Don't Mess with my Guns

A vote for Obama is a vote against guns. This cry grew louder after the election. Today, emailed messages of the "Ten ways Obama is Destroying our Country," places loss of Second Amendment rights high on the list.

Local buzz indicates tightening of gun control is feared more than economy based concerns.

I remember when we used guns for hunting. Gun safety and hunting skill were part of a child's upbringing. From the age of twelve, I learned how to walk a corn field for pheasant with four or five other hunters without fear of getting pelted by buckshot. Hunting was a way of life in our Idaho farming community near the Snake River.

To my knowledge, a thief never came to our house. If so, the trouble maker would have met Dad's 12 gauge shotgun. However, his love for the doubled-barrel shotgun centered on bagging plump pheasants, not Second Amendment rights.

Rep. Walt Minnick and Sen. Mike Crapo assure us that gun control is not on the menu this session. There are too many pressing problems to take care of before Obama can meddle with our Second Amendment rights. The message is that legislators from either party are against letting that new president, dead set on destroying our country, mess with our guns.

What's behind this fear of losing guns? Why is there a rush of people across America stockpiling ammunition? During his campaign, President Obama took a stand against gun crime by calling for the Tiahrt (Rep. Todd Tiahrt, R-KS) restrictions to be removed. He continues this stand today. Some call this a common sense stand.

Tihrt stands in the way of law enforcement by restricting access of important trace data making it impossible to stop the flow of illegal guns to criminals.

The Second Amendment to the United States Constituion reads: "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."

A key phrase seemingly overlooked is "a well-regulated militia." Those crying for A gun in every pot rather than A chicken in every pot, tend to overlook the well-regulated part.

Logically, freeing law enforcement to trace guns back to the criminals who obtained them and inventory checks for loss and theft are not going to stop all of the criminal based activity involving gun trafficking. But, it will stop some of it. Don't we want to enable rather than hinder law enforcement to stop the flow of illegal guns? Sounds like common sense to me.

Illegal arsenals are found containing grenades with launchers and bazookas. If someone breaks into my place armed with one of those, my daddy's shotgun is going to look like a Dollar Store toy.