Posted in #2amendment

Conspiracy Theory or Hidden Agenda? You Decide.


Rep. Kathleen Rice of New York, took to twitter on Thursday labeling members of the NRA, and essentially all of us that choose to exercise our 2nd Amendment right, as “domestic security threats.” 

It is difficult to understand why liberals insist on continuing their false narrative regarding any correlation between legal gun ownership and gun crimes without getting into conspiracy theories.  The numbers and statistics speak for themselves.  Detroit has the strictest gun laws in the country, yet experiences among the highest rate of gun violence.  What part of “criminals do not obey the law” does the anti-gun movement not understand?  Some studies have shown that less than 3% of gun crimes are committed by the legal owners of the firearm, other studies have shown that most victims of gun crime had prior arrest records and/or criminal convictions (64%-71%).  These statistics in and of themselves seem to indicate that gun violence in the United States has nothing to do with legal gun ownership, it is more about criminals who would never pass the background checks required for a legal firearm purchase in the first place.


According to Dr. Gary Kleck,  a criminologist from Florida State University, legal gun ownership prevents more than 2.5 million crimes annually, and in most cases without the firearm ever being fired.  Again, trying to come up with a reasonable explanation as to why liberals want to take our guns away without getting into some type of conspiracy theory, no luck so far.  Some of the anti-gun rhetoric has even gone so far as to claim that gun owners have some type of mental problem that requires them to be armed in order to feel safe.  What is truly insane is preventing law-abiding citizens from arming themselves while the criminals and growing gang affiliations in this country are running around armed illegally, and our law enforcement officers are often prevented from doing anything about it without being sued because their actions were perceived as profiling or somehow politically incorrect.

As with so many issues in this country, more legislation is not the answer to curbing gun crime, enforcing the laws already in existence would be sufficient if law enforcement was simply allowed to do their job without fear of reprisals because their actions may be deemed politically incorrect or seen as profiling.  Most MS-13 gang members are of Central American origin, that is just a fact, does it mean that everyone from Central America is a member of the gang, of course not.  However, most gangs do have some type of identifier signifying where their allegiance lies such as colors or tattoos and the police officers working in heavy gang areas are familiar with these identifiers.  Let them do their job because the fact is, the vast majority of gun violence in this country happens within and between these gangs.

gun permit

In The District of Columbia v Heller, the Court held that:

“…the District’s ban on handgun possession in the home violates the Second Amendment,
as does its prohibition against rendering any lawful firearm in the home operable for the purpose of immediate self-defense. …But the enshrinement of constitutional rights necessarily takes certain policy choices off the table. These include the absolute prohibition of handguns held and used for self-defense in the home. Undoubtedly some think that the Second Amendment is outmoded in a society where our standing army is
the pride of our Nation, where well-trained police forces provide personal security, and where gun violence is a serious problem. That is perhaps debatable, but what is not debatable is that it is not the role of this Court to pronounce the Second Amendment extinct.”

In Caetano v. Massachusetts, the Court held that:

“the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute
bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding,”

In 1789 James Madison, the father of the Constitution, said “A well regulated militia, composed of the body of the people, trained to arms, is the best and most natural defense of a free country.” Here is where what some may see as the “conspiracy theory” comes in. The founding fathers, after almost eight years of fighting for our independence from an overbearing and controlling Britain, endeavored to form a limited central government that would be controlled by the people, they crafted a document that was intended to prevent the government from intruding in our lives.  Notice that in his statement he says “defense of a free country”, this indicates that our right to keep and bear arms that “shall not be infringed”, was not simply referring to a means of hunting for food or defending against individuals who would seek to do us harm. They were giving us a means to defend ourselves as a free country, against those who would attempt to take away or diminish the type of freedom expressed in the constitution, whether from outside of our nation or from within.

can't take freedom

Statistics have clearly shown that legal gun ownership has served to reduce the number of violent crimes in this country, and is not creating the problem as liberals would have you believe.  Whether it is their goal to disarm us in order to further diminish the freedom and liberties that are quickly disappearing, well, that’s for you to decide.

Share your thoughts, don't be silenced