.

Gun Appreciation Day: What’s West Pasco Saying?

Gun supporters are asking people all over the county to stand up for the Second Amendment on Jan. 19. West Pasco residents have their own opinions about the issue.

As Gun Appreciation Day approaches, people are lining up on both sides of the issue to state their opinions and make their stands.

The national movement is being recognized Jan. 19 as a call for gun supporters across the country to let Washington, D.C., know they don’t want their rights tampered with.

We recently asked people across the Tampa Bay area for their opinions about the movement. Here’s what New Port Richey Patch readers had to say:


"Assault weapon" is a term made up by anti-gun politicians with no fixed definition. I reject any arguments based upon it as both technically uninformed and biased before the fact.
Your claim that no one uses any weapon ever defined as such for self-defense is flatly false; in fact, these are by many metrics the most popular weapons for self-defense in America.
Finally, your comparison to nuclear weapons is silly; these are not defensive in nature, except on a strategic scale, and nuclear material is an environmental hazard and thus separately regulated by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission. But why do I care if my neighbor has a tank? How does that infringe upon my freedoms—unless he commits a crime with them, which is already on the books? Do you think the Second Amendment wasn't meant to let people have cannons? Because I have news for you: it was militia-held cannons and gunpowder, kept in private barns and a firehouse, that the British tried to confiscate—and that touched off the American revolution. The Founding Fathers experienced, and were referring to, exactly this.

-  JN

Why is the second amendment non negotiable? It is not the bible of America written by God through devine inspiration through the pen hand of man. If the Govenment chooses to repeal it ( they won't do that, BUT ) they can. If you don't like it, you can pick up your Gun & give the Govenment the motivation & excuse to pry it out of your cold dead hand. Good luck taking on light atomic artillary fired at you from jet aircraft straffing your house. An athrax canister, or two will end your revolutionary pipe dream real fast. How about armored personel carriers at your front door?
Do you have a way to escape the light atomic Tomakawk smart missel that will get you? In Tom Jefferson's day, rebellion was an option. Today, napalm & agent orange would be the least of your problems.

-  Michael Mirra

We need to look at history and when the 2nd Amendment was written. We had just kicked the Brits out and the country was afraid that they would invade again, which they did do after we tried to invade Canada in 1812, the first war we didn't win. The Brits burned parts of DC and then left. It was technically a "tie." Eventhough we sent anyone who supported the crown packing, confiscating their property, money, and many walked up to Canada or to the nearest boat dock. The Founding Fathers talked about the right to bear arms and a "well regulated militia." Well they weren't sure that all of the "loyalists" had left and maybe they would start a counter-revolution. It's fascinating history. Everyone would be allowed a musket fine and dandy. Now over the years this has gotten out of hand, muskets turned into pistols, pistols into semi-automatics, and what's next then? If I have the right to bear arms then I'd like to have missiles and grenade launchers and maybe an F-15 for my protection! It's my right! I don't think the gov will do away with the right to bear arms, that's just b.s. from paranoid people. I have never owned a gun, am too old to start now, and have never been shot at or robbed. I live my life without fear. Should we have common sense gun ownership and some rules? HELL YES! How is getting rid of semi-automatics stopping you from protecting yourself? I know of a man in town who goes to a shrink and has a concealed weapon permit. And he's a nut! There's the problem....

-  Grace

"Who are the militia? Are they not ourselves?
Is it feared, then, that we shall turn our arms each man gainst his own bosom. Congress have no power to disarm the militia. Their swords, and every other terrible implement of the soldier, are the birthright of an American.... [T]he unlimited power of the sword is not in the hands of either the federal or state governments, but, where I trust in God it will ever remain, in the hands of the people." (Tench Coxe, The Pennsylvania Gazette, Feb. 20, 1788.)

-  Samuel Clemens

What are your thoughts about Gun Appreciation Day? Share them in the comments section.

