Posted on 06/30/2010 8:07:36 AM PDT by JohnRLott
“A gun at home? No; I have six.”
should have read
“A gun at home? No.” (I have six.)
That, and Presser v. Illinois, 116 U.S. 252 being cited for the proposition that states have a green light to infringe the right to keep and bear arms, because the 2nd amendment only restrains the Feds.
It is undoubtedly true that all citizens capable of bearing arms constitute the reserved military force or reserve militia of the United States as well as of the states, and, in view of this prerogative of the general government, as well as of its general powers, the states cannot, even laying the [second amendment] out of view, prohibit the people from keeping and bearing arms, so as to deprive the United States of their rightful resource for maintaining the public security, and disable the people from performing their duty to the general government.
Oh, and the Miller case? Did you catch Scalia's "Miller was convicted, and SCOTUS upheld the conviction"? False. Miller's indictment was quashed, Miller was never even tried, let alone found guilty.
Second amendment law in this country is utterly and totally corrupt.
The pediatrician was taken aback at my reaction, and said "We just ask to make sure that in a household with children steps have been taken if firearms are in the house to safeguard them." I replied "Well then, just say that if firearms are in the house make sure...blah blah blah. Because it is none of your business."
These type of articles are so flaming stupid! The only way someone can take your property (guns in this case) is if you give it up. If you’re looking to 9 lawyers and the bimbos we call Congress for your cues you’re in a world of hurt anyway. Gun ownership isn’t going to be decided in DC nor by judges or politicians. They might have an opinion but its not the one that counts.
OK, how about
“A vote for Kagan is a vote requiring you to shoot people who come to enforce a gun ban”
?
This is the result you get when principled conservatives sit out an election because they loath the RINO running against the communist. It allows communists to become president. Communist presidents nominate communists for the Supreme Court. And communist jurists ban guns.
This is the inevitalbe result when conservatives say “the parties are just the same” and don’t vote and help us block a communist from becoming US president.
This is the endgame.
These judges (Joyce & Cederstrom) would make OUTSTANDING USSC justices. They are not locked into an ideology, are truthful and admit their mistakes.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B5Fs5xhyClQ&feature=fvw
http://www.cbssports.com/mlb/story/13572506/leyland-umpire-cederstrom-admits-to-blown-call
Thanks for the post and your work JohnRLott.
This is the inevitalbe result when “the parties are just the same”
More accurate. Why will there be no filibuster of Kagen? Why will not even one republican call for one, oh they will rattle their sabers, but in the end they will roll over with a whimper.
When has the leadership sanctioned a member for jumping ship? Unless you consider Boehnor publicly demanding an apology from a republican house member for apologizing for the treatment of a corporation. When has a RINO lost a committee assignment for jumping ship?
If Americans are ready to surrender their weapons then I think they are ready to surrender their freedom also. That’s a personal choice everyone of us has to make. Myself, I refuse to become a slave to politics or dictators.
“Senators: vote to confirm Kagan — and die (politically)!”
Electorate’s severe short term memory and a bunch of flaming liberal states make dramatic changes an unrealistic expectation. Also, couldn’t the same thing be said about:
Obamacare
Cap & trade
Union kumbaya
Sotomayor
etc.
Capturing the House & Senate is the first order of business.
“Do you have a gun at home?”
I prefer this answer - “Have you had sex with your significant other in the past week?” or “Do you watch porn movies?” or “Have you ever committed adultery?” or other very personal questions. If they are still too dumb to get the msg say it is NOYFB.
Well, lets say this: Continuation of our govt depends completely on the willingness of the governed to obey. In other words we can decide to stop consenting at any time. At that point the jig is up and the search for a chair is on. I suspect it’ll get a bit rough b/c no one wants to be the one w/o. You can be certain that if We the People decide we’ll no longer obey force will quickly be applied. So, I would say its more about mind set than anything else Does that help?
Never let the fact that you own a gun go into your medical records. If they can’t get your guns registered, they’ll still be able to find out who has them when zer0care kicks in.
Bush appoints Roberts and Alito.
Obama appoints Sotomayor and Kagan.
The partie are the same. Yeah. Right. Sure. Gotcha. No difference. Clones. Mirror image. Yeah. Sure. Right.
Because it won't stop her confirmation for the Supreme Court, and you know it. The Dem Socialists own the Senate and the Senate committes. Nothing can stop her confirmation. When you are the Senate majority, you can stop a nominee or two before you have to take what is shoved down your throat. Not so when you are the ball-less minorty with no power whatsoever.
So what if Kagan was blocked? Do you think the next nominee and the next would suddenly be orignal-intent Constitutionalists? No, they too would be hard communists. You let a radical communist get elected - you get hard communists for SCOTUS jurists. That is how that works.
Letting a radical communist like Obama select communist SCOTUS jurists is the result we are getting because "principled" conservatives could not hold their noses and vote for that idiot McLame. No matter how bad he would be, he would not have nominated hard communists to the Supreme Court, and you know it.
Nope, but maybe forestall it until the election, couldn't hurt.
Lets see, do you remember Justice Ginnsburg, the one Hatch recommended to Clinton, not to mention some of the worst liberals were anointed during Republican presidencies.
There is a difference, but not as much as you would like, and pretending that there is is foolish.
I know Levin's stand and it his unprincipled support of Hannity that sets the tone. I don't know if Beck is making personal attacks on Hannity or not, but I know Beck's name has never been mentioned on his show.
I listen to Levin Daily and have a couple years of his podcast archived, along with Rush and Beck.
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.