Did the framers of the Bill of Rights consider personal protection?

Maybe they did.

One of the arguments against an individual's right to bear arms is that the second amendment needs to be interpreted in the context of the time in which it was written. Anti-gunners claim that the Bill of Rights was written with the idea of maintaining a militia against foreign forces (i.e. the British during the American Revolution) and not with giving individuals the right to own firearms for personal defense.

Anti-gunners also argue that we (people who favor gun rights) cannot claim that the second amendment could be about individual rights or personal protection since we could never really know what the people who wrote the Bill of Rights were thinking at the time.

Perhaps Thomas Jefferson disagreed when he borrowed a quote from the 1700's criminologist Cesare Beccaria: "The laws that forbid the carrying of arms .... disarm only those who are neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes. Such laws make things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants. They serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."

So people were thinking of personal defense against criminals well before modern times. Fascinating......

There is hope for America....

This is preliminary, but it looks as if our individual right to protect ourselves with firearms is alive and well. wOOt!!!

Foxnews.com: Supreme Court Strikes Down D.C. Gun Ban, Upholds Right to Keep and Bear Arms

Court: A constitutional right to a gun: "Answering a 127-year old constitutional question, the Supreme Court ruled on Thursday that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to have a gun, at least in one’s home. The Court, splitting 5-4, struck down a District of Columbia ban on handgun possession. Justice Antonin Scalia’s opinion for the majority stressed that the Court was not casting doubt on long-standing bans on gun possession by felons or the mentally retarded, or laws barring guns from schools or government buildings, or laws putting conditions on gun sales.

In District of Columbia v. Heller (07-290), the Court nullified two provisions of the city of Washington’s strict 1976 gun control law: a flat ban on possessing a gun in one’s home, and a requirement that any gun — except one kept at a business — must be unloaded and disassembled or have a trigger lock in place. The Court said it was not passing on a part of the law requiring that guns be licensed."

Great News For Criminals

An excellent article by one of my favorite political commentators and radio hosts, Tammy Bruce: Great News For Mass Murderers.

"Seattle Mayor Greg Nickels has signed an executive order to ban guns on all property owned by the city.

After the roar of approval from psychotic murderers died down, Nickels explained the new ban was necessary after a shooting at the Folklife Festival wounded two people at the Seattle Center.

You know how that works–make it illegal for law-abiding citizens to carry guns making them even more vulnerable to the beasts who don’t care about laws, also known as “criminals.” I do hate to break it to the mayor, but shooting people is also banned, but criminals do it anyway.

After years of certain cities finding their violent crime rates on the increase after banning firearms, we now have proof that gun bans actually create more violence and subject law-abiding citizen to more risk. — Just ask the people of Washington, D.C., who know all too well how banning guns simply broadcasts a message to violent criminals where the most vulnerable population lives. Just this week, the “gun-free zone” of D.C. (on whose handgun ban we still await the Supreme Court’s decision) has been reduced to implementing road blocks into certain neighborhoods in an attempt to stop, er, gun violence.

After all, it’s just so much easier to invade a home, jack a car, or murder someone when you know your victim won’t be able to protect herself. Despite the history of gun bans putting more people in danger, and to say nothing of the unconstitutionality of that act, politicians still have the gall to exploit instances of bad guys ignoring existing laws (like those against shooting people) to pass laws banning the best self-protection method we have.

Make no mistake–just as climate alarmism has nothing to do with fear over a 2-3 degree increase in temperatures and is simply a manufactured excuse for government to tax and fee us to death–the acts of criminals continue to be used as a manipulative excuse to disarm the law-abiding public while keeping government officials immune from the law, and well protected."

Man goes on killing spree (without a gun!)

Foxnews.com: Man Plows Into Crowd, Goes On Stabbing Rampage; 7 Reported Dead

One person with a weapon, properly trained, could have prevented a lot of this. Of course, Japan has incredibly strict gun control laws. Maybe they should also ban trucks and knives, too?

I don't mean to make light of the killings. The killings are horrible but the reality is (in my mind, at least) that without Japan's strict laws which limit the right to protect yourself (i.e. strict gun control), the outcome could have been a lot different.

Kenyan Chaos

In addition to my watching the upcoming Florida primary, I've been keeping an eye on what has been going on in Kenya. After a heavily disputed presidential election, Kenya has descended into chaos reminiscent of Rwanda in the early 1990's.

Gunfire Rings Out in West Kenyan Streets; At Least 25 Bodies Taken to Mortuary

There are many reports of defenseless people having their homes burned down and family members being killed solely based on which ethnic group to which they belong (and thus assumed presidential choice). Whole towns have been torched and places of refuge have been attacked and burned. All the reports say the Kenyan military and police are trying to restore order. The police and military may be trying very hard to maintain order however, it is apparent that the peace can't be kept everywhere. There are also a few reports of the military being complicit in some of the violence.

I am often accused of having a one track mind (guns, guns, guns and complaining about excessive government control over our daily lives), so, not surprisingly, I decided to look into the gun laws in Kenya because it seems that many of these poor people are defenseless. If I had a mob of anyone threatening my family its pretty obvious I would stand my ground as long as possible and do everything imaginable to protect my wife and 2 children.

I can't seem to find much regarding Kenyan gun control but I did find articles that stated that in Kenya, "All guns are banned, including toys guns that look like guns" and "In both countries (Kenya and Uganda) gun possession is illegal except for a politically favored elite."

There are many instances of where I believe that Africans could (have) better defend(ed) themselves and their families were it not for government bans on civilian gun ownership. Rwanda, Uganda and Darfur often come to mind.

Just to be clear, I am in support of average law-abiding citizens having the right to own firearms. I am in favor of some of the current laws where felons cannot own guns and where the commission of certain crimes with guns provide for greater penalties (as for murder, murder is murder whether it be by machete, vehicular or firearm, no need for "gun control" there). But I see no reason why law-abiding citizens cannot own weapons for target shooting or self-defense. And in my one track mind's opinion, most gun control only disarms law-abiding citizens.

My favorite carry piece

Here's a pic of my favorite "carry" weapon, my .45 caliber Taurus PT-145 Millenium Pro. Although Taurus may have had some issues with their semi-automatics in the past, this weapon has performed exceptionally well at the range. It shoots anything I feed it (I must have put over 2,000 rounds through it by now and no misfires, even with crappy ammo).

For the purposes of personal protection, I carry Federal Hydra-Shok hollow points.