Since the carnage at fort Hood last week, To hear some people tell it, radical Muslim and Army psychiatrist Nidal Malik Hasan did not kill people – his guns alone did. It was not his radical religion the guns are to blame. The gun control nuts are having a ball with this tragedy and loss of life. This happens every time when people like Hasan kills and spreads terror with a fire arm. Honest gun owners pay the price every time. According to Chicago Mayor Richard Daley – who is now arguing to the U.S. Supreme Court for the power to disarm law-abiding people in Chicago – it was not Maj. Hasan's radical Muslim beliefs that drove him to murder innocent colleagues; it was the fact that "America loves guns." Daley explained, "We love guns to a point that we see the devastation on a daily basis." What turnip truck did this man fall off? Put him back in the turnip patch. Was it Hasan's love for guns or his love for a radical religion that caused him to kill. Anyone that has just the smallest amount of sense will tell you that it was not his love for guns, but his belief in radical Islam that caused him to commit these murders. The Brady Campaign to Prevent Gun Violence also jumped at the chance to blame guns first, this is what they said two days after the shootings, " This latest tragedy, at a heavily fortified Army base, ought to convince more Americans to reject the argument that the solution to gun violence is to arm more people with more guns in more places. Enough is enough." By their twisted reasoning, America's love of airplanes led to the attacks on the World Trade Center and the Pentagon. The solution to stopping the 9/11 Islamic terrorists, you see, was fewer people in fewer airplanes in fewer places. As for Fort Hood, the Brady Campaign got it one hundred per cent backwards. Thanks to a 1993 Clinton imposed presidential order, Army posts are an anti-gun supporter's dream, a miniature copy of a "gun-free" society: Only the police are allowed to carry weapons, service weapons are signed out only for training or maintenance, and any personal weapons must be kept locked and registered with the base provost marshal. Strangely, the same soldiers whom we trust with automatic weapons in Afghanistan and Iraq are not allowed to carry weapons on an American post or base. Some of the soldiers just came back from those places, carried guns everyday while over there. And yet all such "gun-control," which the Brady Campaign-types support, did nothing to stop Hasan from sneaking in two personal handguns. Killers with no regard for other people's lives are hardly going to obey at anti-gun rules. Gun control only controls and limits the law-abiding not the people who want to kill, maim, and slaughter. Gun control laws are worthless as the paper that they are written on! Despite being "heavily fortified," Fort Hood had an unarmed population living under a deadly mixture of a false sense of security and no means of self-defense. They were sitting ducks. We as Americans also live under a false sense of security and for the most part we are sitting ducks also. While soldiers should never have to worry about attacks from one of their own, forcing them to be unarmed makes them more vulnerable to traitors and saboteurs than the embattled enemy that they fight. Maj. Hasan knew this, and to maximize his evil plot he did not attack the armed MPs or the civilian police department, This cowardly man attacked dozens of soldiers and officers at the Soldier Readiness Center whom he knew would be unarmed. And they were unarmed precisely because of the "gun-control" measures at Ft. Hood. So where is the logic for gun control here? Our college campuses has to put up and deal with the same deadly "gun-control" policies. On April 16, 2007, Virginia Tech student Seung-Hui Cho, armed with a pair of handguns, massacred 32 students and faculty and injured another 25. Even then, the anti-gun fanatics rose up and condemned the guns. But Virginia Tech's campus, like most colleges, was a so-called "gun-free zone" where students and faculty were not permitted to carry weapons. This made people on Virginia Tech's campus, like those at Fort Hood, an easy target for a lone, suicidal, jihad juiced, gun-wielding murderer. What the Brady Campaign failed to mention is that it took "gun violence" to stop the gun violence at Fort Hood and Virginia Tech. It was police officers, with guns, that brought down Hasan last week; and it took armed police breaking into the building where Cho had barricaded himself before he took his own life. But that means that until the armed police arrived, Hasan shot 42 people and Cho shot 57. Remember the church, in the mid west last year when a lone gunman shot someone outside and then went inside where he was meet by a off duty female security guard, who took her handgun out of her handbag and shot him. If she was not there, with her handgun, how many people would have been killed or wounded before the gunman was stopped? Would it have been as many as the 42 people that Hasan shot or the 57 people that Cho shoot, or would it have been worse? The Bradys and Daleys, of this country, need to answer that question, but they never will. The question must be asked: "How much sooner would either spree have ended had any one of the hundreds of other soldiers or students (or even faculty) been armed?" How many more unarmed victims in "gun-free" zones or cities must die before some of these foolish gun laws are changed? Thomas Paine explained that the erroneous belief of the peace loving Quakers was their failure to account for the fallen nature of man: He Said this : "Could the peaceable principle of the Quakers be universally established, arms and the art of war would be wholly removed: But we live not in a world of angels. … I am thus far a Quaker, that I would gladly agree with all the world to lay aside the use of arms, and settle matters by negotiation: but unless the whole will, the matter ends, and I take up my musket and thank heaven He has put it in my power. "The problem is not weapons, be they firearms, knives, or fists, the problem is that man has sinned and fallen short of the glory of God." Well spoken Thomas Paine! With each news report about Maj. Hasan, it becomes more evident and unmistakable that political correctness handicapped the resolve of the Army and federal agencies to sufficiently and adequately investigate him and for them to respond to the many indicators of his increasingly radical Muslim beliefs. Radical Islamic terrorists belong in front sights of our troops, not among them. Hopefully, America and her armed forces have finally learned that radical Muslims ought to be purged, not promoted. Nor should we be led to believe the politically correct lie that taking guns out of law-abiding hands is the solution and the answer to stop the use of guns by the wrong people. A "gun-control" law stops bullets as effectively as the paper it's printed upon. Until the homicidal psychopaths and the radical juiced up jihadists of the world "lay aside the use of fire arms" (or airplanes, or IEDs, etc.), the right of the people, students and soldiers to keep and bear arms should not be infringed upon.

