Advertisements
Home

The 11 Best US States for Gun Owners

1 Comment

This is from OutDoorHub. 

Is your state on the list?

Mine is not.

Gun laws can vary wildly from state to state. Depending on where you live, you might either be frustrated with your state’s iron-clad gun laws, or praising your lawmakers for standing up for your rights. Did your state make this list? We have ranked what is, in our opinion, the top 11 states in the country for gun owners. Our determinations are based primarily on the state’s gun laws, whether they have any restrictions placed on modern sporting rifles like the AR-15, the amount of states that recognize carry permits issued in that state, and other details. Also, “no-net loss” laws (which protect hunting land) and laws protecting the privacy of gun owners are also considered.

The states on this list do not require a permit to purchase, do not license gun owners, do not have a state-level firearm registry, and do not require a permit to carry long guns. Some states do require a permit to carry concealed handguns. With the exception of Florida, all listed states also allow open carry of handguns. Included with each entry is an excerpt from or related to the state constitution. Information is provided by the NRA’s Institute for Legislative Action.

Without further fuss, here are our top 11 gun states in loosely ranked order.

11. Vermont

“That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the State – and as standing armies in time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up; and that the military should be kept under strict subordination to and governed by the civil power.”

  • Permit to carry: no
  • Castle Doctrine: no law
  • No-Net Loss: no legislation
  • Right to carry confidentiality: no provisions
  • Right to carry in restaurants: legal
  • Right to carry reciprocity and recognition: outright recognition

10. Montana

“The right of any person to keep or bear arms in defense of his own home, person, and property, or in aid of the civil power when thereto legally summoned, shall not be called in question, but nothing herein contained shall be held to permit the carrying of concealed weapons.”

  • Permit to carry: Conditional
  • Castle Doctrine: enacted
  • No-Net Loss: no legislation
  • Right to carry confidentiality: provisions enacted
  • Right to carry in restaurants: partial ban
  • Right to carry reciprocity and recognition: conditional

9. Florida

“The legislature of the State of Florida, in a declaration of policy incorporated in its “Weapons and Firearms” statute, recognizes that adult citizens of the state retain their constitutional right to keep and bear firearms for hunting and sporting activities and for defense of self, family, home, and business and as collectibles.”

  • Permit to carry: yes
  • Castle Doctrine: enacted
  • No-Net Loss: enacted
  • Right to carry confidentiality: provisions enacted
  • Right to carry in restaurants: partial ban
  • Right to carry reciprocity and recognition: true reciprocity

8. Wyoming

“The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the state shall not be denied.”

  • Permit to carry: no
  • Castle Doctrine: enacted
  • No-Net Loss: no legislation
  • Right to carry confidentiality: provisions enacted
  • Right to carry in restaurants: partial ban
  • Right to carry reciprocity and recognition: conditional

7. Georgia

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed, but the General Assembly shall have power to prescribe the manner in which arms may be borne.”

  • Permit to carry: yes
  • Castle Doctrine: enacted
  • No-Net Loss: enacted
  • Right to carry confidentiality: provisions enacted
  • Right to carry in restaurants: partial ban
  • Right to carry reciprocity and recognition: true reciprocity

6. Oklahoma

“The right of a citizen to keep and bear arms in defense of his home, person, or property, or in aid of the civil power, when thereunto legally summoned, shall never be prohibited, but nothing herein contained shall prevent the legislature from regulating the carrying of weapons.”

  • Permit to carry: yes
  • Castle Doctrine: enacted
  • No-Net Loss: no legislation
  • Right to carry confidentiality: provisions enacted
  • Right to carry in restaurants: partial ban
  • Right to carry reciprocity and recognition: outright recognition

5. Kentucky

“All men are by nature, free and equal, and have certain inherent and inalienable rights, among which may be reckoned: … 7) the right to bear arms in defense of themselves and of the state, subject to the power of the general assembly to enact laws to prevent persons from carrying concealed weapons.”

  • Permit to carry: yes
  • Castle Doctrine: enacted
  • No-Net Loss: enacted
  • Right to carry confidentiality: provisions enacted
  • Right to carry in restaurants: partial ban
  • Right to carry reciprocity and recognition: outright recognition

4. Kansas

“The people have the right to bear arms for their defense and : security; but standing armies in time of peace, are dangerous to liberty, and shall not be tolerated, and the military shall be in strict subordination to the civil power.”

