Right Wing Extremist

Apparently, I am one. At least according to the recently released Homeland Security document. I am not part of any "organization" or militia group, but I strongly believe in most of what they label as being right wing extremist. What is interesting to me is that most of things that are outlined in this document are some of the basic rights and laws that are outlined in the Constitution. How is it that a belief in the founding laws and structure of our government can now be considered extremist? Right of left wing? My understanding of this position is that the current administration is directly opposed to the 2nd and the 10th amendment (they are opposed to much more of the Constitution than that, but I will get to that later):

• The Second Amendment - The Right to Bear Arms. 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.
  

The current "liberal" argument (as I understand it) is that the 2nd amendment is intended solely for the purpose of maintaining a state (federally) controlled military and does not apply to an individuals right to own a firearm. And while the language can be interpreted in many ways, I think it is important to consider the intentions of those that initially voted it into law. When James Madison initially proposed this amendment it was worded differently: "The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed; a well armed and well regulated militia being the best security of a free country...." The right of the "People" clearly comes first. A reading of Federalist #46 written by Madison states fairly clearly that one of the main reasons for citizens to own arms is for their protection from the possibility of an OPPRESSIVE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT. If you think that is not important in modern times, here are a few facts cited by Paul Harvey in September of 2000:

Are you considering backing gun control laws? Do you think that because you may not own a gun, the rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment don't matter?

CONSIDER THIS:

· In 1929 the Soviet Union established gun control. From 1929 to 1953, approximately 20 million dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

· In 1911, Turkey established gun control. From 1915-1917, 1.5 million Armenians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

· Germany established gun control in 1938 and from 1939 to 1945, 13 million Jews, gypsies, homosexuals, the mentally ill, and others, who were unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

· China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated. (My note: they were unable to repel Japanese invaders, who piled them up like cordwood! My Dad took the pictures in 1937.)

· Guatemala established gun control in 1964. From 1964 to 1981, 100,000 Mayan Indians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

· Uganda established gun control in 1970. From 1971 to 1979, 300,000 Christians, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

· Cambodia established gun control in 1956. From 1975 to 1977, one million "educated" people, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and exterminated.

That places total victims who lost their lives because of gun control at approximately 56 million in the last century. Since we should learn from the mistakes of history, the next time someone talks in favor of gun control, find out which group of citizens they wish to have exterminated.

It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed, a program costing the government more than $500 million dollars. The results Australia-wide: Homicides are up 3.2%, Assaults are up 8%, and Armed Robberies are up 44%. In that country's state of Victoria, homicides with firearms are up 300%. Over the previous 25 years, figures were showing a steady decrease in armed robberies and Australian politicians are on the spot and at a loss to explain how no improvement in "safety" has been observed after such a monumental effort and expense was expended in "ridding society of guns." It's time to state it plainly: Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws only affect the law-abiding citizens.

Keep in mind that I do not currently own a firearm; primarily because I have small children that I have not educated in the proper respect, use and handling of a gun. I also live in what I would consider a fairly "safe" neighborhood. That being said, it bothers me a great deal that I do not own a gun with which I could protect my family. When I have better educated myself, and can in turn educated my household, I plan to rectify this situation.

Next I am on to the 10th amendment.....