Screen Shot 2013-02-08 at 7.27.01 AMHere are some questions for those trying to dump the second amendment…

If read, the first 4 amendments to the constitution answer most of the questions being raised by gun-o-phobics….

I. Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

II. 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.

III. No Soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the Owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

IV. The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no Warrants shall issue,but upon probable cause, supported by Oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.

A few questions about banning guns:

Should congress ban “the free exercise of religion” since it has been misused for Jihad or terrorism? How about limiting the number of worshipers allowed?

Should congress ban “the freedom of speech” for politically incorrect views or should all have the right ‘to keep and bear’ views contrary to others?

Should congress ban “the freedom of the press” (and limit their magazine sizes) because of copy-cat criminals who imitate their news reports?

Was the second amendment written about sporting rifles and gun collectors or was it written so that each civilian could protect “their persons, houses, papers, and effects”?

Is a “well regulated Militia” usually armed with bows an arrows, or with the most effective military arms available?

Were these rights considered to be temporary or are they necessary to the security of a free State?

Do countries with gun control eliminate terrorism, massacres and crime?

Were these amendments designed to encourage public massacres or to defend public freedom and safety?

Do individual criminal acts negate the rights and freedoms of the public or should criminals be restricted by “A well regulated Militia”?

If human rights are suspended by advances in weaponry, then does the freedom of the press not apply to modern forms of communication?

The clear purpose of the Second Amendment was so that each civilian could arm themselves with state-of-the-art military-capable weapons in order to fight against would-be tyrants to protect their life, liberty and property with the most effective advanced contemporary military arms available.