  • Permit to carry: yes
  • Castle Doctrine: enacted
  • No-Net Loss: no legislation
  • Right to carry confidentiality: provisions enacted
  • Right to carry in restaurants: partial ban
  • Right to carry reciprocity and recognition: outright recognition

3. Utah

“The individual right of the people to keep and bear arms for security and defense of self, family, others, property, or the State as well as for other lawful purposes shall not be infringed; but nothing herein shall prevent the legislature from defining the lawful use of arms.”

  • Permit to carry: no
  • Castle Doctrine: enacted
  • No-Net Loss: no legislation
  • Right to carry confidentiality: provisions enacted
  • Right to carry in restaurants: legal
  • Right to carry reciprocity and recognition: outright recognition

2. Arizona

“The right of the individual citizen to bear arms in defense of himself or the State shall not be impaired, but nothing in this section shall be construed as authorizing individuals or corporations to organize, maintain, or employ an armed body of men.”

  • Permit to carry: yes
  • Castle Doctrine: enacted
  • No-Net Loss: no legislation
  • Right to carry confidentiality: provisions enacted
  • Right to carry in restaurants: legal
  • Right to carry reciprocity and recognition: outright recognition

1. Alaska

“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 individual right to keep and bear arms shall not be denied or infringed by the state or political subdivision of the State.”

  • Permit to carry: no
  • Castle Doctrine: enacted
  • No-Net Loss: no legislation
  • Right to carry confidentiality: provisions enacted
  • Right to carry in restaurants: partial ban
  • Right to carry reciprocity and recognition: outright recognition
Advertisements

Representative Jackson Lee: “Don’t Condemn The Gangbangers,” It’s The Guns’ Fault

Leave a comment

This is from Political Outcast.

Sheila Jackson Lee has become the new Cynthia McKinney.

It is time for Texans to fire this moron.

Last week, Representative Sheila Jackson Lee spoke on the House floor in favor of more restrictions that prohibit law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves and their families from criminals. She pleaded with fellow lawmakers to run to the defense of the gangbangers, telling them that it’s not the criminals’ fault. It’s that we don’t have more laws restricting guns:

“Don’t condemn the gangbangers, they’ve got guns that are trafficked — that are not enforced, that are straw purchased and they come into places even that have strong gun laws. Why? Because we don’t have sensible gun legislation. I’m going to agree with my friends on the other side of the isle. Our Republican friends, let’s enforce the gun laws that we have – – who would run away from that. That’s a sensible proposition. Put a resolution on the floor of the House – – let’s enforce gun laws that we have.”

Chicago’s murder rate is so high because they don’t have strict enough gun control, and that neighboring states don’t impose the same restrictions that Illinois does. So, don’t blame the criminals. It’s not their fault. It’s that we don’t have universal gun control. If we didn’t have any guns at all, these criminals wouldn’t be able to kill each other. Poor gangbangers. They just need more rehabilitation.

I guess she feels the same way about Adam Lanza, the person responsible for the crisis that liberal politicians wouldn’t dare let go to waste. It wasn’t his fault that he killed all those kids and teachers. It was because guns exist, and he got his hands on some of them.

As for enforcing current laws, what pro-2nd Amendment people mean by that is that most violent criminals shouldn’t be on the streets at all, and so the point about whether or not they should be allowed to purchase a firearm is moot. If there is eyewitness testimony and evidence that proves beyond a shadow of a doubt that someone is guilty of murder or rape, that person shouldn’t be given freedom. He shouldn’t even be in a position where he is trying to buy anything, let alone a gun. That is what is meant by “enforcing current laws.” It’s definitely not an endorsement of states’ various gun control laws.

If guns are taken away, violent crime will increase, as it has in the U.K. and Australia following national, mandatory gun buy-back programs.

But at least gun crimes might decrease. For now, they don’t care about violent crimes involving other tools. Even if newborn babies are being decapitated. But I’m sure if Gosnell used an “assault rifle” to kill the babies, then the media and politicians would pretend to care.

Read more: http://politicaloutcast.com/2013/04/representative-jackson-lee-dont-condemn-the-gangbangers-its-the-guns-fault/#ixzz2RKu07DPz

Gun Control – A Canadian Perspective

1 Comment

This is from Jews For The Preservation Of Firearms Ownership.

Do not think this can not happen in America.

We need to stay vigilante. 

 

By Phil Hewkin, February 3rd 2013.