A week ago there was a terrorist attack on one of our military bases which was the worst act of terrorism since 911. Even though our government fails to call it what it was, terrorism plain and simple.  It appears that it’s not enough for our government that America’s armed forces risk their lives overseas defending our freedom. These days, our soldiers aren't even safe here at home stationed on secure military bases. 

On November 5th, a lone gunman murdered 13 fully-trained, ready to deploy soldiers, and wounded 29 more, in the most shocking terrorist attack on American soil since 9/11. Why was this shocking incident allowed to take place? On an army base with all the trained men and women, the best trained in the world, with all the weapons why was this allowed to happen? How was Nidal Hasan able to take down so many trained soldiers before he was stopped? The answer is simple: The base was a “gun-free safe zone.” Gun-free zones only help provide helpless targets for terrorist and mass murders.

It is because this government thinks it is better to keep its armed service members unarmed. That sounds silly, even stupid but the truth is the military men and woman of this country are prohibited and forbidden from carrying the weapons they are trained and trusted to use in the heat of battle on base. President Clinton was the person behind this thoughtless and foolish policy back in 1993 when he declared all military bases “Gun Free Zones.” We can trust theses men and women to fight our countries’ battles and to stop aggression, but we cannot trust them with guns on base. Now what is wrong with that picture? As a result of this thirteen people were killed and thirty more were wounded. The United States is in a war and we must take all the measures to protect our military and the civilian population that is possible. We must take measures like Israel. You do not see any gun-free zones in that tiny country. You see a country’s’ population ready for anything.  

“Gun Free Zones” do nothing but reassure and guarantee criminals, and now terrorists, that they will find unarmed victims defenseless and helpless against their murderous and bloodthirsty rampage. It is easy to shoot at somebody that cannot shoot back. This must stop and people must wake up. If strict measures are not taken the same thing that happen at Fort Hood could happen in your home town and even on your door step. If guns are band, which by the way is right around the corner, how will the average citizen protect their self from people like Nidal Hasan. These people, with their ideology and beliefs  are living in every small town and city in our country. With all due respect, how fast would your police department’s response time be? Will it befast enough to save your life and the lives of your love ones, or would you end up like the soldiers at Fort Hood? Who knows where or how many sleeper cells are in this country. The government, actually, tells the American people very little about this. How can we count on a government that will not even call terrorist what they are: “TERRORIST”

