Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

It’s Not Just Your Guns; It’s America We’re Losing
Absolute Rights ^ | January 9, 2013 | Tim Young

Posted on 01/11/2013 4:42:09 AM PST by IbJensen

This might come as a surprise to a lot of you, but I’m not a gun person… never have been, never will be. And you can stop reading right there and be angry, but you know better… so read on. The one thing that I have always been and always will be, is a freedom person.

I believe in all of the freedoms and liberties given to us by the Bill of Rights… something that very few Americans currently understand.

One group of people who completely understand our rights are the President of the United States, Barack Obama, and the elected officials of the Democratic Party. That understanding should scare you… because they fully know the freedoms we were given when the Bill of Rights and Constitution were written, and have actively worked to take them away.

Today, Vice President Joe Biden announced that the President would unilaterally act using an executive order, SOMETHING HE PROMISED NEVER TO DO WHEN HE RAN FOR OFFICE FOUR YEARS AGO, to limit your Second Amendment rights.

He is attempting to act on the tragedies of the past year to limit the rights of the republic to be free and protect itself… The Second Amendment, which, for those of you have forgotten, says the following:

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.

This Amendment was written because our founding fathers wanted us to have the same footing as the government… to have the same weapons and defensive capabilities so that our own leaders wouldn’t take advantage of our people. It’s a “when all else fails,” clause.

America has internally become weak because of a long time of peace. Somewhere in between the Civil War and now, we have forgotten what it was like to fight for our rights. We have taken for granted the fact that we have been able to work together to accomplish great things in not only America’s history, but the world’s. When you get comfortable and settle in to your every day life, you let your defenses down… that’s when things go horribly wrong.

What’s happening now is a result of us being fat and happy. We haven’t been threatened on our home turf in over a century… but that doesn’t mean that we couldn’t be again.

What the President is doing is taking away that final “when all else fails,” ability to protect our rights. The people of this nation have spoken, and stupidly, they have chosen to take hand outs and continue to be fat, happy, and lazy…

We brushed over the fact that only months ago, we were fed lies on Benghazi, not to cover up what happened there, but in an attempt to begin to limit our First Amendment freedom of speech. Remember the outcries of the Democrats when they were blaming a video for the attacks… we were told that we needed to start to scale back what we could talk about to protect ourselves. That didn’t work…

So when they failed we were hit with another tragedy in Connecticut, and they have moved on to trying to take your guns… If that doesn’t work, there are a pile of other rights that they can try to take, and I’m sure they will…

They will continue to do so until we finally say “ENOUGH!” But let’s face it, America said “FORWARD!” in the last election…

This isn’t the America that the Founding Fathers intended to have; this isn’t the America that I was brought up to believe in; this is a new America, with less freedom than we have ever had. An America where people can live without working and an America where the stupid prevail.

It’s time to act folks. It was time to act 4 years ago, and it was time to act in November, but that didn’t work either.

Call your representatives in Congress, call Attorney Generals in your home States, and call your friends and neighbors to do the same.

You’re about to finally and definitively lose your freedoms… and you’re about to finally and definitively lose your America.

The time is now to be smarter than they think you are.


TOPICS: Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Editorial; Government
KEYWORDS: banglist; democrats; evilobamaregime; guncontrol; obama; obamaisamonster; remakeamerica; secondamendment; takeamericaback; tyranny; youwillnotdisarmus
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 last
To: Lazamataz

“Let me know how that works out for you, as far as saving America.”

Well, America seems to be goin’ the way it’s goin’, regardless of what anyone (at least on this forum) talks about doing to “save” it.

I imagine there were similar discussions held not long after the Titanic hit the iceberg...


41 posted on 01/11/2013 10:21:54 AM PST by Road Glide
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 29 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

Re #38:

I wuz gonna say it, you saved me the effort, quite well too.

However, the Grand Old Stupid Party won’t learn a damn’d thing from it, the will take the exact opposite message from it, “Our candidate was just not “centrist” enough last time, let’s get an even more liberal ass hole next time”.

That’s gonna be one heck of a challenge though, to find someone with an “R” behind his/her name, more liberal than Romney.


42 posted on 01/11/2013 11:21:02 AM PST by Graybeard58 ("Civil rights” leader and MSNB-Hee Haw host Al Sharpton - Larry Elder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: barefoot_hiker
Won't own a gun. FAIL. (Every true American should).

I make an exception for blind people, other than that I pretty much agree.

Welcome to F.R.

43 posted on 01/11/2013 11:27:44 AM PST by Graybeard58 ("Civil rights” leader and MSNB-Hee Haw host Al Sharpton - Larry Elder)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 34 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

okay.. not an argument for socialism, but an argument against the coming dictatorship. I have no idea where Romney was proposing a tyranny, but the government is becoming tyrannical and having a person propose a smaller federal government with less power is always preferred.

You can USE UPPERCASE TEXT all you want and use whatever logical pretzels you desire but the fact still remains that if we were to have elected Romney instead of allowing Obama to remain in office, we would not be discussing gun confiscation, but tax policy and economic growth which was my original statement.

I happen to agree about the rules garbage at the RNC but it was what it was and we had two logical choices and some decided that Obama was better. I disagree that Romney was a socialist, he wasn’t, but Obama ran as one (as well as a gun banner) and we had a choice. Now we no longer have that choice.


44 posted on 01/11/2013 12:16:36 PM PST by newnhdad (Our new motto: USA, it was fun while it lasted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 38 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
I wuz gonna say it, you saved me the effort, quite well too.

Thank you, Graybeard58; it's always good to know when a job's been done "quite well." :)
Good to see you around.

45 posted on 01/11/2013 12:17:27 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: newnhdad
There's always a choice.
The question is "are you willing to push?"