JPFO preface: To remind everyone of the old expression “It can’t happen here”.
Take good note of what is below and make your mantra “Do NOT let it happen here”.

(We have added a video at the end of this article – watch and ponder.)

Dear JPFO.

I write as a supporter of our collective just cause, which is the protection of liberty and property rights for all, including and especially, the right to bear arms. I am very concerned about what I observe in America today. The mainstream media in America shows extreme anti gun bias, they desperately, foolishly cling to concepts like; magazine restriction/military appearance/universal background checks.

I can attest to the failed gun control agenda in Canada. The leftist mantra of public safety was chanted unwaveringly by the very similar main stream consensus media. It is noteworthy that CANADIAN C.B.C. and C.T.V. are publically funded, in excess of a billion dollars annually, and that their liberal leaning is as obvious as it is despicable. Even today, with a clear Conservative Government majority, media consensus remain unanimously anti gun, anti-liberty, and anti conservative despite public funding actually being increased to those corporations by Conservative Government.

The Truth is never told in Canada, with exception to SUN NEWS MEDIA. The Canadian reality is that Federally FORCED, CRIMINALIZING gun-owner licensing, called Possession/Acquisition License, or P.A.L. (Canadian equivalent of Universal Background Checks) remains largely unsupported by the majority of Canadians who continue to possess firearms minus the P.A.L., despite threat of prison, confiscation and criminalization. these laws in the Criminal Code of Canada thrust honest Canadians into a “GUILTY until PROVEN INNOCENT” reverse-onus status. This has resulted in hundreds of thousands of legitimately held firearms being confiscated and destroyed, despite promises that no guns would be confiscated. there is no process of appeal. There is no compensation for loss.

Compliant Gun owners, who obtain a license, have their highly detailed personal information kept in a CPIC police Database, with CONTINUOUS BACKGROUND CHECKS This database has been HACKED MANY TIMES. it is NOT SECURE. this fact remains UN-REPORTED. CHECKS run 24/7, and any “hit” may result in swat-team style raids and arrests of License holders. Ironically, criminals, insane, violent, retain their right to privacy. A search warrant MUST BE OBTAINED, before police can execute any search. even repeat offender predator pedophiles retain their rights, NOT SO for average, honest, responsible Canadian Gun owners. truly pathetic, a NON-REWARD, for those who did jump through all the hoops, and became vetted gun owners. Common sense should dictate that these honest persons should be those that experience retention of rights protecting intrusions, privacy, and property. NOT SO.

What there IS. Honest Canadians facing an array of charges under the “firearms act” Charges being laid by a prejudiced police, and upheld by extremely prejudiced unelected APPOINTED anti-gun judges. In most cases, charges are reduced, or dismissed in absence of any real crime, if firearms are surrendered for destruction. In the advent that a citizen has the means and fortitude to legally challenge the charges, most times firearms can be recovered and charges dismissed, but at a cost of $10.000.oo-$25.000.oo and much more, for legal fees. The process is the punishment. An estimated 2 million Canadians remain non compliant, unlicensed. The number could be much higher, but due to the demographics, Canada being such a vast country, it is near impossible to have an accurate number.

We have had a small victory in that the Long Gun Registry was repealed. The current Government actually had promised to repeal Bill C-68 in its entirety. as of appx. 2006 they did change their terminology and would only refer to these horrible Liberal gun laws as “The Long Gun Registry” Before this, P.A.L. criminalizing licensing was included in the “promise to repeal”. I wrote my own Member of Parliament MANY times, as I feared that this watered down commitment would result in the largest/worst part of these laws would remain in force. Holy COW was I right. In fact, remaining Forced federal Licensing places the stigmatism of criminality MINUS any proven act or threat, upon a peaceful, law abiding segment of society who are proven, by their actions and history, to be the safest and most responsible segment of society. simply for continuance to own that which was bought/owned legitimately. As long as the media and political bodies can effortlessly and shamelessly vilify honest gun owners by immediately attacking ONLY the honest segment of gun owners with their vitriol and hatred EVERY TIME some deranged crack-pot goes on a shooting spree, we will continue to be the victims of politically-correct extreme prejudice.