Maybe I’m crazy, as some that read this might think, but I’d would have rather the soldiers delivered a barrage of bullets to end Hasan’s attack the second he opened fire. I’d rather Hasan was dead and the heroes he murdered were still alive. I rather for him to be dead instead of the thirty injured people that were shot by him and some critical. This is exactly what would have happen if they were allowed to carry their weapons. By the way soldiers go through more firearms training than the local police departments and yet it was the local police department that took this man down. They were allowed to carry guns on the base but the soldiers are not.

But because of Clinton’s ingenious policy of an unarmed armed force, this psychopathic terrorist, Nidal Hasan, systematically and methodically executed soldier after soldier before the local police could arrive on the scene. If we didn't have “Gun Free Zones” and our armed forces were armed, Nadir Hasan would have met bullets instead of bodies. He would have been dead instead of the brave soldiers that are. 

I just read the article in the Salisbury Times about their Gang problem. It was a very interesting article. Even though it was a very good and well written article she is behind times, because so many people in the Salisbury area have been commenting on this very subject in the paper for years. That is the way it is, the voice of the common folks are mostly never heard. It is a shame when gangs (who you know are armed) roam Salisbury and honest people have no way of defending their self because of federal and state gun control laws that are really worthless. Honest people are at the mercy of the bad guy and guess what, the bad guy knows this. The problem of gun control and gangs, home invasions, murder, and robbery will soon get much worse. The lawless people will have guns and the honest people will have none. You cannot count on the police because even though they do a good job this problem will soon over whelm them. They are only so many police officers. How are we to defend ourselves? The honest citizen will soon not be allowed to own a firearm, if Obama and Holder get their way, let alone be allowed to carry one. In some towns and states in this country it is legal to carry fire arms and in those states crime is way down. I wonder why. We do not need such as in the old wild west days but we do need to be safe in our homes and walking down the street. What good is the courts? 80% of the time they slap the criminals on the wrist instead of bringing the full weight of the law down on then.

The real news is that as the things in this world get worse, so will the gangs. You may laugh but the problems of this world have steadily got worse. There are parts of certain cities, across this nation, that police will not even go unless they go in force. Who is protecting the citizen in these areas? And now we have a federal government who wants to dismantle our country piece by piece. The gang problem, in Salisbury or anywhere else in this country, will not get any better until the borders are sealed and the flow of illegal people are stopped. We do not need to stop Mexico's drug war for them. We have our own problems and Mexico is the cause of a lot of them. We can blame the gang problem on whatever we want but it will not get any better until the citizens unite and demand a change. Not Obama's kind of change, but a change of our values and how things are done to keep the honest person safe. Everything is done for the criminal in this country and the honest man is screwed most of the time. Until we change the soft laws we have on crime and do away with gun control laws, that are useless, these problems will not stop but get worse. You may say the courts are overcrowded and they are, but why? They are overcrowded because of so many repeat offenders who will break the law over and over again because they know for the most part our court systems are a joke. For the most part it is not the judges and court officials but it is the rules and guidelines that they have to go by. These guide lines are made up and passed by people that we have elected to government. These people not only tie your hands they even tie the hands of law enforcement with some of their silly laws.

I do not want to sound like a prophet of doom and gloom, but we have not seen nothing yet. As if the crimes in this country are not getting worse we have a federal government that wants to give the enemy terrorist their rights when they are captured. How stupid! Who knows what laws that are in effect that would land you in jail for shooting someone who breaks into your home. We have some twisted laws that are just plain out and out foolish. I live in the country and anytime that I have called the police their response time has always been at least fifteen minutes. By that time a person could be seriously hurt or killed by a intruder. It is not the police officers fault there is only so many of them to cover a large area. So the question is do you just stand there and let the intruder do what they want or run to another room until the police come,  as most of the government law makers will tell you to do, or do you defend and protect yourself? If someone tries to break in my house, if Bruce (my dog) does not get them my shotgun will. Let me give you a short story, that I once read over the internet, and you tell me which one you are! 