I'm a Constitutionalist and, out of respect for my father's wishes, abstained from testing the "law" -- you see, in NM the State Constitution specifically prohibits any law abridging the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms for security and defense; even barring the counties and municipalities from regulating "in any way" and incident of the right to keep and bear arms -- by taking a firearm with me into the city's courthouse.

Some people would say it is a stupid thing to do; most people do not realize that the police (and security) have "no affirmative obligation to provide for a particular private citizen's safety." (According to several US Supreme Court rulings. -- and did you know that you may be compelled, even if not accused of a crime, to be present in a courthouse: this is called jury duty. -- If then, there is no guarantee for the juror's safety, it is obvious that disarming the juror is immoral.

And there are many "laws", rules, regulations like this.
Do you oppose, and I mean more than just complaining or grumbling, them?

46 posted on 01/11/2013 12:38:04 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: hdbc

It’s getting to the point where I wish Iran or Norks would nuke DC - to save America.


47 posted on 01/11/2013 12:45:12 PM PST by broken_arrow1 (I regret that I have but one life to give for my country - Nathan Hale "Patriot")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 31 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58
That’s gonna be one heck of a challenge though, to find someone with an “R” behind his/her name, more liberal than Romney.

easy - Chris Christie R NJ; recently said he is looking forward to running for POTUS in 2016.

48 posted on 01/11/2013 12:53:11 PM PST by broken_arrow1 (I regret that I have but one life to give for my country - Nathan Hale "Patriot")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: OneWingedShark

I have no idea where you are taking this discussion but thank you for your service.


49 posted on 01/11/2013 1:00:13 PM PST by newnhdad (Our new motto: USA, it was fun while it lasted.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 46 | View Replies]

To: newnhdad
I have no idea where you are taking this discussion but thank you for your service.

Like I said in the first post -- those in power have little respect for the law. Indeed, the 'law' cannot be respectable if (a) it is so morally corrupt so as to deny real, God-given rights, (b) conflict with the authority which gave the power to authorize it, or [and I did not raise this issue yet] (c) be selectively enforced.

A & B are both in my first post, B the primary in my last post.

In order to get the law back to being respectable; you and I and hundreds of other people need to push back against its abuse... and those that are abusing it need to pay (whether that will be monetary/financial, security, or with blood is a question that I am not addressing) -- it must be disadvantageous for an official to act in unjust manner.

The US Code provides an interesting duo:
18 USC § 241 - Conspiracy against rights
18 USC § 242 - Deprivation of rights under color of law

Until the Law is just and valid -- meaning also the Constitution is Supreme -- the parties matter little; for it is they who, along with the judiciary, show such despite to the Constitution.

50 posted on 01/11/2013 1:13:37 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: broken_arrow1

>>That’s gonna be one heck of a challenge though, to find someone with an “R” behind his/her name, more liberal than Romney.
>
>easy - Chris Christie R NJ; recently said he is looking forward to running for POTUS in 2016.

Ah... no.
Heck, *I* would make a better president.


51 posted on 01/11/2013 1:17:50 PM PST by OneWingedShark (Q: Why am I here? A: To do Justly, to love mercy, and to walk humbly with my God.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 48 | View Replies]

To: newnhdad
But as we all know, Romney would have been worse because instead of discussing how many of our rights are going to be taken away, we would have been talking about that silly economy.

I voted for Romney but to be fair, Romney has banned more guns than Obama ever has. Without a doubt, he would've supported an assault weapons ban after Sandy Hook and congressional Republicans would've had a more difficult time opposing him on this than they currently do Obama.

Despite his NRA endorsement, Romney was no friend to gun owners and most certainly, no fan of so-called "assault weapons".

52 posted on 01/11/2013 1:50:50 PM PST by Drew68
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen

Most people are missing the bigger issue. If Caliph Hussein can get away with (illegally) overriding the Second Amendment by executive fiat (IOW, rule by decree), then he will be emboldened and he can try to get away with overriding the rest of the Bill of Rights, including the First, Fourth, Fifth, Eighth, and the rest, as well as the 22nd Amendment, simply by his own fiat.

Then he will have achieved his goal to be the absolute ruler of America. We cannot and must not allow this to happen.


53 posted on 01/11/2013 3:10:16 PM PST by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Godebert

Thanks for that summary!


54 posted on 01/11/2013 5:27:10 PM PST by GBA (Here in the Matrix, life is but a dream.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: Graybeard58

In Texas and presumably other states, the blind can hunt with a firearm if they have a guide along.

For self defense in public, sure, probably not a good idea unless the person has a guide. “Okay, the punk with the knife is three feet to your left. Aim 4 feet high and fire....NOW” Ha.

At home though, just the presence of a gun works to stop an invader in most cases. I think a blind person with some common sense and training could effectively use a firearm for home defense.

However if they chose not to, I wouldn’t consider that un-American :)


55 posted on 01/11/2013 11:48:15 PM PST by barefoot_hiker
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 43 | View Replies]

To: School of Rational Thought
Realty is that very, very few people will contact their representatives. Very sad.

Imagine if every rant at FR was backed up with an email to a Congressman and Senator. Recall how Rush motivated conservatives to defeat the shamnesty bill for illegals and the nomination of Harriet Myers to the Supreme Court.

56 posted on 01/12/2013 2:59:49 AM PST by Jacquerie ("How few were left who had seen the republic!" - Tacitus, The Annals)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 5 | View Replies]

To: IbJensen
I believe in all of the freedoms and liberties given to us by the Bill of Rights

Sorry, had to stop reading right there.

57 posted on 01/12/2013 3:13:16 AM PST by metesky (Brethren, leave us go amongst them! - Rev. Capt. Samuel Johnston Clayton - Ward Bond, The Searchers)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-57 last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson