Wonít sacrifice freedom

Most of the 23 points that the president proposed are fine with me because they are designed to keep guns away from crazy people, but, the legislation that heís proposing that prohibits military-styledĒ weapons and limits the amount of rounds that a person can carry is just plain wrong. What really bugs me is that in his speech, he told America not to listen to people like me with opposing views because Iím wrong, self-serving and not using my common sense. How arrogant. There are always two sides of an argument and heís attempting to shut down the dialogue by making the other side less credible. Believe me, I know his side of the argument and could argue it for him and I still believe in my side of the argument. In case you havenít considered both sides, hereís mine:

Criminals arenít going to abide by this new law as they break the others.

The 2nd amendment wasnít written to make sure that we can still hunt. We see in the news and throughout history that often countries are overthrown from within. Lord forbid there be a time that someone goes nuts and takes the military with him. Our citizenry must be armed with the same resources as the military. Itís a hard concept to consider; probably causes cognitive dissonance attempting to think about protecting ourselves from the country and the military that we love and respect so much but that is exactly what the amendment is referring to.

Be very weary of people who say, ďIf it saves one life, then itís all worth itĒ. I donít want one more person to be the victim of a gun either, but Iím not willing to sacrifice my freedom for that impossible dream. Wouldnít we be an easy country to overthrow if it took threatening one life?

Kimberly Holdren