 Picture yourself walking down the street with your family one night and a terrorist or a gang member came out of the shadows with intentions to rob you and do you and your family bodily harm. Which of the following three are you? (1) A LIBERAL sees the bad guy coming with his weapon drawn and he begins to question himself if there is enough lighting in the area, is there some way that I could reason with him, we need new gun laws, maybe if we run some of us could get away, do I have time to call the police? (2) A CONSERVATIVE sees the bad guy coming and he pulls out a handgun and starts to think, will I get in trouble if I shoot him, if I go to jail, for shooting this bad guy, will my family be okay? Who will take care of them with me in jail?(3) THE ONE THAT CLING TO HIS BIBLE AND GUNS sees the guy coming pulls out his Glock 45 and then you hear BANG! BANG! BANG! over and over again, then a empty clip hitting the ground. The family is safe and wait for the police to arrive. No more bad guy.

Sad to say some reading this will say that that is a dangerous and bad story but I would say this to you: In times past when most people, in this country, were like the number three guy in the above story there was a lot less crime in this country and it was basically safe to walk our streets. As this nation gets more and more violent all Americans need to know how to protect their self. Let the empty clip fall to the ground instead of you. Let the criminal know and understand that crime never pays and let him know that you will defend you and your family. 

Here a little and there a little we are losing our freedoms in this country and most Americans cannot even see it. They just go with the flow. Our Founding Fathers recognized and knew that the armed common folk was the greatest and most effective means of defense against an oppressive government, which explains why most liberal Democrats have been trying to do away with the Second Amendment for years. To do away with a free people’s firearms is instant people control. They are no longer free. History proves that. As the United States spirals toward a one world government we are losing our means of defending that 2nd amendment more every day. We are so close to a one world government that it could happen in the very near future. Obama has czars that want a one world government, so you know what they are working for, unrestrained, answering only to Obama. We now have a president who will give this nation away in a heartbeat and even though he will not admit it he is not for gun ownership. What he is for, is total control over everything. We do not need or want a dictator (someone who wants to be in total control) or a dictatorial government that rules over everybody and everything. A government ruling with absolute power over a population has always presented the greatest danger to the citizens of any nation, Our Freedoms that was put forth in the Declaration that come from God have always been despised and hated by evil and ignorant men. I can think of no other time in our nation’s history when our God given rights and freedoms have been endangered by a list of statistics and worthless gun control laws, as well as other worthless laws, by liberal politicians, communist, and socialist, who hate every building block upon which our nation rests. We have people that have been elected to our government at all levels that hate this country and would tear it down if they could. And if they need help in doing it the Obama appointed Czars will help in tearing it down. We have a president and a attorney general who are one hundred per cent behind gun control and other laws that take away your freedom. What is the real purpose of gun control? The government would have you to believe it is to prevent crime and for the peoples best interest. The states and cities in this country that have the most strictest gun laws, that is where crime is the highest. For example, Washington, DC and Chicago. The government is using gun control laws to do what they want. It is for people control. Gun registration allows the government to know that you own guns, what kind they are and where you live. THAT INFORMATION should be none of their business. Most of the present gun laws are not to keep the citizen safe even though that is what they would have you to believe. These laws were made to lay the ground work for the government to knock at your door and taking every gun that you have and it will come to that very thing in the near future. Keep an eye on the development of the Obama Civilian Security Force (what was once known as the "Gestapo" a little over 60 years ago in a country called Germany). He said this security force would only be answerable to him. When these people start showing up, it'll will be all over. You will have to turn over your fire arms because it will be the law. The new Attorney General's Guidelines for Domestic (within the United States) FBI Operations authorize the FBI without going to a court to open a investigation and to give an assessment of any American without any exact information based on fact to open that investigation. Such 'assessments' allow the use of invasive practices to secretly and underhandedly collect information on people suspected of no wrongdoing and in no way are connected with any foreign entity. What is happening here is the total loss of our freedom. Obama has expressed no objections to these far-reaching revisions of