I did not write this, but received it from a friend via email.
Liberals would have us believe that the 2nd Amendment does not protect a citizen's right to possess a firearm. The more generous or perhaps disingenuous allow that while the 2nd Amendment may allow the possession of firearms, There is no need for a class of weapons that only a liberal can recognize as, "assault weapons". They take exception to high capacity magazines, but never differentiate between "high" and "acceptable" capacity. Liberals take exception to bayonet lugs. Come to think of it the British took exception to bayonet lugs. In the time leading up to the Revolutionary War, the British banned the possession of muskets and rifles that would accept a bayonet. There are two million AR-15 variants on the civilian market. How many bayonets are out there that will fit an AR-15? Liberals contend limiting features or eliminating whole classes of weapons is perfectly acceptable, in the name of public safety.
A lone gunman who decides to go out in a "blaze of glory" by killing innocents as a prelude to suicide is still an anomaly. While firearms are the weapons of choice they are by no means the only way to commit mass murder, box cutters and Boeing 737's provided to be an effective choice in Washington DC, New York City and a Pennsylvania hillside. Timothy McVeigh used fertilizer and diesel fuel to great effect in Oklahoma City. Jim Jones used Kool Aide, not the same concoction that most liberals are imbibing. All of these alternative methods of murder are not as effective as the "smart phone" or common cell phone. Consider the following:
Driver Electronic Use in 2010
2009 Cell Phone and Distracted Driving Statistics
Teen Driver Cell Phone and Text Messaging Statistics
To use liberal logic, the 1st Amendment protects freedom of speech and free association. This protection is not absolute. One cannot yell, "FIRE" in a crowded theater. It is not allowed to express certain opinions on college campuses. Black people and Quentin Tarantino can say NIGGER but white people can not. Liberals are very comfortable in placing limits on speech, so it would seem to follow they would support an outright ban on cell phones. After all people are dying! The founders could never have contemplated that people would talk or text one another across great distances, therefore they didn't intend that such a device be protected. Current laws banning talking and texting while driving have proven to be ineffective. Innocent people are being killed because lone texters ignore the law and common sense. If texters couldn't text and drive, then they couldn't kill.
If an outright ban on cell phones is too extreme then how about banning certain features. No texting, no APPS, no Internet, and e-mail on any smart phone or cell phone. Leave the GPS maybe somebody can develop an APP that will disable cell phones when the GPS detects speeds in excess of 3 MPH. There are problems inherent in any ban. First, the government would have to stop buying cell phones for irresponsible people. Some psychologists claim that cell phone use and texting are addictive behaviors, a 12 step program will have to be designed and implemented. Remember uncontrolled mass communication is too important to be left to the common person. They might actually begin to think, then where would the liberals be?
Spread the word people who use cell phones are all potential murders. Apple is manufacturing weapons of mass destruction.