Unfortunately, every one of Obama’s executive orders, and senator Feinstein’s bill, will only achieve the same, unending harassment of honest gun owners and restrictions on their 2nd Amendment rights, while real criminals and insane people carry on their business as usual. I sincerely hope that America will be restored to sanity before this vile, unworkable design has undone liberty in that country. I would very much recommend, in hindsight of an inside observation of the Canadian experiment, that all concerned become steeped in the facts, and actively oppose this rampant gun control stupidity, NIP IT IN THE BUD, before Americans are made subject to onerous requirements, offensive intrusions, and political and legal perversions causing a new class of criminality where no real crime has taken place, save the vastly offensive mass of HATE CRIME that has become busy work for media, police, Judges and courts. THIS IS FAILED SOCIAL ENGINEERING POLICY. It fails to save EVEN ONE LIFE.

I give permission for this communication to be used for JPFO to print. R.I.P. Aaron Zellman.
May the message communicated so succinctly in the production “Innocents Betrayed” permeate social consciousness, and spare eventual future genocide, that civilian disarmament brings.

Sincerely, Phil Hewkin, Prince George B.C. Canada.
philhewkin@telus.net


To further fill in the gaps, watch the video below — made some time ago but it should provide very salutary information with regard to the possibilities of “gun control”. This is pretty much what is being planned for the U.S.A. unless people stand up for the 2A and their innate rights.

 

 

Chicago has tough gun laws, but leads nation in gun violence

Leave a comment

This is from Fox News Politics.

DemocRats run Chicago, Detroit,Washington D.C. and New York City.

They have the harshest gun laws in place and have major gun violence.

Their draconian gun laws are a failure.

 An unarmed man is a subject.

An armed man is a citizen.

Any night can explode into gunfire in the Austin neighborhood on Chicago’s West Side.

Chicago Police Superintendent Garry McCarthy knows that well. On New Year’s Eve, he went on patrol there with one of his officers, as he occasionally does, and seized an illegal gun from a car during a routine traffic stop.

It was just one in a sea of weapons the end up in Chicago’s South Side and West Side, more often then not with the serial numbers filed off.

Last year, the city hit 506 homicides, and this year, killings again are stacking up at a rate faster than one a day.

“I’ve had eight cops shot in the last year and a half that I’ve been here,” McCarthy said. “Somebody’s got to do something about it besides putting ourselves [Chicago police officers] in harm’s way.”

He and Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel are in sync in their push for new gun laws and are getting support from state lawmakers in Springfield. The Public Health Committee of the state Senate rapidly approved bills that would ban the sale of semi-automatic weapons and high-capacity magazines during the lame-duck session.

The legislation is moving quickly, riding a wave of emotion triggered by the massacre at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Conn. The timing is in keeping with the stated philosophy of Emanuel that we should use times of crisis to mobilize people and demand change.

“As somebody who stood by President Clinton’s side to make sure we had a ban on assault weapons, I do not want to see more weapons on the street,” Emanuel said.

However, McCarthy acknowledged aiming at assault weapons misses the mark when dealing with Chicago’s gang violence. The weapon used is generally a handgun and rarely is it purchased through legal channels. McCarthy wants to target straw purchasing, which is when legal gun buyers will purchase a weapon and then let it loose in the illegal market.

“You buy ten 9 millimeters, then you walk out the door and you give them to whoever you want,” McCarthy said. “There is no accountability. Then, in a year, we recover your gun in a shooting, you say, ‘well I lost it.’ … That’s the end of it. There’s nothing we can do about it.”

He is pushing for a law that puts the burden back on the gun owner to report if a weapon is lost, stolen or sold. Emanuel is pushing for a database of gun offenders, very similar to those established for sex offenders.

Gun rights advocates are not in their corner. Don Moran, president of the Illinois State Rifle Association, thinks new laws will not make a dent in the violence. The illegal guns are already out there. The people buying and shooting them with reckless abandon won’t even learn that the gun laws exist, let alone respect them.

Moran thinks Illinois politicians are only pushing gun laws to create a debate and distraction from the huge fiscal problems in Illinois.

“The bigger the problems they have to solve, and the harder the media would take a look at those things, the harder they want you to look at something else,” he said.

Although the gun laws are moving quickly through the Illinois legislature, the lame duck session ends Wednesday. McCarthy worries that the emotion supporting the new laws will die down while the opposition has time to grow.

“My fear is that it’s already slowing … and nothing is going to come of it, just like nothing came of Columbine or Virginia Tech.”

Read more: http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2013/01/04/chicago-has-tough-gun-laws-but-leads-nation-in-gun-violence/#ixzz2H9gQo2Nx

 

 

12-Year-Old Defends Herself with Gun, Proves Need of 2nd Amendment

Leave a comment

This is from Town Hall.