the Constitution in a founding document he used to educate students about it at the University of Chicago. His attorney general, Eric Holder, said during his Senate confirmation hearing: "The guidelines are necessary because the FBI is changing its mission from a pure investigating agency to one that deals with national security." This the same Eric Holder who said, while George W. Bush was president: "I never thought that I would see the day when a president would act in direct defiance of federal law by authorizing warrantless NSA (National Security Agency) surveillance of American citizens." Obama now has a unrestrained FBI and it will get even worse if he is allowed to start his national security force. The Second Amendment was designed as a way for the people to maintain their freedom by giving them the tools to resist repressive government. Doing away with or changing the 2nd amendment will be the cause of all our other rights to be taken from us. Gun ownership (the right to bear arms) was never about hunting or stopping a burglar even though they are certainly a great benefit of gun ownership and always will be. The greatest danger to life and our freedoms in this world is government. That has always been the case. Down through the years it has always been that way. For examples look at Russia, China, Germany, Cambodia and on and on. Now we are seeing the same thing in this country. I think that it is now being called: “CHANGE”. And that change is from a capitalist form of government to a communist form of government. Making sure the government knows the population is fully capable of resisting goes a long way toward keeping that government on the right track. There is always a cost for freedom. The price is always high. Being unwilling to accept the cost guarantees the loss of freedom. A dictator or a dictatorial government has always presented the greatest danger to the citizens of any country including ours, Our Freedoms listed in the Declaration that come from God have always been despised by evil and ignorant men. I can think of no other time in our nation’s history when our God given rights and freedoms are being endangered by a list of laws made mostly by people who hate every building block and joint upon which our nation rests than this present time in our history. Our country is at a cross road and all conservatives, gun owners, and people who believe in our Constitution (as the founding fathers laid it out) need to stand up and be counted. The weapons of these people are deception, dishonesty, deceitfulness, confusion, a “in the tank” news media, just plain outright lies, and the power of government itself. These weapons are far more dangerous to our country than the fire arms that law abiding citizens own. If you are a gun owner you must realize that gun control is not the only freedom issue we have in this country. There is a list of issues that need to be spoken about. Government takeover of banks, lending institutions, the takeover of private business, the automobile industry, and health care, the taking of your hard earned money and spreading it around, and this is only the start. Appointing czars that are not answerable to you, the American citizen, as to how they run the country. That was not how our country is founded. Some of these Czars are proven communist and socialist. Here a little and there a little we are heading to a government that will have 100% control over every aspect of your life. Our freedoms and way of life as Americans are under attack and soon will be gone” HEAR A LITTLE AND THERE A LITTLE” May God have mercy on our nation and open the eyes of more and more of its people to rise up against the vile and deliberate attempts to erode our freedoms, to take the creator out of things, and turn our nation into a communist slave state. Laugh if you want but that is what is happening right before your eyes AMERICA. Do you have the same amount of freedom that you had twenty years ago, ten years ago, or even five years ago? The answer is no! Is the government bigger or smaller than it was ten years ago? We all know it is bigger! If the Constitution does not mean EXACTLY what it says, according to the plain meaning of the words as understood at the time it was written, (and it does) then there is no point to having a written constitution at all. What good is it. Our form of government was formed the way it was to have checks and balances so no certain branch of government could not have it all and become a threat to the common folk of this country. But look what is happening before your very eyes, the supreme court is now in the business of trying to make laws instead of interpreting the law, the congress do not care about or will listen to the citizens. All they want is their liberal agenda passed and their ear marks attached to bills that are passed, Then we have a president that wants TOTAL CONTROL over everything, even a police officer doing his job. It is time not only for gun owners to take heed but for all true Americans to do the same thing. You need to ask yourself this question: “IS THIS THE AMERICA THAT I GREW UP IN?”

We have debated the issue of gun control for years and years now and it seems like we are getting no where with this debate except for the passing of hundreds of laws that does no good. Theses laws does not keep the guns out of the hands of criminals only the law abiding citizens who are then at the mercy of the criminal.

