It is now closer to reality than you think.
You're sound asleep when you hear a thump outside your bedroom door. Half-awake,
and nearly paralyzed with fear, you hear muffled whispers. At least two people
have broken into your house and are moving your way. With your heart pumping,
you reach down beside your bed and pick up your shotgun. You rack a shell into
the chamber, then inch toward the door and open it. In the darkness, you make
out two shadows.
One holds something that looks like a crowbar. When the intruder brandishes
it as if to strike, you raise the shotgun and fire. The blast knocks both thugs
to the floor. One writhes and screams while the second man crawls to the front
door and lurches outside. As you pick up the telephone to call police, you know
you're in trouble.
In your country, most guns were outlawed years before, and the few That are
privately owned are so stringently regulated as to make them useless. Yours
was never registered. Police arrive and inform you that the second burglar has
died. They arrest you for First Degree Murder and Illegal Possession of a Firearm.
When you talk to your attorney, he tells you not to worry: authorities will
probably plea the case down to manslaughter.
"What kind of sentence will I get?" you ask.
"Only ten-to-twelve years," he replies, as if that's nothing. "Behave
yourself, and you'll be out in seven."
The next day, the shooting is the lead story in the local newspaper. Somehow,
you're portrayed as an eccentric vigilante while the two men you shot are represented
as choirboys. Their friends and relatives can't find an unkind word to say about
them. Buried deep down in the article, authorities acknowledge that both "victims"
have been arrested numerous times. But the next day's headline says it all:
"Lovable Rogue Son Didn't Deserve to Die." The thieves have been transformed
from career criminals into Robin Hood-type pranksters. As the days wear on,
the story takes wings. The national media picks it up, then the international
media. The surviving burglar has become a folk hero.
Your attorney says the thief is preparing to sue you, and he'll probably win.
The media publishes reports that your home has been burglarized several times
in the past and that you've been critical of local police for their lack of
effort in apprehending the suspects. After the last break-in, you told your
neighbor that you would be prepared next time. The District Attorney uses this
to allege that you were lying in wait for the burglars.
A few months later, you go to trial. The charges haven't been reduced, as your
lawyer had so confidently predicted. When you take the stand, your anger at
the injustice of it all works against you. Prosecutors paint a picture of you
as a mean, vengeful man. It doesn't take long for the jury to convict you of
all charges.
The judge sentences you to life in prison.
This case really happened.
On August 22, 1999, Tony Martin of Emneth, Norfolk , England , killed one burglar
and wounded a second. In April, 2000, he was convicted and is now serving a
life term.
How did it become a crime to defend one's own life in the once great British
Empire ?
It started with the Pistols Act of 1903. This seemingly reasonable law forbade
selling pistols to minors or felons and established that handgun sales were
to be made only to those who had a license. The Firearms Act of 1920 expanded
licensing to include not only handguns but all firearms except shotguns.
Later laws passed in 1953 and 1967 outlawed the carrying of any weapon by private
citizens and mandated the registration of all shotguns.
Momentum for total handgun confiscation began in earnest after the Hungerford
mass shooting in 1987.. Michael Ryan, a mentally disturbed Man with a Kalashnikov
rifle, walked down the streets shooting everyone he saw. When the smoke cleared,
17 people were dead.
The British public, already de-sensitized by eighty years of "gun control",
demanded even tougher restrictions. (The seizure of all privately owned handguns
was the objective even though Ryan used a rifle.)
Nine years later, at Dunblane , Scotland , Thomas Hamilton used a semi-automatic
weapon to murder 16 children and a teacher at a public school.
For many years, the media had portrayed all gun owners as mentally unstable
width='100%' or worse, criminals. Now the press had a real kook with which to
beat up law-abiding gun owners. Day after day, week after week, the media gave
up all pretense of objectivity and demanded a total ban on all handguns. The
Dunblane Inquiry, a few months later, Sealed the fate of the few sidearm still
owned by private citizens.
During the years in which the British government incrementally took away most
gun rights, the notion that a citizen had the right to armed self-defense came
to be seen as vigilantism. Authorities refused to grant gun licenses to people
who were threatened, claiming that self-defense was no longer considered a reason
to own a gun. Citizens who shot burglars or robbers or rapists were charged
while the real criminals were released.
Indeed, after the Martin shooting, a police spokesman was quoted as saying,
"We cannot have people take the law into their own hands."
All of Martin's neighbors had been robbed numerous times, and several elderly
people were severely injured in beatings by young thugs who had no fear of the
consequences. Martin himself, a collector of antiques, had seen most of his
collection trashed or stolen by burglars.
When the Dunblane Inquiry ended, citizens who owned handguns were given three
months to turn them over to local authorities. Being good British subjects,
most people obeyed the law. The few who didn't were visited by police and threatened
with ten-year prison sentences if they didn't comply. Police later bragged that
they'd taken nearly 200,000 handguns from private citizens.
How did the authorities know who had handguns? The guns had been registered
and licensed. Kinda like cars.
Sound familiar?
Battle of Lexington and Concord
On the 15 of April 1775, General Thomas Gage, British Military Governor of Massachusetts, was ordered to destroy the rebel's military stores at Concord. To disarm the Colonist. Had the Colonist been disarmed they probably would not have been successful in the Revolution against the British. This is basically why the 2nd amendment was put into the Constitution, not so Americans could go hunting and target practicing. The "Right To Bare Arms" was included in the Constitution so citizens could protect themselves against the Government. I may not have this worded entirely correctly but this is gist of it.
Amendment II
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.
WAKE UP AMERICA ; THIS IS WHY OUR FOUNDING FATHERS PUT THE SECOND AMENDMENT
IN OUR CONSTITUTION.
"..It does not require a majority to prevail,
but rather an irate, tireless minority keen to set brush fires in people's minds.."
--Samuel Adams
You better wake up cause your new president is going to do this very same thing
over here if he can get it done. And there are gullible people in congress and
on the street that will go right along with him.
Don't be one of them.