The Nineteenth Amendment is a threat to the U. S. Constitution:
From the Gallup Organization http://www.gallup.com/poll/releases/pr990423.asp "Women Particularly Critical of Role of Guns--Women are substantially more likely than men to cite the availability of guns as a significant factor contributing to school shootings. Women are also more likely to express confidence that stricter gun laws for teenagers would be a very effective preventive solution. Only 47% of men, compared to 73% of women, blame gun availability "a great deal" for causing U.S. school shootings like the one in Littleton-a 26-percentage-point difference. Similarly, just 53% of men compared to 70% of women think stricter gun laws would be very effective-a 17-point difference".
Without the female vote, the Constitutional right to bear arms would not be threatened. Because women are 11% more of the vote than men, 60.7% of the voters would vote to "infringe" on the right to bear arms. However, it requires support by two thirds of the voters to amend the constitution:
The Congress, whenever two-thirds of
both houses shall deem it
necessary, shall propose amendments to this constitution, or on the
application of the legislatures of two-thirds of the several states,
By passing a law which INFRINGES on the right to bear arms, without the required amendment to the Constitution necessary to repeal the Second Amendment, Congress is committing treason against the Constitution by violating their following oath http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/query/D?r106:7:./temp/~r1068FV6we::
This does not give Congress the authority to react emotionally to the female voter every time there is a national calamity. It does not give them the authority to abandon the Constitution nor its Amendments. It does not give them the authority to ignore the basic law of the land. It does not give them the authority to pass any law at any time.
It gives Congress only the *responsibility* to uphold the EXISTING Constitution OR to ratify it by following a specific easy to understand procedure.
Until Congress removes the Second Amendment from the Constitution, they cannot "infringe" on ownership of "arms" of ANY kind.
Twenty Dumb Things You Must Believe to be a Gun Control Nut
Guns & Crime Prevention
With 4 million robberies, burglaries, and other personal assaults each year, in a nation with 230 million private firearms, it is not surprising that 10% of these, or 400,000, involved crime victims who used firearms to defend their lives.
More Interesting Data on Guns
Guns & Child Deaths
It is questionable that even a 50% reduction in the number of guns, from 230 million to 115 million, is either possible or would have any impact at all on the rate at which children die from guns. On the other hand, voluminous data shows that eliminating SMHs would both reduce the rate at which children die from 36.4 to 0.62, and reduce the rate at which they die by guns from 5.24 to 0.62. This would save 9,607 children's lives each year. The proper method for reducing child deaths, accidental or murder, is to implement laws which reduce the number of SMHs. Outlawing guns which are less dangerous and subjecting citizens to egregious acts by government not only violates the Constitution, but it puts American citizens at as serious a risk as the following citizens, who also didn't have guns
Guns & Death by Government
The 20th century's top nine megamurderers, as estimated in the book "Death by Government"
Joseph Stalin 42,672,000 1929-1936
Mao Tse-Tung 37,828,000 1923-1976
Adolph Hitler 20,946,000 1933-1945
Chiang Kai-shek 10,214,000 1921-1948
Vladimir Lenin 4,017,000 1917-1924
Hideki Tojo 3,990,000 1937-1945
Pol Pot 2,397,000 1968-1987
Yayha Khan(Pakistan) 1,500,000 1971
Josip Tito Yugoslavia 1,172,000 1941-1987
Guns & National Defense
Had it not been for private gun ownership in the US, the Japanese would not have stopped at Pearl Harbor and we would now be trying to speak Japanese to our current jailers. Even IF the number of children killed by guns could be reduced to zero with a 90% reduction of guns, it is just not worth the risk to citizens who have not amended a Constitution which has served us well for more than 2 centuries.
Guns & Automobiles
The National Safety Council http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/af78.htm reports that our 181,700,000 licensed drivers killed 43,200 fellow citizens in traffic accidents in 1997, a fatality rate of 23.8 fatalities per 100,000 licensed drivers. It also reports that 1,500 fellow citizens died last year at the hands of accidents by our 230 million firearms http://www.nsc.org/lrs/statinfo/af8.htm#H , a fatality rate of 0.65 fatalities per 100,000 firearms. Thus the accidental death rate of automobiles, which are not constitutionally protected, is 36.6 times greater than the accidental death rate of guns, which ARE constitutionally protected.
The real danger of gun control laws, besides being unconstitutional, besides putting American citizens at risk to "death by government" and by criminals, puts automobiles in position to be banned by government.
How can we justify a restriction of a constitutionally protected private property when private property which is not constitutionally protected is 36 times more dangerous to human life?
Guns & Suicide
restriction on civilian
ownership of firearms
Guns in the Medical Literature,Suter, Med. Ass'n of Georgia, Vol 83, 1994 http://teapot.usask.ca/cdn-firearms/Suter/med-lit.html