June 26, 2008

Guns: We Might Need them

The US Supreme Court decision striking down the District of Columbia law prohibiting possession of hand guns is likely to have far reaching implications. On a simple level, it means more guns in the hands of "the people." In view of the dictatorial direction of the US Government, driven by Bush's principles of unitary presidency, we might all need the guns to protect our constitution from internal threats. My attitude toward the elite Court's decision is "let us have guns.... if you're that stupid."

And, reading in the July/August 2008 issue of Mother Jones (pre-Court decision) we see that it has become easier to get an assault rifle, and .50-caliber sniper rifles in the US (a single .50-cliber round can cut a person in half). For only $89 you can be the proud owner of an oldie but goodie Soviet army SKS. No problem shooting through they type of body armor typically used by police officers. Now we're really talking protection of the constitution. Message? Don't be a stooge trooper for the elite minority that seeks to undermine the US constitution... 'cuz thar's guns in the hands of them thar people.

This commentary would have little meaning if I was your regular gun-toting Republican or Libertarian. But I'm originally from the Democratic Party fold, and more recently the Green Party fold. Society-watchers might want to take note. Things they are a change'n and it ain't 'cuz of Obama.



Anonymous said...

And you really think any number of progressives armed with automatic weapons are going to be victorious over the legions of Blackwater operatives?

Obviously, you haven't seen the last season of LOST.

GDAEman said...

Har Har. I was in Miami at the FTAA conference in November 2006. The trick is you don't go at them directly. Remember the lessons of the Revolutionary War.