I don't believe the politicians are in touch with the common people or do they want to be in touch. They are not the same as they were in years gone by. There is a hidden agenda with these politicians. They need to be asked is it gun control or people control that you are after?The only sure defense between a lawful citizen and a thug is his gun. Sen Feinstein realizes this and has said that her family was threatened by someone and she thought she should have a conceal carry permit but she opposes the rest of us the same freedom of choice. Why is that? We need to take our country back from these kind of politicians and tell Hillary, Holder, Obama and the rest of the gun control people that this is America with a constitution that gives us the right to bear arms. Neither on of these politicians needs a gun for protection because they all have security men around them twenty four hours a day and each one of them is armed.

These people need to either support the constitution as they swore to do or leave office and move to a country that believes as they do. China would like to have them and so would Russia and Cuba. When you make a law that goes against the constitutionally guaranteed right of the American Citizen to keep and bear arms you have declared war on the rights of the American people. Anything less than that makes those politicians LIARS to the people and TRAITORS to the principals that was our founding fathers. Our government is infested with these people who care not about the average mans rights or what is best for our country. They have their own special agenda and they could care less about the American citizens rights.

Why is firearms such a problem now when forty of fifty years ago it was not a hardly a problem at all? Forty or fifty years ago there was hardly, if any, gun control laws on the books and people were a lot safer then. Why was this so? It was because nearly everybody had a gun of some type and knew how to use it. Just that fact alone stopped many a crime such as breaking and entering, robbery, and murders. It did not stop all of them but there was no where as many crimes committed in those days as it is now. If that is the case, and it is, then where is all the crime in this country coming from. Well if you sit down and ready take a good look what has happen in this country over the past several decades a blind man could see it.

As I said in many of my commentaries I'm 63 years old and I have seen a lot in this country and I no probably a lot of you readers have also. What amazes me is that the blame is never put where it should go. The blame for all the increase in violence over the past decades is the fault of the politicians and court officials who make the decisions, not the guns used in the crimes. Let me go deeper into this topic because I already know there are people who disagree with me. 

When I was a teenager I could go hunting in any woods as long as I had a hunting licenses. Property owners did not care as long as you did what was right. You could go into any store and buy a gun to go hunting with. You could walk down the side of the road with it as long as it was unloaded and you could have it in your car as long as it was unloaded. You did not have to sign your name every time you bought a box of ammunition for the gun and you could buy as many boxes of shells as you wanted at one time. There was not hundreds of of laws on the books controlling the use of a gun. But that is not the way it is now. You even have to take a gun safety course now to get a hunting licenses. It use to be that the parent gave their children all the lessons that they needed and they did not use a gun until the parent said that they were ready to use it. What is the difference between then and now? It is not the gun because it is the same now as it was them. You put shells in the chamber, aim, and then pull the trigger.If the gun is not used right it can kill. It is still a person using and controlling the gun so what is the difference between now and then?

The difference is that our government and its leaders decided in the early and mid 1960's that the criminals needed more rights and the honest citizen needed less. This all came about the same time as the "Great Society" came into place. They decided that the police officer had to much power and something had to be done about it. It became harder to arrest someone and even harder to give the bad guy the sentence he should have received. This give the criminal more incentive to do bigger crimes against the public with the police having less power to stop them. It use to be that a police officer had respect and he was answered by a yes sir and no sir. Today the police officer are cussed until , as the saying goes, a fly would not lite on them. This is mostly thanks to the laws put in place by our elected officials. Compared to years ago the police officer has his hands tied and the criminal has his untied. Then you wonder why there is so much gun violence. So now there is a group of people like the "Brady Bunch" that would take away the rights and punish the honest citizen along with the criminal. They can not rightly divide the truth as the ordinary person can. Who are they working for the criminal or the honest citizen.

