Some quotes for gun grabbers
Rep. John Lewis, D-Ga., in the wake of the Newtown, Conn., mass shooting, said: “The British are not coming. ... We don't need all these guns to kill people.”
Lewis' vision, shared by many, represents a gross ignorance of why the Framers of the Constitution gave us the Second Amendment. How about a few quotes from the period, and you decide whether our Founding Fathers harbored a fear of foreign tyrants.
Alexander Hamilton: “The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed,” adding later, “If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense, which is paramount to all positive forms of government.”
Thomas Jefferson: “What country can preserve its liberties if its rulers are not warned from time to time that their people preserve the spirit of resistance? Let them take arms.”
Lewis and like-minded people might dismiss these thoughts by saying the Founders were racist anyway.
Here's a more recent quote from a card-carrying liberal, the late Vice President Hubert H. Humphrey: “Certainly, one of the chief guarantees of freedom under any government, no matter how popular and respected, is the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms. ... The right of the citizen to bear arms is just one guarantee against arbitrary government, one more safeguard against the tyranny which now appears remote in America but which historically has proven to be always possible.”
I have many other Second Amendment references at econfaculty.gmu.edu/wew/quotes.html.
How about a couple of quotations with which Lewis and others might agree? “Armas para que?” (translated: “Guns, for what?”) by Fidel Castro. There's a more famous one: “The most foolish mistake we could possibly make would be to allow the subject races to possess arms. History shows that all conquerors who have allowed their subject races to carry arms have prepared their own downfall by so doing.” That was Adolf Hitler.
Here's the gun grabbers' slippery-slope agenda, laid out by Nelson T. Shields, founder of Handgun Control Inc.: “We're going to have to take this one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily — given the political realities — going to be very modest. ... Right now, though, we'd be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal — total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time” (The New Yorker, July 1976).
There have been people who've ridiculed the protections afforded by the Second Amendment, asking what chance would citizens have against the military might of the U.S. government. Military might isn't always the deciding factor. Our 1776 war of independence was against the mightiest nation on the face of the Earth — Great Britain. There are about 300 million privately held firearms owned by Americans. That's nothing to sneeze at. And notice that the people who support gun control are the very people who want to control and dictate our lives.
Walter Williams is a professor of economics at George Mason University.
Show commenting policy
TribLive commenting policy
You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.
We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.
While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.
We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers.
We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.
We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.
We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.
We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.
- Prime time not kind to Heinz Field
- Ferrante defense continues to question cyanide tests
- Starkey: Hockey hypocrites, unite
- Steelers offense puts up gaudy numbers in season’s 1st half
- Woman’s body found in Mars home
- Kennametal profit, sales improve in 1Q, but forecast reduced
- Penguins veteran defenseman Scuderi’s game looking up
- State police trooper seriously hurt when hit by vehicle in East Huntingdon
- Steelers notebook: Roethlisberger, offense must adjust with CB Smith out
- Fulbright Program gives Pine woman taste of Thailand
- Clairton police rounding up street-level drug dealers