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 Palm Harbor Patch readers had to say:
Kim: Ok. Until we are all in the militia, and the army's we have are disbanded and we (the militia) are the only protection the country has, then I will recognize gun appreciation day. "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" That doesn't mean that the "fringe" can take over and distort what the 2nd Amendment means. It was for militia's because Washington did not want a standing Army so the militia were the only protection our new country had. The British are NOT coming and seeing us with all of our gun violence, they are probably glad we chased them out. We are gun owners, but people do NOT understand the actual meaning behind the 2nd Amendment. Also, the weapons back then were single shot muskets, not semi-automatic weapons. If you want to use assault weapons, join the military. I've been there and done that too,
JaaaaaaayBeeeeeeeeee: When the 2nd Amendment was written, you had to load your gun a shot at a time. They didn't even have revolvers. I am a gun owner, but don't feel the need to own an automatic weapon. There has to be a line drawn somewhere. Anyone out there feel the need to own a heat-seeking missile in order to take down aircraft? .... I don't. The 2nd Amendment is do overdue for a review in light of modern technology.
What are your thoughts about Gun Appreciation Day? Share them in the comments section.
Harvey A. Smith
10:40 am on Thursday, January 17, 2013
Simple answer? I appreciate guns and highly value the 2nd Amendment right to own them. I just have a problem with some of the irresponsible and outright crazy trigger fingers out there who shouldn't be able to drive a car (another weapon) much less own a gun.
Al Navic
10:49 am on Thursday, January 17, 2013
If we don't have fire power how can we defend ourselves against tyranny?
Solutions to ending misuse of guns rest in preventing corrupted members of our society access to guns.
ROBERT LINDSAY
1:45 pm on Thursday, January 17, 2013
I admire people that are not afraid of the bad guys and not afraid of our government. They, like me, have no need for a gun in their homes. I believe that if you buy a gun to protect your home, that gun is more likely to kill a child than a bad guy.
Cheryl Jocobs
2:17 pm on Thursday, January 17, 2013
interesting how all of those here have forgotten history and what the Nazis did to the Germans. they did not loose all of their freedoms on one day... it was taken away little by little. The 2A is there so that we do not have to fear our own government.
Harvey A. Smith
5:14 pm on Thursday, January 17, 2013
All this misdirected rhetoric about gun control. Has anyone, anywhere, anytime talked about longer non-negotiable jail sentences for crimes committed with a gun? Of course not! How about the guy just sentenced for eight years for killing another man over a skateboard incident? Think he'll do the full eight years for taking another man's life in front of his daughter? Not a chance! There are non-violent criminals doing longer sentences than those who kill with guns. I wonder if the gun was legally owned and the killer had a carry permit? The liberal media doesn't care nor, apparently, does anyone else!
Danielle Knight
2:31 pm on Saturday, January 19, 2013
"I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials."
- George Mason
Father of the Bill of Rights
Co-Author of the Second Amendment
Source: Debates in Virginia Convention on Ratification of the Constitution, Elliot, Vol. 3, June 16, 1788
And as for the muzzle-loader argument, I suppose that if the second amendment only protects the right to own 18th Century weaponry, I suppose the first amendment only protects speech written with quill pens or manual printing presses. Oh, what a slippery slope your logic has created.