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

Skip to comments.

Eric Holder: Obama Decides Who's 'Entitled' to Second Amendment Rights
breitbart ^ | 2/8 | breitbart

Posted on 02/08/2013 8:08:15 AM PST by RummyChick

video at link

(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...


TOPICS: News/Current Events
KEYWORDS: 2ndamendment; banglist; ericholder; guncontrol; holder; secondamendment

1 posted on 02/08/2013 8:08:24 AM PST by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Oh really?


2 posted on 02/08/2013 8:12:56 AM PST by Pikachu_Dad (Impeach Sen Quinn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

He already decides who lives and dies (drones and healthcare) why not?


3 posted on 02/08/2013 8:13:52 AM PST by Resolute Conservative
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

FUBO!


4 posted on 02/08/2013 8:14:26 AM PST by Puppage (You may disagree with what I have to say, but I shall defend to your death my right to say it)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Hitler’s Germany decided who could have a gun and did so with permits and registration.


5 posted on 02/08/2013 8:15:00 AM PST by South40
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Pikachu_Dad

http://www.gpb.org/news/2013/02/07/holder-decries-georgia-school-shootings


Holder reminded students at the historically black school that the leading cause of death among young black men is homicide.
He urged students to continue the civil rights struggle begun by their parents and grandparents.

I know they would like to take guns away from Whitey but it isn’t Whitey killing those young black men in Chicago...


6 posted on 02/08/2013 8:16:04 AM PST by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Why isn’t Eric the Holder in prison where he belongs? He’s not an American. He’s anti-American, anti-Freedom, pro-corruption and anti-Bill of Rights. Damn commies.


7 posted on 02/08/2013 8:16:39 AM PST by FlingWingFlyer (Now Playing. Obama II - The Revenge of My Father.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick
And here I've always seen the clear language of the 2nd Amendment as a restraint on government. Silly me.

This is what comes of negotiating away bits and pieces of our freedom over the long years. It was inevitable that sooner or later, the government would assess the situation and decide to take away what we hadn't willingly handed over.

8 posted on 02/08/2013 8:17:17 AM PST by Charles Martel (Endeavor to persevere...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

All those fools, laughing and carrying on, thinking he’s just the funniest guy....totally oblivious and ignorant of what a TRAITOR he is.

Except for felons....who by law should not be allowed the right to a fire arm, NO ONE in or out of government should be able to say who is “entitled” to a God given right.


9 posted on 02/08/2013 8:17:17 AM PST by Lucky9teen (Peace is that brief glorious moment in history when everybody stands around reloading.~Thomas Jeffer)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Everyday they push a little further, being aggressively controversial, it is a test. No one is stopping them, and they are winning.


10 posted on 02/08/2013 8:17:50 AM PST by Toespi
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: FlingWingFlyer
He’s anti-American, anti-Freedom, pro-corruption and anti-Bill of Rights

You wouldn't mind if he weren't black. /s

11 posted on 02/08/2013 8:18:25 AM PST by South40
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 7 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

It’s often said that gun rights are to protect us from tyranny.

?


12 posted on 02/08/2013 8:18:59 AM PST by onedoug
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

I wonder how he would like it if George Bush were the decider of who’s “entitled” to First Amendment rights.


13 posted on 02/08/2013 8:18:59 AM PST by DuncanWaring (The Lord uses the good ones; the bad ones use the Lord.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

The categories he mentioned already are disqualified from owning a gun legally. What other laws could 0dumbo enact that would do anymore?

You hve to give 0dumbo and his monions ( including most of the press0 credit they ‘seem’ to make reasonable cases for more law
IF no one actually thinks about what the idiots are saying


14 posted on 02/08/2013 8:19:04 AM PST by RWGinger
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Charles Martel

“shall not be”

has specific and well known legal meaning,

and only someone that is being deceptive would try to tell you that it is “vague” or “can be interpreted”.


15 posted on 02/08/2013 8:19:35 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Toespi

One of my favorite stories of the week:

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-chat/2985926/posts

“Fight over soda at East Dallas apartment sends pillow, glass jar, chicken flying (and tire iron)”

Clearly Holder needs to keep boxes of chicken away from certain individuals who would use them as a weapon.


16 posted on 02/08/2013 8:20:27 AM PST by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: Toespi

“and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed.”


17 posted on 02/08/2013 8:20:37 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

BET ME!


18 posted on 02/08/2013 8:20:58 AM PST by TNoldman (AN AMERICAN FOR A MUSLIM/BHO FREE AMERICA.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Really?!

Just STFU Eric Holder...and go away!


