One Mom's View on Gun Control

Source

We Need to Protect Our 2nd Amendment

I am not a highly political person. My opinions about U.S. politics are usually kept to myself as I am a very firm believer in everyone’s right to their own opinion. Our country was built with this concept; we have freedom of speech and beliefs for a strong reason, it is how we survive and thrive as a nation. It is why I strongly believe in the 2nd amendment as well, “ The Right to Bear Arms”.

As a mother of two young children who attend school , I along with the rest of the country, grieved when 20 school aged children were gunned down by a horrific man in Newton, Connecticut. I remember seeing their pictures slide across my television screen, knowing it could have just as easily been one of my own children. My heart ached for the families and suddenly I feared for the safety of my own kids. My immediate thought…why can’t we put armed officers at our schools?

In recent years I have heard strong debates about classroom sizes, the need for more money, and more teachers. I would gladly place my daughter or son in a larger classroom in order to fund an armed officer. I would gladly pay higher taxes for an armed officer at my child’s school .

It doesn’t make sense to me that someone could fully believe that by taking guns from the law abiding citizens, we can prevent these crimes. Criminals don’t abide by the laws. When you limit our ability to protect ourselves you are creating a breeding ground for criminals. They no longer have to worry about robbing a home when someone is present because they will have a gun, and the homeowner will not.

Is this debate truly about gun control? Do we truly believe that by limiting our ability to buy large magazines, it will keep these out of criminal’s hands? The only thing this will do is create a very large black market. Our war against crime doesn’t become easier if we disarm ourselves. Our war becomes harder, we become weak.

Criminals do not read restraining orders.

Criminals do not fear you calling the cops.

Why I Support 'The Right to Bear Arms.'


I do not own a gun to hunt, I didn’t grow up in a hunting family, I do not own a gun to compete in any sport. I am a mother of two and I own a gun to protect my children. I have an alarm installed in my home, not because it calls the cops, but because it gives me time to grab my gun.




For Protection

When my husband works nights I do not sleep next to a phone, I sleep within a close proximity to a gun. Of course it is locked up for my children’s protection, but I will have access to it if I need it.

Criminals will get guns regardless of the laws our government imposes. The only harm that will be done by gun control is that we will be more vulnerable. We have outlawed drugs, yet drugs live and breathe on the streets of our large cities, our small towns, and our suburbs. We don’t have enough manpower to remove drugs from the streets, we don’t have enough man power to remove guns from the criminals now…..it won’t get easier with tighter gun control.

---Only months ago we were warned in my county that we would be losing officers and that more policeman will be laid off because of the lack of funds. My only comfort- I own a gun.

---What if ‘God Forbid’ there was war on this very soil, my only comfort to this- I own a gun.

---It has never been a question of whether or not I have faith in our law enforcement. My husband is a peace officer. I have faith in him. I have faith in my neighbor who is a member of the local law enforcement. I have faith in our military. I am, however, aware that we are among people without conscious, without care, people who hurt other people. I have faith that if a criminal enters my home I have the ability to protect my children- because I own a gun.

Why do I not support gun control? Not because I believe they will try and take all of our guns, but because when does it stop? If you take gun from a law abiding citizen you are not taking one from a criminal. Criminals are not lining up to turn in their illegal guns. If we give up our rights to guns….any of our rights, they win. The men who kill and hurt innocent people with firearms win. Our time needs to be spent elsewhere. We need to turn our focus into protecting our children, and getting these criminals off the streets.



More by this Author


Comments 9 comments

tsadjatko profile image

tsadjatko 3 years ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

You know what you say is just

so sensible,

well reasoned

and practical...

I'm curious...

how long have you been an extremist?

