I’m pretty sure free speech is next. ‘Can’t have the peasants dissin’ the king.
You don’t understand! They CANNOT TAKE AWAY A RIGHT! They exist outside of any law. They can attempt to regulate a right, but they can’t take it away.
This WILL result in bloodshed.
Our God given right to keep and bear such arms as we may deem necassary and appropriate to defend our lives, our republic and our freedom against tyranny cannot be taken from us. What the Nancy boy and his regime propose is to violate the Constitutional prohibition against government infringements on our God given, previously existing right. Nothing they do can alter the full force and effect of that right. We shall see how they fare.
Easy. Once they’re done gutting the 2nd Amendment, they’ll set their sights on the 1st.
The 2nd Amendment to our Constitution contains these words. This is the only Amendment in which our founding fathers sought to absolutely guarantee and insure the unfettered right to keep and bear arms. There were no limits on that guaranteed right. ANY infringement upon that right is a direct and undeniable violation of the Constitution and warrants impeachment of any office holder who violates their oath to uphold the Constitution.
Certain questions come to mind:
1. Of the 500 plus killings by gun in Chicago in 2012, how many were perpetrated by using a firearm equipped with high capacity clips?
2. Would any of the new Obama/Biden restrictions on firearms have had any preventative effect on the recent Connecticut schoolhouse shooting incident, or on the incident where Congresswoman Giffords was seriously injured?
We shall see.
This is exactly the reason we have the 2nd Amendment, and the right to keep and bear the arms to resist tyranny.
I, however, may or may not be black... so I should maybe be using "the n-word" rather than "nigger" to write this post? Hmmm?
So anyways, what really is next for the government? They take your freedon of speech, your right to bear arms... they seem to be just going through the Bill of Rights amendment by amendment...
Maybe part of the whole "sequestration" business is that due to cuts, they will start quartering troops IN YOUR HOUSE?
Go back and read NYS's ratification of the Federal Constitution....and the contingency of adding the Bill of Rights. Then carefully read the section pertaining to "arms". I will post it as soon as I look it up again. It's important.
Whew.. good thing we didn’t elect a rino..
A second civil war is coming.
On a more personal level:
Three gang members breaking down your door - daughter&wife screaming- Dems took your gun.Son dead...
What a short term memory. Our First Amendment Rights were abridged by Bush, 43, when he signed the flawed Campaign Finance Reform Law into effect as a political favor to Juan McVain!
Since then (even though most of the CFR law has been struck down), leftists have been chewing on different ways to eviscerate the Constitution.
At least zero is more direct! He either outright ignores the Constitution and the rule of law, or he just dances around it. After all, who's going to tell him that he can't? The Republicans!??
First they will make it against the law to utter politically incorrect speech, then they will make it against the law the speak out against the government, then your right against unreasonable search and seizure will go, along with your right to an attorney and a speedy trial. By then they are all gone for all practical purposes.
Not Obama nor anyone else can take our God-given rights. They can only falsely claim to do so, while hoping we go along with their con.
No Sir - Each and every executive order that limits my rights is a meaningless waste of ink.
More specifically, the Founding States made the Constitution mainly to limit the powers of the federal government. And regarding our 1st and 2nd Amendment "rights," many patriots evidently don't understand that, since the states have never delegated to Congress or the Oval Office via the Constitution the specific powers to regulate our 1st and 2nd Amendment "rights," that Congress has no constitutional authority to regulate those rights, with or without those amendments.
In fact, note that James Madison, regarded as the father of both the Constitution and the Bill of Rights, had regarded the Bill of Rights as unnecessary since the states had never delegated to Congress the specific powers to regulate such issues.
Fortunately, a recent FR thread had referenced what I personally regard as the bible of our 2nd Amedment "rights," the Court's opinion in the 2A-related Cruikshank case. In a nutshell, the Court clarified in Cruikshank that 2A was intended only to clarify that Congress has no constitutionally delegated power to regulate the natural (my word) right to self-defence, particularly when citizens are defending themselves from the federal government.
"6. The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence. The Second Amendments means no more than that it shall not be infringed by Congress, and has no other effect than to restrict the powers of the National Government." --United States v. Cruikshank, 1875.
So as I've ranted in other threads, one of the reasons that Constitution-ignoring Obama has patriots under his thumb at this time is because patriots themselves evidently don't know important nuances about the Constitution, particularly the idea of constitutionally limited federal government powers.