There has been hundreds of gun laws passed over the years since then and those laws have not been any deterrent to any crime committed by the criminal. It continues to get worse. Why is that. It would seem after a while there would be so many gun laws that it would have a effect and stop some of the crime if the gun was the main reason, but it does not. There are so many laws on the books that a hunter feels like a criminal when he goes to the store to by a box of bullets.So these people pass new laws and still the crime grows worse. This should soon tell people that it is something else other than the gun that is the main problem. These laws are only hurting the law abiding citizen because the bad guy will always get what he needs to commit the crime, if it is a gun or anything else. We should untie the police's hands so they can make arrest. Untie the judges hands so they can give the criminal a sentence that fits the crime and then see that the sentence is served. What good is it to lock someone up and then give them week end passes, conjugal visits, and early release? They have cable TV, gyms, and better than decent food. They are just as good as being told to do it again and again. 

Now we have even a bigger threat looming and that is terrorism. Our government said it will protect us, well if their protecting us is anything like what is happening on the border with Mexico then we are in serious trouble. Those people who live on the border are not waiting for government help. you can best believe that they have a loaded gun or two in their house. Let me put it into a context that everyone should understand instead of listening to the same old crap from our government.

Three men were walking down the street after dinner with their families. One was a Democrat, one was a Republican, and the last one was a good old boy from the south. As they walked down the street a terrorist runs out of the dark alley with an AK47 Assault Rifle and a long knife intending to kill everyone there or in other words to commit jihad. There was no turning back for this guy. The democrat reaction was this: We need to debate this, There should be more street lighting here. Maybe if we gave this poor fellow some money and a place to stay he would be different. We need more anger management, maybe we need to hire more law enforcement officers and we most certainly need more laws to stop this! The Republican pulls out his gun and then begins to thinks: If I shoot this man am I in the right, will they lock me up, is there any trouble for me in shooting this guy, what does the law say about this? Then last there was the good old boy from down south who re acted this way: He pulls out his Glock 45 automatic, aims at the terrorist, and bang, bang, bang, bang. Now in this story which of the three families would be around to go out to dinner again? Which of the three people above are you most like?

In the wake up call of the recent killings in the State of Alabama gun control fanatics believe that the kind of firearms used by the killer should be banned. The killer took his own life, but not a word was said about him by theses gun ban fanatics who want to ban all fire arms. This was a most terrible act but a gun ban is not the way to stop future incidents like this. Once again the ban would only hurt honest law abiding gun owners. There would still be murders, killings, people being robbed, and I could go on and on. A gun ban is not the way to solve these problems.

To me we have such twisted thinking in this country. There are people who want to take your right to own a fire arm away from you. But yet they are the first ones to cry out against capital punishment. Am I missing something here? A person can be convicted of the most gruesome crime on the books where innocent life was snuffed out and you have people saying to put to death the person convicted and responsible for these crimes is unusual punishment and it is not right. To me something is certainly twisted here. To me these people are just pure out and out nut cakes. If I lived on the border to Mexico there would be more than one fire arm in my house. It is plain to see that these people are getting no help or protection from our government. Living on the border with Mexico is just as bad as living in the middle east.

Maybe, just maybe, if we use the reasoning applied to the Alabama killings by the Brady people and their campaign to Prevent Gun Violence, knives ought to be banned also. There are a lot of people killed, maimed, and hurt for life by all kinds of knives. What about the nut cake who just beheaded his wife in New York. Should we ban that kind of knife? Should the maker of that knife be sued like the manufactures of fire arms? The American public as a whole does not hear about these kinds on killings because of the liberal press and their agenda to ban guns. you hear what they want you to hear.

We are told that we do not live in a civilized society anymore. How so is that? We do not live in a perfect society, but it is better than lawlessness and complete disorder. In this sinful world there will never be a perfect society or a perfect world. You can bank on that! Our country is far more civilized than societies that sentence women to death by stoning for unfaithfulness and not being loyal to her husband, or puts people to death by public beheading for sometimes the pettiest crime. The question that I want to ask and think that I must ask is this: What makes some people think that our country is not civilized just because some of the crimes that are committed here have a fire arm involved. People need to stop and think.

There can be no greater proof of the ineffectiveness of restrictive gun laws than the mass murder in Germany that happened about the same time as the Alabama killings. Germany has very strict gun control laws. Some of the strictest laws to be found anywhere, but those laws did not prevent a teenager from murdering at least a dozen people. It is not the weapon that is used it is the person with that evil mind that is the problem.