joe schlabotnik January 17, 2013 at 01:18 PM
@Grace - your last two sentences make the case we who don't want our rights trampled have been espousing, its not the guns, it's the people with mental illness. Thank you!
Ellen Rivers Wilkinson Drane January 17, 2013 at 01:25 PM
Yes, I do live in fear. I feat to my children in school to the point that I now homeschooling them. I fear every time I leave to shop. These are the end times and I shall protect my family!!!
Evelyn Hayes January 17, 2013 at 02:10 PM
Teach gun safety at an early age. It includes respect for living things and awareness of real consequences.
Robert Faughnan January 17, 2013 at 02:52 PM
Any discussion on limiting our second amendment rights needs to keep in mind that what you are doing is limiting the ability of a single mother from protecting her children. Any criminal is not going to obey the law and limits on what is available are only going to affect what a law abiding citizen has access to. How many bullets are you going to allow in a magazine for a woman defending herself and her children? How many bullets can an elderly man have to defend his wife? If that is not part of the discussion then no limits should be placed. There is no question that those with mental illness should not have a gun - I would almost say those with mental illness should not have free speech rights either but that is another issue. In the end if you do not want a gun do not buy one but be careful before you call for a right to be taken away that you do not care about - the ones you do care about could be next.
mike jones January 17, 2013 at 05:12 PM
The 19th is MLK day who stood for peace. What a disgrace to have weapons that kill appreciated on that day or any.
michael mirra January 17, 2013 at 05:22 PM
What part of nobody is talking about taking away guns don't these people understand? All that is being said is that guns are dangerous to people in the wrong hands & that something must be implimented to help limit the access of guns to people unfit to have them. We keep saying that & they go off on some wild rants about trashing the constitution, impeachment, their rights to have a small armory in their homes, etc. I give up. it isn't possible to reason with insanity.
J N January 17, 2013 at 05:42 PM
Grace asks in the quoted comments: "How is getting rid of semi-automatics stopping you from protecting yourself?" Grace, perhaps you should learn what "semi-automatic" means. I offer the following website for everyone who wants to learn something: http://www.assaultweapon.info/ This site will make clear to you the following facts: semi-automatic fire means one round per one pull of the trigger, is the most common mode of fire in firearms available to Americans in 2013 and subsequently the most common choice among them for defense. The answer to your question should thus be self-evident. Michael Mirra said the following: "Good luck taking on light atomic artillary fired at you from jet aircraft straffing your house. An athrax canister, or two will end your revolutionary pipe dream real fast. How about armored personel carriers at your front door? Do you have a way to escape the light atomic Tomakawk smart missel that will get you? In Tom Jefferson's day, rebellion was an option. Today, napalm & agent orange would be the least of your problems." First, if you think this is a nation that will fire nuclear-tipped cruise missiles at civilians for owning something that was both Constitutional and recently legal to purchase, you're proposing some nightmare dystopia as if it doesn't bother you. Yes, Americans would fight back in such a scenario. If you're so sure they'd have no chance, explain the difficulties against poorly-armed insurgents abroad...
Jimmy James II January 17, 2013 at 06:09 PM
Criminals will hesitate because of fear they might encounter someone who has a gun.
michael mirra January 17, 2013 at 07:35 PM
JN, I proposed that senerio because people like you talk about rising up in revolution like they are chomping at the bit to bring it on. I'm just stating what you might be up against. You mention that we weren't able to conqure poorly armed insurgents. In Nam, & Iraq our national security was never at risk. Vietnam was never going to even begin to threaten American security, as neither was Iraq. The Government's involvment in Nam was to save American Capitilistic investment there that would be lost by Communism taking it all. In Iraq we wanted to establish a puppet government to join our other satalite country, Isreal, in this stratigic part of the world. In Afganistan, we are there to school the local authorities to fight their own battles. If American traitors rise up, & look like they could actually threaten the Government's hold of power, Government will use everything at their disposal to defeat the enemy within that can dethrone them. You people call Obama the devil, but you expect him to wear kid gloves when fighting you. They'll squash you real fast if you ever become a ligititimate threat.
J N January 17, 2013 at 09:19 PM
I plan no armed revolution, so let's not pretend I suggested any such thing. But for the record, if you think anything like a majority of American servicemen will lock and load on some civilian who happens to legally and safely own and operate a firearm that makes Feinstein nervous, you put a lot less faith in our servicemen than I do. Or did you think none of them owned firearms privately?
michael mirra January 17, 2013 at 09:37 PM
I didn't say they would lock & load on some civilian who happens to own a fire arm & I didn't say that YOU plan a revolution. I'm sorry if you misunderstood. When I said people like you, I was refering to people that talk about armed resistence to the United States Government in armed insurrection because they think it is their right to alter, or abolish the Govenment because THEY decided it is destuctive to the ends for which it was created. Listen to Alex Jones talking about 1776 all over again as he screams about it along with Ted Nuget. The Government won't shoot people that have guns unless those people fire on the Government troops first. If a solder is in a tank in a Waco, or Ruby Ridge senerio & a 'civilian' comes up on his vehicle with a molitov cocktail, I have no question he would shoot to kill the civilian.
bill stanton January 18, 2013 at 02:57 AM
ok so what u saying is legal game hunting aint legal wrong it is
bill stanton January 18, 2013 at 02:59 AM
the criminals there all cowards any ways when they robb some one the bad guys are always running away
michael mirra January 18, 2013 at 03:23 AM
For the first time in my life I have a respect for Reagan. He actually came out AGAINT assault weapons. He supported the Brady Bill . George (Big Daddy) Bush, resigned his lifelong membership in the NRA back in the 1990s. How did the Republican Party deviate from Reaganism who they idolize? Has the Rush/Hannity factor perverted the Republicans?

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something