New gun bills mean more restrictionsPublished 10:27am Friday, May 24, 2013
By Tim Thomas, Guest Columnist
Friends and neighbors, let’s talk frankly for a minute. We have heard an awful lot lately from the federal government about “Gun Control” issues. Now our state legislature has put forth two bills (one from the house and one from the senate) that on the surface “seeks to restore and protect the rights of law-abiding gun owners and sportsmen in Alabama.”
I beg to differ. Neither of the bills do what they are supposed to do.
In actuality, both bills are restrictive in nature.
Senate Bill 286 passed 28 to 5 and is now headed to the House of Representatives.
The Second Amendment of the Constitution as ratified Dec. 17, 1791 states, “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. Also consider the Constitution of Alabama 1901, section 26: Right to bear arms – That every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state.
After reading SB286, I fail to see how the proposed legislation is anything more than a watered down version of what was being discussed at the federal level under “Gun Control.”
Why would anyone need a free of charge and good for life “car carry permit” if not for creating a database of who had them? Another provision extends the Castle Doctrine to include your business. Under this provision, we can only defend ourselves in our homes or businesses.
I suppose that’s OK, if that’s the only places we ever go. Should we not be able to defend ourselves ANYWHERE we go? I think so, and I think that’s what is implied in both Constitutions.
We are being denied by our state legislature our right to self defense except where they think we should have it. Is that not a form of gun control? I think so.
I have an idea: instead of wasting time debating and trying to pass more gun control laws, maybe our legislature should just simply follow section 26 of the State Constitution of Alabama 1901 “That every citizen has a right to bear arms in defense of himself and the state” and the affirmation in the Second Amendment that the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, “SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.”
I made the statement that we should be able to defend ourselves anywhere we go, and I know that some folks will argue that point.
Business owners should have the right to prohibit guns on their property – after all, it belongs to them. If they don’t want to allow guns on their property, I believe that should be their choice. The state legislature should not be allowed to force business owners. Is that not another infringement on our rights as citizens (business owners), as guaranteed by the Constitution?
To me it’s a choice. If I choose to work somewhere that guns are not allowed, I will find another place to work. If I want to go someplace, I would not choose to go to a place that restricts my right to keep and bear arms, but that’s my choice.
Maybe it’s just me, but I see SB 286 as another infringement on our rights as guaranteed under the Bill of Rights of the Constitution.
Everything we do in life is a choice. It’s up to us to make the right choices and be accountable and responsible for those choices. I for one think that we as a free people have allowed our elected officials to regulate and control us for way to long.
I would like to see our elected representatives start repealing laws that violate the Constitution and stop trying to control our lives, but that’s just me.
Life is a choice. Make it wisely.
“Hold on, my friends, to the Constitution and to the Republic for which it stands. Miracles do not cluster and what has happened once in 6,000 years may not happen again. Hold on to the Constitution, for if the American Constitution should fail, there will be anarchy throughout the world.” -Daniel Webster
Thomas is a guest columnist for The Outlook.