A nut job shoots people in a theater  and it is daily headlines.

Yet let someone use a gun in self-defense you hear crickets.

As a gun owner I am angered by the media bias.

As the left continues to advocate for further restrictions on the Second Amendment, others are using it to save their lives.

This past Wednesday a young 12-year old girl in Bryan County, Oklahoma was able to protect her life when an intruder kicked in her back door and entered her house. Frantically, she called her mother who advised her to grab their household gun, hide in the closet, and call 911.

The intruder made his way through the house, and as he was opening the door of the closet, the young girl shot him through the closet door. The intruder left the house and the girl was found unharmed. The police arrived and took the man into custody.

What would have happened had the girl not been armed? We can’t be sure, but there are far too many stories of young girls being kidnapped, murdered, and raped.

The news is full of crimes and events that could have been prevented—or at least decreased the amount of damage—had there been less gun restrictions. One of the most recent examples is the Aurora, Colorado shooting that occurred back in July.

A masked gunman opened fire at one of the midnight showings of The Dark Knight Rises, leaving 12 dead and 50 injured. One person opened fire, but not one person was armed to protect themselves or others. Aurora citizens are allowed to obtain concealed carry permits, but aren’t allowed to use their weapons. It would have been illegal for anyone to fire his or her weapon in the theatre. The theatre also had a ban on any and all weapons.

I can only imagine if second amendment rights were upheld and protected in Aurora, maybe more people would have been saved. Unfortunately, that wasn’t the case.

In areas where Second Amendment rights are respected, many lives have been saved in similar instances. About a week before the Aurora shooting, 71-year old Samuel Williams—a concealed gun carrier—opened fire on two intruders in an internet café in Marion County, Florida. One of the intruders was armed with a gun, the other with a baseball bat. Both intruders suffered only minor injuries and were taken into custody.

Luckily, the young 12-year old girl was also able to save herself.

The Left loves to use these instances to lobby for stricter gun laws. Mayor Bloomberg, among many others, advocated for stricter gun laws following the Aurora incident. And, in Tuesday’s presidential debate, President Obama advocated for stricter gun laws:

“What I’m trying to do is to get a broader conversation about how do we reduce the violence generally. Part of it is seeing if we can get an assault weapons ban reintroduced. But part of it is also looking at other sources of the violence. Because frankly, in my hometown of Chicago, there’s an awful lot of violence and they’re not using AK-47s. They’re using cheap handguns.”

President Obama tried to make an argument for more restrictions on the Second Amendment, but Chicago has some of the strictest gun laws, and that hasn’t decreased violence.

We will never understand why people go out of their way to harm others, but we have a constitutional right to defend ourselves. We must stand by the Constitution and remember this: guns don’t kill people. People must make the decision to kill others. If I were to ever be in a similar situation as the 12-year old Oklahoma girl, I wouldn’t want to be found empty handed.

Do We Need New Gun Laws?

Leave a comment

 

The article below is from Jews For The Preservation Of Firearms Ownership.
I would like to get your input on this article.

Reproduced by kind permission of Alan Korwin, ofGunLaws.com, from the original article.
smalline



Ask the average gun buff if we need new gun laws and the knee-jerk reaction is, “Not just no, but hell no!” That’s followed up with, “What part of ‘Shall not be infringed’ don’t you understand? All those gun laws on the books are illegal and should be repealed!” Let’s just think about that.
You know rights come with limits and responsibilities. Your right to swing your arms ends at the tip of my nose, right? Who would argue a law disarming convicted murderers in prison violates the Second Amendment? You get the point. Some gun laws are just fine. A five year old can’t walk into a gun shop and buy a gun.
Yes, on cool reflection, some gun laws work and are a part of the American concept of ordered liberty. We control bad elements in society and mete out punishment for bad actors and their bad acts. The worse the act is, the harsher the penalty. You want those laws.
But let’s change the rules of engagement. You help undermine anti-gun-rights bigots, and co-opt their work, by demanding reasonable, common sense gun laws of your own — a superb paradigm shift.
Let’s look at our legitimate need for gun laws. Because laws protect the innocent as well as punish the guilty. That’s especially important now the Constitution no longer constrains Congress. Officials do whatever they please, trashing our rights, ignoring their limits, acting like tyrants unrestricted by “a government of limited delegated powers.” You can fight this using new laws, with teeth, to stop those defilers of our magnificent system.
Here’s how you grow teeth. Instead of a law stating (in simple terms), “It’s illegal to take a gun away from an innocent person” (a toothless statement, but oh so typical), you say instead, “Anyone who takes a gun from an innocent person shall go to jail.” Now the authorities have to watch their butts because there’s a penalty for violating your rights, not just some feckless statement they shouldn’t do it. We win.

