How can someone be anti gun control but pro warrantless wiretapping?

I'm with you man. The people need their privacy rights back. For firearms and for communications privacy. Google: Ron Paul

Hi,

I think you're wrong in saying that many people who are opposed to gun control are NOT concerned about warrantless wiretapping. I think, if you actually did your homework, that you'd find that the majority of folks who are opposed to gun control are folks who truly support our Constitution. You might disagree, but I believe gun owners are more aware of the Bill of Rights than folks who favor gun control.

While our Constitution contains no express right to privacy, the Bill of Rights reflects the concern of James Madison and other framers for protecting specific aspects of privacy, such as the privacy of beliefs (1st Amendment), privacy of the home against demands that it be used to house soldiers (3rd Amendment), privacy of the person and possessions as against unreasonable searches (4th Amendment), and the 5th Amendment's privilege against self-incrimination, which provides protection for the privacy of personal information.

I hate to imagine martial law and government take-over scenarios, but I have always believed that it's better to have a gun and never need it, than to need a gun and not have it.

Take care!

gr8pop - I completely agree with you, I am not in favor of overturning the 2nd amendment by any stretch of the imagination. My comment was directed towards what I feel is a conflict of interest for those who do not want gun control but feel that government eavesdropping is a beneficial action for the country.

I am essentially asking, why one and not the other? I feel if one is for privacy and personal rights, that should span both topics.

Hi somerandomdude, I truly did not think you were in favor of overturning ... anything. :)) I realize that you can find gun rights advocates that feel that it's okay for our government to spy on us, but I suggest that they are not among the majority of gun rights advocates. I can find environmental advocates that don't recycle, and do drive SUVs. I don't expect you to see logic in this, but gun owners are less likely (than non-gun ownders) to accept forfeiture of liberties to gain security. They believe that we, as individuals, are responsible for our security. Here's something you may notice if it's brought to your attention. If you've seen various illustrations of the "10 steps towards Fascism", you might notice that gun control advocates never include a very important step ... that being the disarming the populace. I don't know about you, but I see that as an important step. The setting up of a surveillance system IS considered one of the steps. Second Amendment advocates are usually acutely aware of all the steps. I'll agree to disagree with you. We may be nearly on the same side(s). ... (of course there are more than 2 sides)

Cheers!

gr8pop, I understand exactly what you mean and I too think we're much closer to agreeing than disagreeing.

I am completely with you about environmental advocates that do not practice sound person environmental practices. In the end, I think we need to practice what we preach, or at least try our best to do so.

I really appreciate the conversation about this. Once again, I really think we're on the same side here, we're just going about it in different ways. ;)

FLAKY !!!!!!!! LIKE A SNOWFLAKE

grobba, For the record, I'm against gun control. I'm for the Second Amendment. This should have been clear by a comment I made (above) that reads, "I have always believed that it's better to have a gun and never need it, than to need a gun and not have it. "

I'll go a step further and say that I think gun ownership should be encouraged.

If you're going to make a comment like, "FLAKY", then perhaps you try to help readers out by indicating what or who (?) is flaky. Thanks!

Good point. When will the sheep start thinking before they listen and regurgitate? While I am not in favor of total gun control I must say this--How come many of the people who want guns in case their government tries to harm their life in any way are often the same ones claiming to be the most patriotic America loving individuals? If you love your country and government so much then why are you so scared of it that you need a small arsenal just in case you have to fight it?

In a time when our rights are rapidly evaporating in this country, I should think that you wouldn't be so quick to give this one up. The right to bear arms is as important as freedom of speech, and I don't plan to give that up or limit it either.

People who fear guns really fear each other. A cell phone in a car is far more dangerous than a gun in an attic.

I'm all for limiting access to felons and psychos, but let's not give so freely our rights to protect ourselves - especially with such an abusive and secretive administration in power.

Oh and by the way, a pistol won't save you from a team of kevlar wearing specialists sporting automatics and grenades. That's not the point.

P.s. I don't personally own a gun, but I do have the right to purchase one - for now at least.

I will have to say that for the most part I agree with you. However, my reasons for the agreement are as varied as the next person in the country. I am a gun owner, I know the differences between right and wrong, good and bad behavior, the need for a firearm vs. the negative connotations associated with owning one. My primary reasons for owning a gun/guns will primarily remain forever as a tool for harvesting food for my family and I. The fact that I could easily use said firearms as a tool to defend me and mine from those who would deprive me of life, liberty, and resources is, at best, a secondary concern that I have, and rarely do I consider my guns in that capacity. Frankly I need my guns, as a supplimental tool for food production as the economy in my region is slowly declining due to known economic problems in the country as of right now.
I can see the other side's point though, Crime is on a rise, and it seems that the criminal element has an easy access to firearms to use against innocent people (especially in major urban centers across the US) that never seems to abate. I feel a mass majority of individuals who are directly in favor of extreme gun control measures primarily reside in said urban centers where the need for a firearm to gather foodstuff is neither needed nor wanted, as they have easily accessable places to gather food and whatnot, so I can see where due to violent crimes committed in their areas they would like to see harsher gun control methods implemented to combat the criminal element.
admirable desires and efforts, however, as some have already pointed out, If these measures "were" implemented by the government, a vast majority of americans, who depend on firearms to provide for the health and prosperity of their families living in a non-urban environment would basically starve and ultimatley fail. The burden on the welfare system is already high as it is, imagine 2 to 3 times that number suddenly dropped into an overtaxed welfare system due to not being able to simply go hunting for food.

For every decision that this government makes in what it considers "best" for it's citizens, there will ultimately be victims created due to the decisions of a few. I value my right "to bear arms" for the right reasons, and if they were taken away tomorrow, I have no doubt that the criminal element will still illegally obtain weapons for nefarious purposes to the detriment of society as a whole.....my two pence worth at any rate.

the decision of the current administration to implement warrantless wiretapping was a poor move on thier part, however noble their intentions were. it's acts like these that make me to not want to trust the government for the health and wellbeing of the country, and that my friends, is a scary place to live in indeed...

What gets me is how much the government has been trying to protect people. Seatbelt law is one. Smoking in public is another. Gun control is another. When we lose the right to have bear arms. We will finally lose the right to be free and justly so. Sometimes I wish there was just less government in our lifes. That way, if I didn't ware my seatbelt while my .44 handgun sits on the seat, while my friend smokes his cigerette and then I get in to an accident and am killed. At least I would know beyond a shadow of a doubt, that I died free.

I did not agree with you simply by the fact that I believe in no gun control at all and also believe what the government is doing to wiretap our communications is inherently unconstitutional. I stand up for every amendment of the first 10 which are non-negotiable.