19 posted on 02/08/2013 8:20:58 AM PST by mkboyce
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Lucky9teen
The individual states already decide who can and who cannot have a gun. http://www.ncsl.org/issues-research/justice/possession-of-a-firearm-by-the-mentally-ill.aspx
20 posted on 02/08/2013 8:21:24 AM PST by South40
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

The leading cause of death of young black men is other young black men,
which is caused by young black men not having fathers in the home,
which was caused specifically by liberal government policies.

Yes, lefties, it IS all your fault.


21 posted on 02/08/2013 8:22:47 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Weaponized chicken LOL. Call Feinstein so she can get it included in her list.


22 posted on 02/08/2013 8:24:57 AM PST by MomwithHope (Buy and read Ameritopia by Mark Levin!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 16 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

This moron is too stupid to hold the office he occupies.


23 posted on 02/08/2013 8:25:48 AM PST by beethovenfan (If Islam is the solution, the "problem" must be freedom.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

There’s probably a few tire iron females in the mix there somewhere

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbAjU0KSoqw


24 posted on 02/08/2013 8:25:59 AM PST by RummyChick
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 21 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Is that so, Mr Attorney General? Silly me, I thought the Bill of Rights made that call. Oh, to be enlightened like the Elites of our age!


25 posted on 02/08/2013 8:27:41 AM PST by cardinal4 (Constitution? What Constitution?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

yep, the wimmens are gettin vishus these days too.


26 posted on 02/08/2013 8:31:22 AM PST by MrB (The difference between a Humanist and a Satanist - the latter admits whom he's working for)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Thomas Jefferson said it best.

The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government. Thomas Jefferson

MOLON LABE


27 posted on 02/08/2013 8:34:28 AM PST by EXCH54FE (Hurricane 416 "It’s one thing to make a law, It’s another to enforce it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick
It's the Bill of RIGHTS, not the Bill of Privileges.
28 posted on 02/08/2013 8:35:40 AM PST by ZirconEncrustedTweezers (Taking away guns will do nothing to stop violence.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

The ‘wrong’ people to posess guns might include the ATF, the TSA, and several other Federal agencies whose actions indicate they believe themselves above the law.

IMHO.


29 posted on 02/08/2013 8:36:38 AM PST by LucianOfSamasota (Tanstaafl - its not just for breakfast anymore...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

I just want to punch my fist through his stupid melon head.


30 posted on 02/08/2013 8:44:01 AM PST by Thorliveshere (Tais deau sá taghdedaul!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Hey Holder, the PEOPLE decide. Not you or your master.
WE do. GFY.


31 posted on 02/08/2013 8:53:41 AM PST by theDentist (FUBO; qwerty ergo typo : i type, therefore i misspelll)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: MrB

“shall not be”

has specific and well known legal meaning,and only someone that is being deceptive would try to tell you that it is “vague” or “can be interpreted”.


Lo’ these many years ago when I was writing “Program Requirements” the word “Shall” was the beginning word of most paragraphs and it definitely meant “Must, Will, No-choice”.


32 posted on 02/08/2013 9:06:32 AM PST by The Working Man
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 15 | View Replies]

To: Lucky9teen
Except for felons....who by law should not be allowed the right to a fire arm

he Second Amendment does not make any exception for felons or for crazy ppeople or for foreigners or for anyone, and the wording is absolute- it bars any and all rules against firearms. All those caveats and nervousnesses of otherwise conservative Constitutionalist folk are answerable with the same answers we normally use anyway.

Felons and crazies will get guns anyway. When you say, "of course that doesn't mean crazy people or felons you are denying the wording of the Amendment and therefore rendering the Amendment interprepatable and thus meaningless. Felons and crazies will get guns anyway.

"Of course, that doesn't mean machine guns or A-bombs." Yes it does. The market limits who can possess the more expensive arms and people at George Soros's level have better ways to wreak their havoc than wasting their money on nuclear weapons which just destroy assets they can buy and profit from.

33 posted on 02/08/2013 9:13:34 AM PST by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's Economics In One Lesson ONLINE www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 9 | View Replies]

To: South40
The individual states already decide who can and who cannot have a gun.

UNCONSTITUTIONALLY!

"Shall not be infringed" is the operative wording here. There is no "except for" clause. When you stuff one into the Amendment you negate the Amendment entirely because you admit of the ability to interpret the Amendment to agree with your own trepidations.

34 posted on 02/08/2013 9:18:48 AM PST by arthurus (Read Hazlitt's Economics In One Lesson ONLINE www.fee.org/library/books/economics-in-one-lesson)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 20 | View Replies]

To: Toespi
Everyday they push a little further, being aggressively controversial, it is a test.

Yes, I do think they are probing our defenses in a way.

But they are also telling us what they think and what their plans are and, in doing so, they are certainly hardening our resolve...evidence of which is the shortage of weapons and ammo in stores and online.

35 posted on 02/08/2013 9:20:44 AM PST by RoosterRedux (Get armed, practice in the use of your weapons, get physically fit, stay alert!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 10 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Bump


36 posted on 02/08/2013 9:21:23 AM PST by lowbridge (Joe Biden: "Look, the Taliban per se is not our enemy.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Bump


37 posted on 02/08/2013 9:22:09 AM PST by lowbridge (Joe Biden: "Look, the Taliban per se is not our enemy.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Looks like he’s got a bad case of the mange.


38 posted on 02/08/2013 9:23:08 AM PST by bgill
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Deaths of high profile firearms experts

39 posted on 02/08/2013 9:28:20 AM PST by opentalk
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Confucius say man who make insane man angry is crazy


40 posted on 02/08/2013 9:36:38 AM PST by bunkerhill7 ("The Second Amendment has no limits on firepower"-NY State Senator Marchione.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

From day one of this administration, such as it is we have seen enough to know they have a total misconception of the type of government that exists in the USA.

They truly believe they are in positions of power as rulers of the people, NOT as representatives of the people working as public servants on behalf of the people to maintain the union.

The Leftist Bureaucratic control of our government that has incrementally been installed at the Federal level has to be literally destroyed. Older Californians understand what I mean by “Jack In The Box” style.

If the States want an EPA for their State, then let the State do it, NOT the Fed. Let the State suffer the consequence, NOT the Nation. If the State wants a Department of education, then let the State do it, NOT the Fed., and so on.

We have to return to the government the founders designed, and strengthen it to assure balance in the focus of the representation.

We cannot allow our Congress to ever capitulate their duties to bureaucracies of Leftist bent Departments under the Executive Branch that the Left, or the Right for that matter can ever accomplish what is happening today again.


41 posted on 02/08/2013 9:40:49 AM PST by rockinqsranch (Dems, Libs, Socialists, call 'em what you will, they ALL have fairies livin' in their trees.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

Although I agree with the sentiment... it’s a false quote. No evidence Jefferson ever said or wrote it.


42 posted on 02/08/2013 10:07:59 AM PST by ReaganberAlles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 27 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

This is the state of affairs. They really think they have this dictatorial power, or at least they want it.


43 posted on 02/08/2013 10:13:52 AM PST by TBP (Obama lies, Granny dies.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

My understanding is that Senate-approved officials aren’t immune to being directed to appear before Congress.

Someone in the House (Issa maybe) should just summon Holder up to the Hill to publically clarify his remarks everytime something like this escapes his lips. Sure, he’d be up there several times a week ... But it would be SO worth it to see him having to explain away his own words.


44 posted on 02/08/2013 10:21:12 AM PST by tanknetter
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick
 photo white-house-2_zpscab8d62b.jpg
45 posted on 02/08/2013 10:33:48 AM PST by RetSignman ("A Republic if you can keep it"....)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: RummyChick

Hey Eric, the Constitution says otherwise.

Obama has no legal right to say what I can and can not have.

You forget, you may work for Obama but I don’t. He works for me. And if I had the ability to fire his sorry ass I would. And you would be gone with him.


46 posted on 02/08/2013 11:47:56 AM PST by History Repeats (sic transit gloria mundi)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: ReaganÜberAlles
I do not know if Thomas Jefferson said it, some say yes some no. CNN has an article that states;

“A commenter named Henry from Charlotte, North Carolina, said he read through the Monticello page, but he isn't ready to declare that the comment is fake.

“I do not know if Jefferson actually ever made such a statement or not, (but) I find it odd that many people attribute it to him if it wasn't true. It's ridiculous in my opinion to propose that since nowhere in his writings there is trace of such a statement, then Jefferson has never said something like that. Jefferson could have come up with those words in any occasion of his public or private life and someone else recorded and then quoted him.”

All I know is if Thomas Jefferson did not say it, he would have if asked. IMHO

47 posted on 02/08/2013 12:42:38 PM PST by EXCH54FE (Hurricane 416 "It’s one thing to make a law, It’s another to enforce it.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: EXCH54FE

I agree with your last paragraph. All the Founders would have said it if asked. This we know. Just striving for accuracy so as not to be attacked on that front.


48 posted on 02/09/2013 6:52:04 AM PST by ReaganberAlles
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

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