 

“Kosher” Gun Laws
Of all the groups defending the RKBA, the most aggressive is Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, and even those people support “reasonable” gun control, the type I’m talking about. They’ve identified five Kosher Gun Laws (“Kosher” means proper). JPFO suggests all the rest should be tossed in the ocean:
  • 1) If you criminally misuse a gun, your gun rights can be severed.
  • 2) People who are mentally unfit to handle their own affairs may not bear arms.
  • 3) Until the age of 18, your gun rights come from your parents.
  • 4) You are responsible for the outcome of every shot you fire.
  • 5) Because the God-given right of self-defense is inviolate, anyone who, under color of law, denies or attempts to deny your civil right to bear arms, pays a stiff fine and goes to prison.
See the footnotes and more that expand on these basic rules, at www.jpfo.org.

 

Other Ideas
No one who reads Handgunner should be a spectator in the struggle to preserve freedom. Find out who your local legislators are and start enacting reasonable common sense gun laws with them. That’s how things get done. What laws? You can read the details of these and more “Model Gun Laws” at www.gunlaws.com/ModelLegislation.htm. Here are some ideas.
Constitutional Carry: The right to discreetly or openly bear arms should not require a government-issued permission slip, taxes, paperwork and an expiration date. Gun-Free-Zone Liability Act: If you create a dangerous, make believe, so-called “gun-free” zone by simply hanging a sign, you are liable for any harm it causes. High School Marksmanship Act: An elective class worth one credit is offered toward your high school diploma, earned after you safely discharge a firearm at a target. “Educate kids on the constitutional roots and proper exercise of the right to keep and bear arms.” Protection of Private Property Act: Any legally owned private property may be kept in or on a private means of transportation at any place the means of transportation may legally be. This removes bans on guns in vehicles (without mentioning guns).
And there’s more. Defensive Display: Warning an attacker you’re armed is protected by law in Montana and Arizona. Get your state onboard. The warning can be verbal, a motion or reach, or presenting a firearm in a way a person would understand is meant to forestall an assault. BIDS vs. NICS: If we must have gun-buyer background checks to stop criminals, at least do it without compiling massive records on the innocent. A simple system called BIDS can do this, and at far less cost than NICS. Limited Immunity for 911 Emergency Reporting: If you have the right to remain silent, and the right to have an attorney present during questioning, why are you encouraged to call 911 after self defense and speak into a police voice recorder, to the people trying to convict you? Yes, America needs more common sense gun laws.
Alan Korwin is the author of nine books on gun law. He runs the GunLaws.com website, and is the manager of the TrainMeAZ.com campaign, which you should check out.

 

I Don’t Carry a Gun…

1 Comment

 

 
 
I don’t carry a gun to kill people.
I carry a gun to keep from being killed.
I don’t carry a gun to scare people.
I carry a gun because sometimes this world can be a scary place.

 

I don’t carry a gun because I’m paranoid.
I carry a gun because there are real threats in the world.

 

I don’t carry a gun because I’m evil.
I carry a gun because I have lived long enough to see the evil in the world.

 

I don’t carry a gun because I hate the government.
I carry a gun because I understand the limitations of government.

 

I don’t carry a gun because I’m angry.
I carry a gun so that I don’t have to spend the rest of my life hating myself for failing to be prepared.

 

I don’t carry a gun because my sex organs are too small.
I carry a gun because I want to continue to use those sex organs for the purpose for which they were intended for a good long time to come.

 

I don’t carry a gun because I want to shoot someone.
I carry a gun because I want to die at a ripe old age in my bed, and not on a sidewalk somewhere tomorrow afternoon.

 

I don’t carry a gun because I’m a cowboy.
I carry a gun because, when I die and go to heaven, I want to be a cowboy.

 

I don’t carry a gun to make me feel like a man.
I carry a gun because men know how to take care of themselves and the ones they love.

 

I don’t carry a gun because I feel inadequate.
I carry a gun because unarmed and facing three armed thugs, I am inadequate.

 

I don’t carry a gun because I love it.
I carry a gun because I love life and the people who make it meaningful to me.

 

%d bloggers like this: