And while we are doing all these nice things, the Communists are screaming, hollering, stirring up the people to demonize us.
When are people going to get it through their thick skulls that elected officials don’t give two hoots in hell what the people do or say?
This is a war for our very survival as a free people. You had better prepare for a long and ugly conflict. A lot of us won’t survive; but it is better to die free than to live in chains.
First, if you go state by state...more than half just won’t agree with any significant change in gun laws. Mandating smaller ammo clips might pass through most voters, but that’s just all that would be accepted.
Second, once the media has kinda burned out on the topic of discussing the gun control stuff and people are turning their news off or just laughing over commentary....the whole thing starts to dissolve away.
Third, elections are just twenty-two months away, and with twenty democratic US Senators in the running...most don’t want a fuss over this topic, especially if they are from a southern state.
Finally, there are ten thousand fed and state laws and regulations on the books currently. The mere suggest that another page will help solve the mess...makes it all just a comedy of sorts. We have laws against murder, and we aren’t seeing much of a plus-up on that situation.
If your Congress-Critter is already among the more conservative, pro-2A types, focus on your Senator.
The only problem there is they are even more impervious to non-finacial influence.
They are wed to their ideology, and only care if you support them.
Not if you don’t.
“We must act calmly and rationally.”
I am acting calmly and rationally. I just found and ordered a 25 shell magazine for my Ruger 10/22 rifle. That plus hollow points for that weapon is acting calmly and rationally.
The author is not correct, when he writes: “The 2nd Amendment is not about hunting or self-defense.”
We understand that he’s trying to say, that the 2nd Amendment is *not exclusively about* hunting and self-defense, but he is not careful.
Carefully ...
- - -
Various wordings of the Second Amendment were tried during its development. The end result *purposefully* leaves out any enumeration of reasons why an individual has the right to keep and bear Arms. Any reason *why* an individual may or may not keep and bear Arms, was left to the states and the people thereof, to settle among themselves.
The only enumeration in the Second Amendment focuses on what to do about a group of men under Arms - what is to happen when individuals who bear military grade Arms are in a group, and they *are* capable of exercising martial power. What *then,* was to become of that power?
The answer was, that both the states and the federal government would rely upon *the group* being formally mustered, well-regulated, well trained to Arms, well discplined, and answerable to civilian authority.
Both the states and the federal government sought unity of function and preparedness of the militia of each state. The state militiae should be “well trained to Arms” and be capable of, and mindful of, lawfully exercising martial power and respecting lawful civilian authority.
In the old days up to around WW-I times and for a while thereafter, there was a tradition of local militia drilling on the common, the town green, or the county fairgrounds. It gave people an opportunity to remain somewhat familiar with military duty; it helped to keep them from becoming too rusty. It demonstrated the proper practices and discipline *for all to see.*
It is a shame that most communities and counties and states got out of that practice.
All the uses of weapons, firearm or not, for non-military purposes, were left to be decided by the states and their people.
Again, there would be no condition within the Second Amendment, by which you do, or do not, have the right to keep and bear Arms; because, the Founding Fathers correctly anticipated that any such enumerated condition might be used as grounds for an individual to either be forced to bear Arms or be stripped of their Arms.
- - -
The *only* say in the matter, that the federal government has, is in the agreement of the state and the federal government, specifically regarding *What will be “military grade” weapons.*
The reason, there, and there only, that the federal government has a say re the agreement, is because of the need of both the state and the federal government, that we maintain some common Arms for the common defense.
Having established in agreement, what are military grade Arms, then the state may use its authority to consider and establish regulations about such agreed-upon military grade Arms - while the federal government has no Constitutional authority to regulate those Arms within the states, though a state *could* adopt a federally-proposed war department regulation ... but still, the federal government cannot Constitutionally impose weapons regulations within a state.
All other Arms that the people keep and bear, are a matter for the people and their respective states to consider and regulate if the people choose to within the common law of their state -— this is a continuance of the same common law practices and individual rights to keep and bear Arms from before, during, and after all of the American Revolution, founding of our country, and establishment of our national government via our Constitution and its ratified Amendments.
The real issue that the left is trying to take over, is its desire to usurp the common law.
The common law is no business of the federal government to be in; but the leftists keep trying to displace the common law with a radical, nationalizing-socialist, communo-organizers’ legal system, generated from the left’s own liberal-media-vapors and other thoughtless pop-cultural demands for *both* police state security and “professional student security” at university among students who do not know why they are free individuals and really could care less as long as they are taken care of by government - something that popular leftist professors’ in loco dictatorships, relish.
OK, having cleared that up, I will try to follow the steps suggested by Lee DeCovnick, about visiting my Representatives’ (state and U.S.) and Senators (state and U.S.).
