Posted on 01/21/2013 7:32:29 AM PST by afraidfortherepublic
What part of the Second Amendment “against all enemies, foreign and domestic” does this pseudo-intellectual idiot not understand?
Absolutely.
[[that 2nd Amendment types]]
the left are throwing htis term aroudn now as an insult- if You are patriotic, and love your coutnry, and value hte second mamendment, you are simply old fashioned and out of touch with the ‘new reality’ in theirm inds, and shoudl be called the that 2nd Amendment types as a form of scorn and ridicule-
It woudl be nice if there were enough TRUE right wing news stations i nthis coutnry where everytime oen of hte Anti-Americans opens their piehole, the right immedfiately pounces on it and shows America how unamerican the left really are- but all we really have is the assinien ‘fair and balanced’ (Read- left leaning ‘conservative’) fox channel
You're an assclown, Brokaw. What you've just described as "the most far reaching thing you can possibly imagine" is exactly what was going on at Lexington and Concord when the men who pledgeed their lives and their sacred honor shed blood for your freedom.
Joseph Story, a contemporary of the framers of the Constitution,in his Commentaries on the Constitution considered the right to keep and bear arms as "the palladium of the liberties of the republic," which deterred tyranny and enabled the citizenry at large to overthrow it should it come to pass.
In 1837, the Georgia Supreme Court in Nunn v. State held that the Bill of Rights protected natural rights which were fully as capable of infringement by states as by the federal government, and that the Second Amendment provided "the right of the whole people, old and young, men, women and boys, and not militia only, to keep and bear arms of every description, and not merely such as are used by the militia, shall not be infringed, curtailed nor broke in on, in the slightest degree; and all this for the important end to be attained: the rearing up and qualifying of a well regulated militia, so vitally necessary to the security of a free state."...
Sadly Brokaw was born and raised in South Dakota. However he has long ago lost South Dakota values and his views on gun control would not play well in his home state.
Brokaw spoke with Andrea Mitchell... 2nd Amendment types who say the Amendment is there to protect citizens from government tyranny are 'pretty outlandish'.As an agitprop mouthpiece and Partisan Media Shill, after they and their ilk launch their armed insurrection, their won't be making any more media appearances.
When the argument is made, as Cuomo did in screaching tones, that hunters don’t need semi-autos, assault weapons and high capacity magazines, the rebuttal should be clear.
This is not about hunting. This is about our right to defend ourselves from government tyranny. Why should we have to limit ourselves to weapons inferior to the government if the purpose it to restrain the government. When muskets were what the army had, citizens had the right to muskets. Technology has advanced and our weapons must keep up in order to maintain our deterrence capability.
Why is Homeland Security stocking up on hollow point ammo? When the government gets rid of AR’s so will the citizenry.
And I used to have a smidgeon of respect for Brokaw which I've now completely lost. He now sounds like a typical, leftist petty-tyrant.
Quite correct.
‘Technology has advanced and our weapons must keep up in order to maintain our deterrence capability.’
And to do otherwise is in contraindication of the Founders intent in Art 1, Sec 8 of the Constitution. See ‘Letters of Marque’
I knew one of them was Canadian. Thanks for the info.
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.