Nam Vet
I’m siding with you on this one also!
>The son-of-a-bitch is only 72. After that statement though, we should move to have him retired non compos mentis.
What’s sad is that such a statement isn’t considered treason, which the Constitution defines as “Treason against the United States, shall consist only in levying War against them, or in adhering to their Enemies, giving them Aid and Comfort.”
The reasoning is simple; the Second Amendment states:
A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Now, obviously there is a relationship between the militia and the right to bear arms shown here, namely: an individual member of society cannot function as a member of the militia without the equipment thereof. Therefore to bar access to such “terrible implements of war” is exactly equivalent (constitutionally speaking) to refusing to supply the army.
Therefore, because this is an exact equivalence, forbidding the general citizen the right to keep and bear arms *IS* supplying aid and comfort to America’s enemies, precisely because it denies otherwise capable militia members from the militia which *IS* the security for the free state.
Q.E.D.