Posted on 02/24/2018 9:41:09 AM PST by rktman
Looking to capitalize on the public whirlwind demanding gun control measures, Ohio governor John Kasich took to Twitter to ask:
If all the sudden you couldn't buy an AR-15, what would you lose? Would you feel your second amendment [sic] rights would be eroded? These are the things that have to be looked at and action has to happen.
What I'd lose should be pretty obvious. I'd lose the ability to purchase an AR-15 to defend my family, my life, and my home because the federal government has prohibited me from doing so – i.e., infringed upon my right to do so. The Second Amendment could not be clearer in declaring that the federal government has no such right enumerated in the Constitution.
If the practical result is that my rights are inarguably infringed, why would your feelings, my feelings, or anyone else's feelings have any relevance whatsoever?
(Excerpt) Read more at americanthinker.com ...
“feelings do NOT over ride the bill of rights and constitution.”
They don’t know it yet but they’re not the President’s equal.
Rights have nothing to do with feelings.
And our RKBA isn’t dependent on how the majority feels about it.
It doesn’t matter if the 2nd Amendment became unpopular. Our freedom to exercise our right of self-defense is non-negotiable.
Bttt.
5.56mm
“declaratory and restrictive”
I do not give a damn what that POS thinks or says. Heck, I don’t even like reading the name of this trash. If he could have pulled it off, this worthless piece of humanlike flesh would have given us Clinton.
“If all the sudden you couldn’t buy an AR-15, what would you lose?”
None of your f’n business.
In this country, you are allowed to do what you want until it is made illegal, unlike other countries, where the default is that if the government doesn’t explicitly allow it, you can’t do it.
So the question is, what does it matter to YOU, if I have one?
It's also laughably naive to believe that a ban on a single style/model of firearm would 1) alter the landscape of armed violence, and/or 2) satisfy the desires of anti-gun activists in any way.
The answer is always this, "SHALL NOT INFRINGE"
From Chapter Two of the Conservative Debate Handbook:
A few years earlier, at the conclusion of the War, General Washington had put his thoughts on the Common Defence into a May 2, 1783 draft to Alexander Hamilton, entitled Sentiments On A Peace Establishment:
...to prove ...the Policy and expediency of resting the protection of the Country on a respectable and well established Militia, we might not only shew the propriety ...from our peculiar local situation, but we might have recourse to the Histories of Greece and Rome in their most virtuous and Patriotic ages.... we might see, with admiration, the Freedom and Independence of Switzerland supported for Centuries, in the midst of powerful and jealous neighbors, by means of a hardy and well organized Militia. ...
It may be laid down as a primary position, and the basis of our system, that every Citizen who enjoys the protection of a free Government, owes not only a proportion of his property, but even of his personal services to the defence of it, and consequently that the Citizens of America (with a few legal and official exceptions) from 18 to 50 Years of Age should be borne on the Militia Rolls, provided with uniform Arms, and so far accustomed to the use of them, that the Total strength of the Country might be called forth at a Short Notice...
The following month, June 8, 1783, Washington reported to the States, in surrendering the solemn trust of his command: The Militia of this Country must be considered as the Palladium of our security, and the first effectual resort in case of hostility...
Washington's reference to the Swiss was quite revealing. Trained, as school boys, in the safe, correct and deadly accurate use of arms, the Swiss had and have managed to maintain an armed neutrality for generations amidst their more warlike, but less war efficient neighbors. While world travelers have reported for generations that Switzerland, where every household has its own military grade weapons, has the lowest crime rate in Europe. The Swiss have also managed to preserve the diverse rights of their 22 Cantons (or States) better than any other Federation in the world.
Yet perhaps the single most important reason why Washington wanted America to adopt the Swiss system, is that it teaches the youth--in the most immediate and compelling manner--the importance of that level of personal responsibility on which all of our other institutions are based. It gives youth a sense of purpose, importance and self-worth, for which all the words expended by "Liberal" theorists, from the Creation to this day, are no substitutep>
Do these window licking paste eaters understand that Americans already own 5 to 10 million AR-15 rifles?
And they own another 100 to 200 million rifles that are just as lethal - or more lethal?
Would that we had that understanding disseminated and implemented among our people.
Thanks for sharing that. Good stuff.
The underlying assumption by gun grabbers is that the citizenry of this country has nothing to fear from it’s government, that nothing resembling the tyranny that goes on in other countries could ever happen in America. Yet what precursors have we observed lately? We’ve seen consolidation of power by the Federal Government, domestic spying on Americans in the name of state security morphed into the weaponization of intelligence apparatus for political advantage (Obama/Clinton legacy) and many more examples of corruption of our constitution. And now they seek to disarm us by removing and outlawing a specific weapon after demonizing the weapon while absolving themselves from societal causality. This, my friends, is the argument we should be making. Because, in reality, although our AR’s are effective against home invasion and fun for target shooting it would not be my first choice for hunting (except hogs and coyotes) preferring one of my handguns for home and personal protection. Bottom line is the AR-15 is my weapon of choice to defend and protect the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic in keeping with the oath I made in 1968.
“...2nd Amendment, but repealing it wouldn’t do a freaking thing unless there was also a new amendment authorizing the feds to regulate gun ownership.”
The only way to repeal the 2nd Amendment is to pass & ratify a new Amendment which not only repeals but creates a new definition of the right as previously defined (fat chance, BTW).
Some nutburger out there wants an Amendment which states you can bear arms only as a member of the military. Another nutcase wants the wording modified to “the right of the people to keep & bear arms such as existed when the Constitution was ratified in 1791”, i.e. flintlocks.
Why is the “horror” at this latest massacre so exponentially greater than the Las Vegas massacre? In October the only discussion was about banning bumpfire stocks. Now the stampede is on to shut down the NRA. What did they have to do with what just went down?
Massive police incompetence contributed directly to Parkland, and yet, “only the police should have guns”. Phooey to that!
Do you have a link for those quotes? I’d like to see it.
acknowledges it as a natural right of man stowed upon them by God.””
Some rights simply supersede laws passed by lawyers and approved by judges—these are nothing but manmade laws to be disregarded by children of God. These kinds of actions make the lawyers and judges more the enemy of free people than they were before.
Correct. Yhats how I’d answer Kasich’s question.
Incremental banning.
Kid uses AR15 to kill, gun grabbers grab all the AR15s.
Next kid uses multiple handguns to shoot up his school, gun grabbers grab all the handguns.
Next kid brings a few shotguns to shoot up his school, grabbers grab all the shotguns.
Next kid uses bolt or lever rifles, grabbers grab all the rifles.
That is their ultimate goal and the only reason they refuse to improve security at the schools. The dead kids are the sacrifice they are willing to make towards that goal.
Well, I guess an AK would work about s well as an AR. And you won’t be wanting to ban those, too, so I guess it’s cool. /s
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.