I totally disagree at this being a good idea. It sounds like bribery and I do not condone that at all, and there is absolutely no way I am going to give a nickel to Bill Nelson no matter how he votes on this issue.
I totally disagree at this being a good idea. It sounds like bribery and I do not condone that at all, and there is absolutely no way I am going to give a nickel to Bill Nelson no matter how he votes on this issue.
I totally disagree at this being a good idea. It sounds like bribery and I do not condone that at all, and there is absolutely no way I am going to give a nickel to Bill Nelson no matter how he votes on this issue.
I totally disagree at this being a good idea. It sounds like bribery and I do not condone that at all, and there is absolutely no way I am going to give a nickel to Bill Nelson no matter how he votes on this issue.
I totally disagree at this being a good idea. It sounds like bribery and I do not condone that at all, and there is absolutely no way I am going to give a nickel to Bill Nelson no matter how he votes on this issue.
I totally disagree at this being a good idea. It sounds like bribery and I do not condone that at all, and there is absolutely no way I am going to give a nickel to Bill Nelson no matter how he votes on this issue.
Something is going to happen somewhere, most likely there will be another mass shooting, probably in Illinois, might even be a connect to Libor again.
And then Illinois will start road blocks, will do block by block searches, will offer insane rewards for information leading to the seizure of all said weapons. All phones will be monitored, all purchases check in by Swat teams.
Obama will do a trial run with just one state, if it enrages the whole nation it will be a success.
So any way about it as long as their is the Islamic infiltration in our nations capitol they will continue to plan on how to get our neighbors to decapitate each other.
Islam has no army per se, no they are going to make us fight each other.
The author’s advice shows the extent of vanity in only some of the government corruption.
Refuse to follow the "new" law, especially when it infringes on a right.
Today gun owners must not wave weapons in the air and jabber mindlessly at those who wish to disarm us.
Horsehockey. Wave weapons and threaten. It takes that and more since some of those questionable lawmakers won't listen until they are hit over the head.
The Honorable Kelly Ayotte
The Honorable Jeanne Shaheen
The Honorable Ann Kuster
Washington, DC.
Subject: Pending Federal Gun Control Legislation
The Second Amendment of the US Constitution clearly establishes the limits of the Government concerning gun control. It was established by our founding fathers to give “We the People” an equal footing with the Government should our Government ever become tyrannical. We are at, or very near that point today.
I, as an American citizen, will not be disarmed! I will not give up my guns to the Government. I will not surrender my Rights to an out of control, despotic government, whose agenda is the destruction of this great nation as we once knew it.
The killings at Sandy Hook by a lunatic were tragic, but it pales in comparison to the murder of more than 3000 children per day to government sanctioned abortion. It pales in comparison to the number of innocent people that were killed in Mexico due to Operation Fast & Furious. It pales in comparison to Waco and Ruby Ridge. Our Government is complicit to murder in the first degree, willful and mindful of the very facts.
I urge you to consider carefully your actions in the forthcoming deliberations on the new Assault Weapons Ban. Magazines, clips, flash suppressors, thumbhole grips, folding stocks, night vision sites, lasers and lights do not make a firearm dangerous. A firearm is no more dangerous than a screwdriver. In the hands of a deranged human being, they are both deadly weapons.
Remember these four words as you cast your votes, “Shall Not Be Infringed”.
Sincerely, Keith P. Momberger
PING!
PING!
I have recently found that issues such as hunting and self defense against criminals are believed to be the reason we were granted our Second Amendment right by an alarming number of people, including many intelligent gun owners who support the right. I was shocked to just recently start realizing this fact.
The true meaning behind this right instantly defeats most of the major unconstitutional arguments used to intentionally bypass our Constitution. It also shows that we are already having unconstitutional restrictions placed on us that we need to free ourselves of. A massive campaign by all second amendment groups to inform the public about why this right exist should be a priority. Those in the public who are defending this right also need to make a point of explaining it's true meaning every time they speak on the issue.
It's ridiculous we allowed so much disinformation to be spread in what was clearly an intentional strategy by those on the left looking to bypass the Constitution by distorting the reasoning behind it.
If there is so much fear of being accused of inciting violence anytime there is an act against the government by an individual, then we have to stop cowering in the face of frivolous threats. Of course the left will make those kinds of ridiculous accusations in an attempt to destroy the individual and their cause, but if you can't mention the purpose of our Constitutional right to bear arms on a regular basis without that fear then the entire movement is too fragile to survive.
Allowing this mass disinformation campaign is a huge failure on the part of Second Amendment advocates, and the most influential people we have defending the issue don't seem like they will change their approach. I would like a politician to say gun control is not only unconstitutional, but then explain how the people trying to take away the right are in fact the same people the right was meant to give us a defense against.
Mark Levin: The reason the 2nd amendment exists is to arm the population to overthrow a tyrannical government