America's #1 Online Cigar Auction
first, best, biggest!

Last post 23 years ago by sherpamills. 6 replies replies.
Letter to Mr. Heston
unklebill Offline
#1 Posted:
Joined: 12-29-1999
Posts: 729
TO:
Charlton Heston, President
National Rifle Association
11250 Waples Mill Road
Fairfax, VA 22030


877-375-4202, 800-392-8683


March 8, 2001


RE: My Second Amendment Rights


Dear Mr. Heston:


I am writing to demand that you resign your post as President of the National Rifle Association. Like most actors, you talk a good game, but like many politicians, you refuse to follow through. You are not doing your job.

You have asserted that I have a right to self-defense, that I have this right whoever the aggressor against me is, and that I have the right to use "any means necessary." How lovely of you. I am pleased to hear you admit it.

If that is the way you feel, then why, Mr. Heston, aren't you working to secure my Second Amendment rights? As you well know, Amendment II says nothing about "guns" or "rifles", but rather, about "arms". Guns are ridiculously obsolete in our modern world. With religious fundamentalists seizing power in places like Pakistan, Afghanistan and the United States -- Afghanistan is rumored to have access to nuclear bomb components, and the United States and Pakistan certainly do -- how am I to protect myself and my family with a pitiful little Barrett .50 caliber M82A1? It may fire armor-piercing and incendiary ammunition, Sir, but it is no deterrent against an adversary with nukes, and certainly offers me no real protection.

I am also outraged that you are not working, right now, to see that the overly-restrictive treaties America has signed with other nations which prevent me from legally possessing chemical and biological weapons are overturned. This is a personal sovereignty issue. I never waived my right to keep any of these Arms.

And please, do not insult my intelligence with talk that my government has these weapons, and can deter or retaliate against aggressors on my behalf. What claptrap! That is no different than saying my First Amendment freedoms are protected when my government speaks for me.

As you have so wisely pointed out, Mr. Heston, my right to armed self-protection is supreme, and of more urgent importance than my right to freedom of speech or of religion. If I won't trust the government to do my talking or worshipping for me, what makes you think I would trust them to stand guard for me? I wouldn't! It has often been said, "If you want something done right, do it yourself." Well, I want this thing done right!

So, I issue an ultimatum to you today. Either put up, or shut up. Either get busy securing my right to bear Arms, ALL ARMS, or step down from your post, and allow that hallowed seat to be filled by someone who won't cave to the liberals. Either do your duty, or resign and let a leader who loves Amendment II as much as I do assume the Office of President of the NRA.
abennett23 Offline
#2 Posted:
Joined: 02-15-2001
Posts: 126
Thomas Jefferson stated "The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is,
as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government." Politicians who fear the people seek to disarm them. People who fear their government's intentions refuse to be disarmed. The Founders understood this. So, too, does every tyrant who ever lived. Are you asking Mr Heston to undue years of Liberal court decisions, laws and media propeganda overnight. One must also look at the current definition of a well regulated militia. Well trained armed citizens, being necessary to the security of a free State, the Right of citizens to possess and carry weapons, esp, firearms, will not be violated, encroached, defeated, invalidated, nullified, or infringed in any way. I am not aware of any training courses for nuclear weapons, therefore its unreasonable to think that we, as individuals, should be able to "carry" them.
unklebill Offline
#3 Posted:
Joined: 12-29-1999
Posts: 729
There were no training classes for firearms before people possesed them. Give me the nuclear weapons and then there should be voluntary classed for the poeple that posses them. But not mandatory. God no! Nor should there be any safety devices sold with them! That would be in violation of my constitutional rights!
Charlie Offline
#4 Posted:
Joined: 06-16-2002
Posts: 39,751
Unclebill,sounds like you want to go back to the days of the Wild West and settle arguments with a gunfight!
That would be something in Southern California-we would eliminate about 50% of the High School students over the course of the year long session with legalized gun fights! I a Republican who is in support of gun control! I am not afraid to register my firearms! However, I do not think that gun control will keep the guns out of the criminals hands..as many liberals seem to!
tailgater Offline
#5 Posted:
Joined: 06-01-2000
Posts: 26,185
I think it is obvious that Unclebill's remark is a tad on the sarcastic side. The problem with this issue is the emotion behind it and the unwillingness of both sides to compromise. The NRA wants guns sold in corner convenience marts, and the liberals want no citizen to have a gun within 1000 yards of their home. Each side is afraid to budge in fear that an inch becomes a mile. There can be no laws for common sense, else the prison population would explode.
Charlie Offline
#6 Posted:
Joined: 06-16-2002
Posts: 39,751
Yeah, I sensed the sarcasim in Unclebill's posting and attempted to put some in mine(weak attempt)===I aint that thin skinned....Gaiter I will send you a couple of Aristoff's next week!
sherpamills Offline
#7 Posted:
Joined: 01-26-2001
Posts: 147
give them all guns an let god sort them out
Users browsing this topic
Guest