligently to prepare a statement indicating the position of the Sheriffs in this State. Below you will find this position paper. Although it is not all encompassing I believe that it demonstrates the major issues being discussed as well as our feelings and beliefs as Elected County Sheriffs. I would like to thank Weld County Sheriff John Cooke for incorporating different aspects and concerns of individual Sheriffs into this document.

Yours in Service,

Kirk M. Taylor

Sheriff

---

County Sheriffs of Colorado Position Paper on Possible Gun Control Legislation

The Second Amendment is not a guideline but rather a right.

Recently, our country has faced two horrific mass murders at the Century Theatre in Aurora, Colorado, and Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. In the wake of these tragedies, it is understandable that both Colorado and the rest of the nation search for reasons why. With this comes a renewed interest in public safety issues. As law enforcement professionals and elected officials, the 62 County Sheriffs of Colorado welcome this dialogue. However, we do not believe that these tragedies should be used as the backdrop to advance gun control legislation.

The County Sheriffs of Colorado (CSOC) represent Colorado’s elected Sheriffs. We proudly serve through the gracious will of voters who elect us to be the chief law enforcement officials for our respective counties, deriving our authority from the Colorado Constitution. State statute grants county sheriffs additional responsibilities such as issuing concealed weapons permits.

CSOC is committed to public safety and faithful to our oath to uphold and protect the Constitution of the State of Colorado and the United States Constitution including the Second Amendment.

It was in this spirit of commitment to Colorado residents and our Constitution that the County Sheriffs of Colorado voted at the January meeting in Larimer County to oppose suggested state legislation that may limit Second Amendment rights. It is important to note that this legislation simply is being suggested at this moment.

Second Amendment to the United State Constitution

County Sheriffs of Colorado believe in the Second Amendment of the United States Constitution that guarantees the right of the people to keep and bear arms and that this right shall not be infringed. As our state and country continue to discuss and debate gun control legislation, the position of our founders remains clear. CSOC will not waiver on our defense of the Constitution and will stand to preserve every constituent’s right to possess a firearm. We believe the Second Amendment is no less important as the other nine Amendments contained in the Bill of Rights.

Also, gun control does not equate to lower crime rates, which is really what we strive for. Washington D.C. and Chicago, two cities known for their strict gun control laws, have some of the highest rates of violent crime. In fact in Chicago’s 2012 homicide rate increased 16 percent over the prior year according to the New York Times.

Statistics from Chicago and tragedies like Aurora and Sandy Hook leave many of us shell-shocked with an impression of a gun violence epidemic, Second Amendment expert David Kopel noted in a Wall Street Journal article, “the total U.S. homicide rate has fallen by over half since 1980, and the gun homicide rate has fallen along with it. Today, Americans are safer from violent crime, including gun homicide, than they have been at any time since the mid-1960s.”

The County Sheriffs of Colorado know first hand that strict gun control laws do not deter criminals from getting firearms illegally and committing crimes. Rather, they hurt law-abiding citizens who may be left unprotected because law enforcement cannot arrive in time to stop a criminal’s bullet once he has pulled the trigger.

Hasty Reactions to Unfortunate Tragedies

Our sympathies are with the victims in the Aurora theater shooting and at Sandy Hook. However, the Sheriffs do not believe this is the appropriate time to introduce gun control legislation because decisions likely will be made on emotion rather than reason and that is not in the best interest of Colorado. It is the Sheriffs’ opinion that all gun control bills be tabled for at least a year to encourage rational deliberations before any decisions are made.

Assault Weapons Ban

The County Sheriffs Of Colorado oppose a ban on so-called “assault weapons” because of its vague definition. What many call “assault weapons” are actually semi-automatic rifles that operate the same as any other rifle in that they fire one bullet for every one time a trigger is pulled. Semi-automatic rifles are not machine guns. They do not spray fire like a machine gun.

The term “assault weapons” often is employed incorrectly to describe an ordinary semi-automatic rifle such as an AR-15, which millions of responsible Americans own without ever harming another person.

The previous federal ban on so-called “assault weapons” was confusing and cosmetic in nature. Guns considered scary such as those with a pistol grip were banned with no regard for actual gun operation.

Ban on Private Sales of Firearms

The County Sheriffs Of Colorado are adamantly opposed to any restriction on a person’s right to privately sell firearms to another person. Private sales to friends, neighbors or loved ones would become illegal, effectively turning law-abiding citizens into criminals. Local and state law enforcement do not have the resources to stop private sales of firearms nor to investigate such transactions making this law unenforceable.

Forcing citizens to sell firearms through a federal firearms dealer is the first step towards gun registration and a national database of gun owners. There is little support among our constituents for either. It is also contrary to Colorado’s longstanding history, tradition and culture of non-registration of firearms.

Law-abiding citizens own firearms for a variety of reasons including self-protection, hunting, competition, or recreation, but their reasons are their own. They do not owe an explanation to government. County Sheriffs of Colorado believe government – whether state or federal – does not have the right to know who owns a firearm or for what reason when used for lawful and peaceful purposes.