Those persons who do these bad deeds must be held responsible to answer for their crimes, not the weapons they use, be they guns, knives, money, baseball bats, gulf clubs, or any other material thing that is used in the commission of a crime. Here are some good examples. If your child is failing in school do you blame it on the pens, pencils, or books that they use. Certainly not! There is something else that is the problem. If a person, who is under the influence of alcohol, rides down the road in a Ford car and has accident where there is the loss of life do we blame the car maker, or the company that made the alcohol? Do we pass laws banning them? Once again no, so why do our law makers want to ban guns and your legal right to own them? What is your answer to this question?

                               My answer to some of the questions in this commentary is this: We have a breakdown in our laws and judicial system that is causing the problems that we face with violent crime today. There must be laws that in short say this: IF YOU DO THE CRIME, THEN YOU MUST DO THE TIME! The court system needs to stop their soft sentencing and send a clear message that enough is enough and if you are convicted of a violent crime there will be no more slaps on the wrist so you can do the same thing over again. Let the criminal know without blinking an eye that: YOU WILL REAP WHAT YOU SOW!

I want to give another personal example that gun control will not and does not work. Back in the early 1980s I was a police officer in a small tourist town and as a police officer you knew most of the locals. One night before I was to come on duty the police officer that I was to relieve stopped a local man who was intoxicated walking down the street with a shot gun. He was going to kill a man that he just had a argument with. Knowing the man the officer just took the shot gun took away from him and he was taken home to sleep it off. I now was on duty and this man comes again with a hatchet with the intentions of still killing this same man. I stopped him, took the hatchet from him, and again took him home. At this time I did not know about the prior incident with the other officer. Once again he came down the street with a high powered rifle with the same intentions to kill the guy he had the argument with. This time he went to jail. The point I want to make is this, the man would have used a shotgun, hatchet, rifle, or anything else he could to carry out his plan. Banning fire arms will never stop the killing that is going on in this country; only getting tough laws and courts that will carry the laws through will ever get the job done. This man should have been taken to jail at the very first incident. Guns do not kill people. Knives do not kill people. Hatchets do not kill people. PEOPLE KILL PEOPLE!

As a Christian person I must insert my religious beliefs about what I have commented on before I close. All through the Bible we can see where crimes and violent acts were committed by violent people.There has always has been and always will be violence until the end of this world. In Bible days the one who committed the crime was punished and it was no slap on the wrist. There was commandments to deal with every law that was broken in that Great Book and they were followed. No where do I see in reading the Bible where weapons were band because of crimes committed. There was just swift punishment. Our laws and our constitution are based on some of these same laws. The problem is our law makers want to change laws already is proven to work.  Taking away a free mans right to bear arms will never solve the problems of this country or the world.

We have had so many radical ideas about crime control in this country that I want to insert my own radical idea for what it is worth. This country needs to locate a big island out in one of the oceans that is not inhabited and take every violent criminal who has preyed, molested, hurt, killed, and injured innocent people and exile them there. No guards, no nothing, just send them there and make sure they never leave. Let the criminal take care of feeding his self, provide his own shelter, and take care of his own needs. You would see how fast that the crime would drop in this country. There would also be no over filling of prisons and their big budgets to keep them staffed that comes from the American tax payer. In fact we would even have less prisons. This would solve a lot of issues that are now in this country. The ones who are against capitol punishment would win, there would be no more appeal after appeal on certain cases, no more millions of dollars spent to build new prisons that is like a second home to most prisoners. no more free Free TV, Gym Rooms, the tax payers would win. There would be no more putting the criminal back on the street before his time was up because of over crowding. Everybody but the bad guy would win.

Now before You start saying how crazy this writer is for saying this let me ask you this question: What would be more effective and what would not take away the citizens rights, what would be the most cost effective? Paying for a one way boat trip or paying for the massive gun control laws, court appeals, prisons, and the hiring of more and more police officers to stop violent criminals that just get out and do the same thing again. Which would cost less? Which would keep the American Public the safest with out taking any of their rights away? I might, as some people will say, be going to the extreme, but am I ?