27 Comments
Apr 27, 2021Liked by Emily Miller

I stand behind you in line at the store with a smile on my face… and a gun under my shirt and you are none the wiser. Yet you are safer for having me next to you. I won’t shoot you. My gun can’t pull its own trigger. It is securely holstered with trigger covered. It cannot just “go-off”. However, rest assured that if a criminal/lunatic walks into the store and pulls out a gun, I will draw my pistol and protect myself and family, therefore I’m protecting you and your family. I may freeze, I may piss my pants, I may get shot before I can pull the trigger… But I won’t die a helpless blubbering heap on the floor begging for my life or my child’s life. I won’t be that victim. I choose not to be. As for you, I don’t ask you carry a gun, so do not limit me or my family on what or where we can use to defend ourselves, we are Pro-Choice. If you are not comfortable, then don’t. But I will keep my right to choose to not be helpless victim.

There is evil in the world and if evil has a gun, I will also.

Expand full comment
Apr 27, 2021Liked by Emily Miller

As a Retired Marine I’m pro 2A. I also believe with rights comes responsibility. What types of situations would allow a government body to prove a person is irresponsible and in a “shall issue” situation withhold a permit for the safety of all. Felons have proven they are irresponsible and forfeited the rights granted under 2A. However what about a person with significant mental illness that refuses treatment or is unable to be treated properly due to the severity of their condition?

It is my opinion a person who chooses to exercise their right to posses and or carry needs to be responsible and due things like 1) practice use as well as safe handling of the firearm. 2) keep it secure to prevent accidents including those to young and or irresponsible from gaining access to it.

There are some very fine lines here. I realize the propaganda the anti gun lobby uses to scare people into supporting reactionary unconstitutional laws. (CT after the Newtown school shooting) As we remind people new laws only penalize the law abiding responsible people and work to help remove unlawful possession and distribution of firearms IMO. Your thoughts?

Expand full comment

Good work Emily! Keep fighting the good fight! You are brave and a powerful voice.

Expand full comment
Apr 26, 2021Liked by Emily Miller

Let’s hope they stand strong for gun rights

Expand full comment
May 5, 2021Liked by Emily Miller

I think I come at this from a little different perspective from a lot of folks. First and foremost, I am a Constitutional absolutist. "Shall not be infringed" means just exactly that. It is worth noting that there was NO prohibition on felons owning or possessing guns until the 1968 Gun Control Act. And honestly, we should probably be grateful for that. Had there *been* that Prohibition, the M1 carbine probably would never have been invented. A man named David Marshall William's invented the gas piston action that made the M1 carbine such a successful and reliable weapon. It was one of the things, along with the Jeep, that folks such as Patton and Eisenhower said helped us win WW2. David Williams invented and perfected that gas piston, while working in a machine shop.... in the Caledonia State Prison Farm in North Carolina. He was serving time for the conviction of murder....of a Deputy Sheriff... while Williams was running an illegal still. Have a read of the Wiki page for Williams, it's pretty fascinating stuff.

I am not at all in favour of any governmental agency having the power to limit or deny *any* of my G-d given rights. Once they *start*, they will NEVER stop, and there will be continued "mission creep". Especially in this day and age, where there are sooooo many things that are classed as Felonies, I dispute totally the notion that a felony conviction should forever deny a citizen his or her G-d given rights. (This assumes that the citizen has served their sentence, and fully paid their restitution, if any). Many jurisdictions nowadays are automatically reinstating the ability to vote, upon release from prison. I support that, and believe that they should go further and restore *all* rights.

As to mental illness.... this is an unpopular opinion, I feel sure, but unless someone is enough of a danger to themselves or others, to be forcibly committed to a mental institution, then same answer as felons... they shouldn't lose their rights.

If we as a country , keep allowing the government to chip away at our rights, and deliver a whole laundry list of "exceptions".... then the rights aren't G-d given at all, they are doled out by a quasi-paternalistic government. If that's the case, then that same government can (and most certainly WILL) feel safe and justified in taking those same rights *away* from the citizens at any excuse, no matter how thin. We have already seen this in New Orleans after Katrina, just as one example.

I'd love to hear (I mean read, I guess ;) ) your thoughts on my perspectives, Emily and the rest of you Gentle Readers. I promise that this isn't some elaborate troll.

I guess that I've always felt that a Right that was limited, was no Right at all, but rather a privilege that couldn't be counted on. I appreciate both the work you're doing, Emily, and also the opportunity to interact with you and quite a few other interesting, intelligent, and thoughtful folks hereabouts. I will say that, in a perfect world, these conversations would be better around a table in person rather than solely through a textual medium. The lack of tone, and body language, and all the other conversational cues and contexts, really causes the discussion to suffer a large loss. But that's the "perfect world", and so in this imperfect one, I am grateful to have the chance to converse and discuss important things with folks I'd probably never meet, otherwise. Y'all be safe and well.

Expand full comment
Apr 26, 2021Liked by Emily Miller

🤞 Let’s hope Amy does the right thing. And perhaps she may address carry outside the home. that’d be YUGE! Good timing on the article, Emily 😉 (see also “Prescient” [presh-uhnt])

Expand full comment

Roberts has been nothing but a HUGE disappointment.

Expand full comment

My worry is one of the other two, especially Kavanaugh. Despite their stated 2A friendliness, their decisions since confirmation have not always been consistent.

Expand full comment