:-)


movingout profile image

movingout 3 years ago from Georgia

Then perhaps we should eliminate all the changes over the years to the 2nd ammendment? And just what changes would our founding fathers approve of? Perhaps stricter gun control? Matter of interpretation at best or convenience for less gun control laws.


tsadjatko profile image

tsadjatko 3 years ago from maybe (the guy or girl) next door

Changes to the second amendment? I was not aware that amendment had been changed at all. What the gun control lobby would prefer to do is get rid of it entirely. Originally they openly disputed that the Second Amendment conferred the right to own a gun. Their major policy goals were to make handguns illegal and enroll all U.S. gun owners in a federal database. The group now known as the Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence was once known as Handgun Control Inc.; a 2001 book by the executive director of the Violence Policy Center was entitled Every Handgun Is Aimed at You: The Case for Banning Handguns. Contrast that with what you see today: Gun-control groups don't even use the term "gun control," with its big-government implications, favoring "preventing gun violence" instead. Democratic politicians preface every appeal for reform with a paean to the rights enshrined in the Second Amendment and bend over backwards to assure "law-abiding gun owners" they mean them no ill will. They've radically changed their message into one that's more appealing to Middle America and moderate voters.

Their names and vernacular have changed but their goal has not,


Mandeeadair profile image

Mandeeadair 3 years ago from California Author

Well said tsadjatko....I'm seeing a well written article on this very subject in your future..... :).


movingout profile image

movingout 3 years ago from Georgia

Interpretation. The debate to ratify the original was to control slavery. To arm, primarily southern militia to go plantation to plantaion (armed) to check slave for ammunition and arms. And if found to give 20 lashings to the slave found in possesion of the same. The 2nd ammendment can be interpreted if your for guns or against. Depends on who's reading it.


Sherri92 profile image

Sherri92 3 years ago

Awesome hub! I couldn't agree with more! :)


RTalloni profile image

RTalloni 3 years ago from the short journey

An interesting read, including the comments. Good for you for speaking up and taking what comes for your position.

Except for the case where war could break out on our own soil, you offer some ideas that are on target. However, to think that citizens could match a government's weaponry is not feasible, particularly in the context of today's sophisticated methods of war.

While stories of partisans in other countries do show us that amazing battle victories can be won by small numbers of people with weaker weapons, they don't usually win the war. A private gun owner might temporarily delay the consequences of another country waging war on our own soil in some cases, but not for long.

In an ideal world, war would be eliminated, but that's not going to happen any more than is true the inanely insane comment I read from a political figure last week, "criminals will lay down their weapons when they see that others are unarmed."

The case where a government turns on its own people is what our right to bear arms is rooted in. Newspapers from the 1700s and documents quoting men like Washington, Franklin, Jefferson, Madison (see the Federalist Papers @ http://usgovinfo.about.com/library/fed/blfed46.htm

, No. 46 as an example), Mason, Webster, Henry, Story, Hamilton, and more explain the concept and the need well.

Today, it is through people working diligently by legal means that the right to bear arms in order to protect themselves and their families from criminals can be maintained. Yeste rday I heard that a recent move in Washington state to allow police to inspect private homes once a year for gun storage and impose amazingly stiff penalties for what they consider improper storage was defeated because someone was paying attention.

Fragmenting the right to bear arms is a growing crusade and the goal of some is to destroy the right. Realizing the consequences of being unarmed when governments act to prevent increasing (and threaten to reduce) the number of police available to meet growing needs is pretty good motivation for supporting the right to bear arms.

We will support those efforts or give up the right. Have you considered researching and writing about how to support the organizations and the legislators who are working to protect that right?


Jack Burton profile image

Jack Burton 3 years ago from The Midwest

Good to see a woman think about guns with reason and logic instead of pure emotion.


emilynemchick profile image

emilynemchick 3 years ago from Pittsburgh, PA

This is a well-considered article and I can certainly see your point of view. As an Englishwoman, I was raised in a country where guns are illegal so I am naturally inclined to dislike the gun culture in America.

Whilst I understand the feeling that guns provide protection, I feel that a culture which endorses guns is likely to breed a greater culture of gun violence. If you look at the people responsible for the tragic school shootings, the trend seems to be that of a maladjusted individual who has access to a gun rather than a dyed-in-the-wool criminal who would have a gun no matter what.

I also feel that having a gun around invites accidents to happen. Just today I read an article about a young boy who accidentally shot his 2-year old sister and killed her. This could never have happened in a culture where guns were not a normal fixture in every household.

Of course I respect an individual's right to take a different view, and your points were valid and well thought out. These are just my two cents.

    Sign in or sign up and post using a HubPages Network account.

    0 of 8192 characters used
    Post Comment

    No HTML is allowed in comments, but URLs will be hyperlinked. Comments are not for promoting your articles or other sites.


    Click to Rate This Article
    working