I do not like the idea of guns being freely available to householders, simply because they would also be available to the bad guys; and they are the ones more likely to use a gun.
If looters think the householder is likely to be armed, then the robbers will also carry guns, looters are often in gangs, householders are often on their own, there are no guarantees that the good guys will win
i totally disagree - with all due respect, humans have had the ability to defend their persons and loved ones since time began,
even animals have claws,
the definition of a criminal is usually someone who doesn't obey laws, (disbelievers don't obey God's laws), anyways - most criminals can get hold of guns, and i could too back in my wild days,
with corruption at an all time high and politicians working almost directly under usurers and oil thiefs, it becomes an even bigger issue to rely solely on police who serve the orders of the politicians, not of the people - ask them - is heroin illegal? yes. if the politicians made it legal tomorrow, would you have to support me and retrieve it for me if it was stolen tomorrow? yes. what if the people were against such an idea? i would still have to take orders from the chain of command - or leave my job.
just a few weeks ago - i witnessed a boy on a bike rip a gold chain off a girls and ride off, i called the police and was on the phone with them for 5 minutes just describing what i saw, never saw them appear as i walked down the road- by which time the kid was gone, if he'd pulled a knife, the girl would have been a frozen corpse by the time any police could have responded. and having one cop per citizen would be like each citizen hiring a private bodyguard.
criminals can get weapons regardless, cops who serve the politicians have weapons with which they often abuse "authority", the common person is stuck like a person out of demolition man or brave new world. dead as a duck.
the right to bear arms is a God given right - as can be observed from even the time of Adam (pbuh) where he would have had at least a pointed object for hunting or self defence and through the ages. it is only recently when people have hired certain groups to take care of larger administration that governments or kings have taken away and demonized that God given right, and given the people the impression that they should have a monopoly on violence - which they are beginning to abuse.
is this how a public "servant" is supposed to address it's employers?
what was the need for that???
these are meant to be security guards hired by the people
here - a whole host of policemen come out on a giant road to ticket cars of supporters of a woman arrested for recording police from he own driveway when she saw them arresting a man she said was innocent, they let the boy go and arrested her, people came out the next day in support, suddenly, loads of police officers turn up in three squad cars and ticket them for being parked more than 12 inches from the curb on a road where 2 cars can pass side by side, where a truck would take up much more space, where they wouldn't normally have ANYONE ticketing.
is this why citizens hire security forces? to tax them unnecessarily??? i thought it was for convenience.
were forgetting that government is a group of people in a locality whom the people have hired for convenience - unless it's a tyrant king forcefully enforcing authority over them.
when america was made independent, it was through common people fighting king george's forces with whatever weapons they had, he would have still been ruling over them now if they didn't have the ability to defend themselves. only an insecure government which no longer represents the people would ban the people's God given right to bear arms as a blanket method due to a fear of an uprising.
if it's a government of the people by the people, the power should be in the hands of the people, unless people are made to believe that they themselves can't be trusted to keep arms, and a government which threatens martial law over refusal to allow $23 trillion bank bailouts can be trusted.
they were attacking the common people who had come out onto the streets to defend their properties while the thieves looted at the other end - in the name of "fighting vigilantism" .
the Prophets followers always had arms, and were taught righteousness and justice, not hollywood crime glorifying movies and libyan rebel triumphs - the only place he banned weapons was in the capital city - for obvious reasons - like a coupe.
2nd amendment:
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 free state is where people are not subject to a small group enforcing absolute authority over them - back in the days - only slaves were not allowed to keep arms - due to the fear of a slave uprising
that is the definition of "free" in contrast to "slave").
When in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth,
the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them,
a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal,
that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights,
that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.
— That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men,
deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed,
— That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends,
it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it,
and to institute new Government,
laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes;
and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.
But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism,
it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.
— Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government.
The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States.
To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world......
......He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries.
He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance.
He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures.
He has affected to render the Military independent of
and superior to the Civil Power.
He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation:
(obama justified illegal libya war powers not from congress - but from un authority - despite the wmd fiasco)
For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us:
(anti-terror cops with sub-machine guns?)
For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States:
(on Friday, the IPCC admitted it might have "inadvertently" misled the media into believing Duggan shot at police - that was the "independent" police complaints commission).
For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent:
For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:
For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
(Guantanamo bay?)
After the ummah gave their allegiance to Abu Bakr (ra), he said this:
O People! I have been put in authority over you and I am not the best of you.
So if I do the right thing then help me
and if I do wrong then put me straight.
Truthfulness is a sacred trust and lying is a betrayal.
The weak amongst you is strong in my sight.
I will surely try to remove his pain and suffering.
And the strong amongst you is weak to me I will – Allah willing – realise the right from him fully.
When obscene things spread among any nation, calamities generally continued to descend upon them.
As long as I obey Allah and His messenger, you should obey me,
and if I do not obey Allah and His messenger, then obedience to me is not incumbent upon you. (Now prepare for prayer).
how would they put him straight if he has all the soldiers and armed police under his command - leaving only the criminals interested in looting with weapons?
- it wouldn't make any sense.
It was narrated that Abu Hurayrah (may Allaah be pleased with him) said:
A man came to the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) and said:
O Messenger of Allaah, what do you think if a man comes wanting to take my property?
He said: “Do not give him your property.”
He said: What if he fights me?
He said: “Fight him.”
He said: What if he kills me?
He said: “Then you will be a martyr.”
He said: What if I kill him?
He said: “He will be in Hell.”
Narrated by Muslim (140).
