odd but earth-shaking quips during the consultation for the freshly signed gun law
odd yet earth-shaking quips during the consultation on the freshly signed gun law:
1. The constitution should enshrine each citizen's right to protect himself, the people he loves and innocent, helpless third parties who at that clitical instance had no one to assist them;
2. It is the obligation of every armed citizen to respond to the country's need in the event of foreign aggression and/or local terrorism;
3. The law abiding armed citizen must guarantee the continuity of his God given and Law recognized rights and must guard against the lingering lust of politicians towards authoritarianism and dictatorship.
1. It is the individual who must qualify for ownership based on competence and compliance with societal norms of good conduct and social responsibility.
2. Qualified individuals need not seek clearance to purchase any firearm wherein the state has recognized his/her competence.
3. Every legally purchased firearm need only be registered in a person's name once and that until and unless he/she has given notice of it's loss, transfer or lack of control over with; said firearm shall be deemed in his possession and responsibility.
4. A 50 rounds limit is absurd and pointless. If every armed citizen is morally and legally bound to defend his/her country in time of need, how the hell does he fight, much more survive with 50 rounds. In fact every armed citizen must be enjoined to stock up on military grade arms and ammunition.
5. Citizens must be encouraged to organize themselves and train in unison as militias prepared to respond to a legitimate call from government.
GUN OWNERSHIP SHOULD BE ENSHRINED AS A RIGHT AND ANY ATTEMPT TO CURTAIL IT AS A PRIVILEGE IS A DE-SERVICE TO BOTH HUMANITY AND COUNTRY (i suggest they are shot with pellets till they relent . . . . tingin ninyo bros and sisters?)