Ban on High Capacity Magazines

Law enforcement officers carry high capacity magazines because there are times when 10 rounds might not be enough to end the threat. County Sheriffs of Colorado believe the same should hold true for civilians who wish to defend themselves, especially if attacked by multiple assailants.

Recently a young mother in Georgia, defending herself and her two children, needed all six bullets in her .38 caliber handgun to stop one intruder. She hit him five times and still he was able to get in his car and drive away. Fortunately the young mother prevailed. Had there been more than one assailant, the outcome may not have been the same because she would have been out of ammunition.

Also, we know that in high-pressure, high-adrenaline situations, people may not be as accurate with their shots. Thus they may need more ammunition to neutralize a threat. When seconds matter, County Sheriffs of Colorado do not want to deny a law-abiding citizen the ability to defend himself and his family based on an arbitrary limit on how many bullets should be in one magazine clip.

Ban on Bulk Purchases of Ammunition

Federal law already prohibits the following:

• Possession of ammunition by convicted felons

• Controlled substance users

• Anyone subject to a domestic violence restraining order

• The sale or transfer of long gun ammunition to anyone under 18

• Handgun ammunition to anyone under the age of 21

The County Sheriffs of Colorado agree with the Major County Sheriffs Association in their letter to Vice President Joseph R. Biden when they stated, “we are not confident such restrictions would have an impact as even if you can’t buy in bulk, you can still buy multiple boxes of smaller quantities.”

Buying ammunition in large quantities does not equate to mass murder. Recreational shooters often will go through several thousand rounds in a month and never hurt another human being. Since ammunition can be expensive, buying in bulk is a way to reduce cost. Reducing the ability to purchase in bulk is just another way to hurt law-abiding citizens.

Mandatory Entry into a Statewide Database for Concealed Carry Permit Holders

County Sheriffs of Colorado oppose any mandate for a statewide database for concealed carry permit holders. Concealed carry recorders are local records belonging to the individual Sheriff and should not be entered into a statewide system.

A permit holder must attend a firearms training course, be fingerprinted and pass background checks both locally and nationally before the County Sheriff issues the permit. Local voters trust us with that authority and we take that responsibility very seriously. Law abiding citizens should not be punished for following the law by being entered into a state-mandated database.

Mental Health

All members of CSOC were deeply saddened by the shocking events at Sandy Hook and Aurora but are also under the belief that the proposed gun control actions treats the symptoms and not the over-arching core problem of mental illness.

Like many, CSOC recognizes that severe mental illness, and not gun control, is at the core in dealing with individuals who turn violent against our children, family, friends, and communities. Suggestions for mandatory reporting requirements by mental health groups possibly create more problems than solutions. This recognition turns us to explore avenues for better funding for screening, treatment, education, and additional government supported mental health facilities; not gun control.

Over the last half century in the United States there has been a continued escalation of turning from institutional care for our mentally ill citizens to a more community-based support system also known as deinstitutionalization. Many studies have shown that this “deinstitutionalization” is a major cause for the increased contact of people with mental illness and the criminal justice system. In Colorado the largest mental health treatment facilities are the county jails and state prisons.

The question should not be what type of gun does a person who is severally mentally ill possess but rather why is that person walking around freely in the first place? To quote once more from the Major Sheriff’s Association letter to Vice President Biden “There is a strong link between untreated mental illness and the increased risk of committing violent acts, including homicide…Included in the report is a study of violent crime statistics and trends—comparing them to the number of psychiatric beds available; they found a correlation:

When individuals with severe mental illness receive appropriate and effective treatment, their risk of committing violent acts is no greater than that of the general population. When they do not receive treatment, multiple studies have found their risk of violent behavior, including homicides, to be significantly elevated”.

To suggest that taking away constitutionally protected freedoms from our law abiding citizens through gun control would somehow alleviate, remediate, or eliminate the threat from violent mentally ill individuals misses the point that the lack of mental health funding, treatment, education, and facility support are the root causes of the existing problem and the pertinent areas that should be addressed.

Conclusion

The County Sheriffs of Colorado welcome open, honest, and deliberative dialogue on all public safety issues. At the same time, we urge our state elected officials not to make decisions during this grieving period because it would likely lead to policies that are unenforceable and possibly unconstitutional, while punishing law abiding citizens and doing nothing to reduce

[Ventura Patriot]

MSNBC Criticized For Editing Of Newtown Gun Hearing (VIDEO)

Actually, media political coverage in general is badly slanted.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/01/31/msnbc-newtown-gun-heckling...

[Ventura Patriot]

 

How TV will shape the new gun culture in america

https://jonrappoport.wordpress.com/2013/01/17/how-television-will-s...

[Ventura Patriot]

[Nancy Larned]

Sure hope that goes all the way thru signing. This is snowballing!

[Nancy Larned]

For those who politicians who chose to ignore the 2nd Amendment...

 

[Ventura Patriot]

yes!