My Freemasonry | Freemason Information and Discussion Forum

Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

Public knowledge

Belcher

Registered User
This might be a little off topic but what is your take on the up coming gun ban set in to motion by the Obama administration. In relation to the 2nd amendment. Will it have any effect on the reduction in the crime rate. ( gun bans effect law abiding citizens not criminals) what are your thoughts.
 

widows son

Premium Member
It's stupid. It's only bandaid over the symptom, and not addressing the cause. It's just another excuse to strip one from their civil liberties. I'm canadian, but if I was an American id do everything in my power to prevent that from happening. Owning guns is the last line of defense a person has for protection. The original reason was for the protection against foreigners and from ones own government. If Americans lose the right to own a gun, God help us all.
 

crono782

Premium Member
This might be a little off topic but what is your take on the up coming gun ban set in to motion by the Obama administration. In relation to the 2nd amendment. Will it have any effect on the reduction in the crime rate. ( gun bans effect law abiding citizens not criminals) what are your thoughts.

Statistics show that 3 US cities with the strictest gun control laws also have the highest murder rates (Chicago, DC, and NYC) and most officers killed by gunfire. Coincidence?

I would posit that stricter gun control keeps guns out of casual owners' hands. Criminals will certainly find a way to obtain guns by other means (and is almost a given that organized crime will seek out black market guns that cannot be traced to the owner anyway). Think of this in much the same analogy as door locks only keep honest people honest; locks are inherintly subject to fault and thus picking. A criminal WILL enter if they are determined enough.

EDIT: I would also posit that to "ban" guns is to repeal the 2nd amendment which seriously is very unlikely to happen in this country. I would suggest more likely is unfairly high cost on permits to carry or even requiring a permit to own, per round ammunition tax, etc effectively making it financially not feasable for the average joe to own a gun without losing face by directly attacking the 2nd amendment.
 
Last edited:

Belcher

Registered User
Gun don't kill poeple, stupid people kill people. Why don't thay ban cars drunk drivers use them every day to kill thousand. How about pencils for misspellings words. Why not ban MC Donald's for making America fat. Those are are careless choices that someone made. Why not blame the Dr.that give them the the happy pills or the judge that let him off with a slap on the wrist. Tired of the lawmakers punishing the hard working law abiding citizens. We need to stand-up and take back the America our for fathers fought and died for. Protect the constitution and bill of rights. This country was built on morals and pride and it seam we lost that somewhere along the way........
 

CTx Mason

Registered User
If we allow these people to use their rights to vote our rights away, eventually no one will have any rights.

History has shown us time and again what happens to a disarmed people. Not only would we be completely vulnerable to the criminal elements in society, we would also be completely under the boot of a tyrannical government.
A gun ban will be ineffective in preventing crime, and it would destabilize those areas that are most restrictive.

I will have to be killed before I give up my only means of defense.
 

CajunTinMan

Registered User
I read today That Obama is considering a petition to label the Westboro church as a hate group and to take away their tax exempt status. I can't express enough how much I hate what these people stand for, how much I hate the message they're trying to send. They are undoubtedly the worst kind of hate group. I think most Christians would agree with this. I wish these people would find the truth in their hearts and stop doing these horrendous acts in the name of God. I don't support their actions in anyway and would be happy to stand between them and a funeral of one of our soldiers. But calling on the government to take away their rights of free speech because it's unpopular is very dangerous ground. If we start taking away peoples rights to free speech because we don't like the message where does it stop? Where do we draw the line? Who will decide what churches or individuals should be able to speak out against? We already have the government considering denying constitutional rights to large segments of our population based on the actions of a few. The government has taken away the right to a trial and decided that it can hold American citizens indefinitely in the name of Homeland defense. They have already taken away our rights to protest around the White House and around other government or UN functions in the name of security. Do we really want to ask the government to limit our rights any further?
 

THurse

Premium Member
My mentor, has taught me that as much as their are commonalities, their are differences and the changes will always occur. This is why we are a strong fraternity.Their will always be difference of opinions, changes in laws and so forth. Remember this saying from a good movie. Life is like a box of chocolates you never know what your gonna get.
 

THurse

Premium Member
When I first moved to Australia, their was a massive shooting and unfortunately their were thirty one fatalities, including children. The Prime Minister, at the time enforced the gun law. Their was a disagreement of the decision, but it did not escalate to something as horrible as the incident. Their is still violence in regards to other weapons, or hand to hand. This decision could be good or bad, but their will always be changes.
 

CTx Mason

Registered User
Bro. Cajun: no, we should have drawn the line when they use the excuse of security or safety or "the Greater Good" to limit our rights and power as a free people.

The question is: what do we do about it? Wait until the next election? Ignore voter suppression and outright fraud?
 

widows son

Premium Member
Westboro is a hate group period. Does your constitution say freedom for hate groups who claim they are a religion? Because that is exactly what they are. An excuse. An excuse to spread their outdated, nonsensical ideals which if we're enacted would cause so much suffering and brooding. It's a tough decision to make. But does free speech include hate? The idea of a free people represents among other things, the highest of moral standards, where does Westboro fit into this?
 

BryanMaloney

Premium Member
"Hate groups" are still covered under the First Amendment in the USA so long as they do not violate the "fighting words" doctrine.
 

jwhoff

Premium Member
"Hate groups" are still covered under the First Amendment in the USA so long as they do not violate the "fighting words" doctrine.


I'd like to say "Barely covered, but covered indeed."

I'd also like to say, from this corner, they are despicable!

Me no gusto!
 

CajunTinMan

Registered User
Westboro is a hate group period. Does your constitution say freedom for hate groups who claim they are a religion? Because that is exactly what they are. An excuse. An excuse to spread their outdated, nonsensical ideals which if we're enacted would cause so much suffering and brooding. It's a tough decision to make. But does free speech include hate? The idea of a free people represents among other things, the highest of moral standards, where does Westboro fit into this?

Free speech is a tough pill to swallow. But sometimes you have to take the bad with the good. Lately bikers have been shutting them down at funerals. God bless those bikers.
 
Top