Yes indeed Guns have changed, but the right remains the same for the same reason


Yes indeed Guns have changed, but the right remains the same for the same reason

This is a video that is being passed around on Facebook a lot lately:

https://www.facebook.com/news.com.au/videos/1349946491699387/


Let's examine this video:

1) Unlike this video back in the day of muskets more people carried either a musket, a rifle (yes they did exist) or some other firelock (a really big handgun) so people would have been shooting back

2) The guy who was shot was able to run away without a scratch, muskets do a lot more damage than that, depending on how and where you get shot, the musket shot could be more dangerous than the damage done by a modern rifle.

3) Most musket shooters carried a bayonet on their musket for the simple reason that reloading was a problem and a bayonet attached to a musket was more efficient for attacking in close quarters, and this video misses that fact

4)  I have a problem with the fact that everyone ran away from the shooter after he fired his musket in this video, the point the video makers are trying to make is that it takes a while to reload a musket but everyone runs away.  How come nobody shoots back or tackles the guy?  What's the benefit of making propaganda over the musket reload time lap if they nobody stops him while he's reloading, he's just going to shoot again!

Those are my issues while watching this video, now the facts:

Yes it is true, guns have changed

Yes it is true, guns have a shorter reload time

Yes it is true, dangerous people with dangerous weapons don't mix well

What is also true:

To properly defend yourself from killers with modern weapons you'll need modern weapons

A killer is going to get automatic or semiautomatic weapons no matter what, or they'll just bulldoze people with an automobile, so the body count will be high regardless of gun restrictions

Dangerous people are going to get dangerous weapons and that makes it ever more important that we have a FORCE EQUALIZER that we can return equal or greater firepower and take the killer out.

Before guns existed, the right to keep and bear arms meant bows and arrows and swords, the fact that the bad guys had them was the EXACT REASON law abiding folks needed to have them.

The right to keep and bear arms exist today for the exact same reason it existed 1000 years ago, to defend oneself and family, and to aid in the common defense of neighborhood, county, state and country.  How that is done is different because the guns the bad guys have are different, and we need to be able to return equal and greater force upon the bad guys.  To do this, the guns we need must be of equal and greater force.  That my friends is why we need the Second Amendment and we need to be able to keep and bear arms of equal and greater force than the bad guys have.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Due to Mass Shootings, Democrats in Congress Propose to Disarm the Majority of Sheriff's Deputies Throughout the Nation

Image
Due to Mass Shootings, Democrats in Congress Propose to Disarm the Majority of Sheriff's Deputies Throughout the Nation You heard it right folks, due to mass shootings Senator Feinstein and other Democrats in the Senate are proposing new gun regulations that would disarm the majority of sheriffs deputies throughout the United States. You might be thinking "they're crazy" or "that's crazy" or "this blogger is crazy" but I speak the truth. There are the regular sheriffs deputies you may be familiar with, but there are others called the "Posse Comitatus" or as the old western movies put it "the sheriff's posse".  Some might think those are the guys who ride horses in 4th of July parades but the sheriff's posse according to Common Law is defined as the power and force of the county, and constitutes all males ages 15 and up of the county.  The sheriff has the common law power to call up all qualifying males to p...
Read more

How the Citizens Militia is Distinct from the State Sponsored Militia

Image
How the "Citizens Militia" is distinct from the state sponsored militia The Militia of the State is but a small portion of "the Militia" as it was understood by the founding fathers.  Unlike the Army and Navy, which were created by the Constitution, the Militia pre-existed the Constitution.  The Constitution simply gave Congress power to call up that portion of the Militia that would be needed in case of national emergency. The founders understood the Militia to be all able bodied male citizens capable of bearing arms, in a previous post The Power of a Tithing , I pointed out that those who were to be trained to aid in the common defense began at the age of 12 and up.  According to US Code, that portion that may be called up to aid the United States consist of all males (with few exceptions) ages 17-45, and most state codes share a uniformity with that code.  There are times however, when the Federal and State Government are either unable or unwilling to a...
Read more

A Well Regulated Militia: Intro

Image
My project is simply called "A Well Regulated Militia" it includes a Facebook Group , a page on Google Plus ,  YouTube Videos  and an upcoming book by the same title, as well as this blog.  Be prepared to learn EVERY aspect of the 2nd Amendment, from the right of the individual to keep and bear arms to what constitutes the Militia and everything in between.  Although the type of weapons we have had access to has changed over the centuries, the right is the same.  We have a right to keep and bear those arms that are antiquate for our own Self Defense and which would enable us to contribute to the Common Defense of our neighbors, county, state or nation at moments notice if called upon to do so. I hope you will join me, your contributions to the discussion will be greatly appreciated (provided your not trying to spread gun control and gun confiscation propaganda of course)
Read more