It urges policy makers and the Supreme Court to make the mistake of curing what could prove to be an isolated problem by disarming the government of its principal weapon to stop future terrorist attacks.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
Understanding the long, sordid history of gun control in America is key to understanding the dangers of disarming.
Preventing terrorist attacks is of the highest important, but trashing the Constitution is not the right way to do it.
It is a virtual reflex for governments to plead security concerns when they undertake any controversial action, often as a pretext for something else.
Guns are the ultimate bulwark against government misbehavior.
It is changing the face of terrorism. It is basically bringing it to the United States, to our great citizens. We know the terrorists are barbaric and murderers that attack innocent civilians, as they did in this case.
We have to face the fact that meaningful gun control has to be a part of homeland security.
The primary goal of the War on Terror is to prevent an attack from happening.
The government wants to be able to attack extremism and hatred wherever it occurs.
One of the most important post-9/11 efforts made to counter terrorism and the spread of weapons of mass destruction is President Bush's Proliferation Security Initiative (PSI).
For the United States to recommit itself to the obligation that we undertook in the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty that many other states undertook, which was to work towards disarmament and the eventual elimination of nuclear weapons, is something that manifestly serves our national security interests.
No opposing quotes found.