“A civil war cannon is frankly much less dangerous than weapons we are allowed to carry on the streets in many of the states and cities in our country today,” Foster said.
FUBF
“The most accurate predictor of the rate of gun homicides, if you look at the statistics, is actually the number of guns per person in the state or in the community.”
That is a blatant and demonstrable lie.
FUBF
Well then, so should the First Amendment.
I "reinterpret" it to mean that democrats are exempt from protection, so sit down and shut up, Bill.
Yeah right Bill, that’s why they said these rights shall not be infringed.
The most accurate predictor of homicides by any means is the cratering of morality and standards.
Thanks to the liberals, human life means nothing and their “ends justify the means” and blaming the tool rather than the perpetrator falsely condemns the firearm.
Idiots, all!
“The technology changes, and the weapons thought to be too dangerous to be in private hands change.”
—
Perhaps the same applies to the 1st Amendment. After all, when written, print technology was quill pens, and woodblock print. The internet, with it’s instant worldwide publication is “too dangerous to be in private hands”, right?
Wait’ll the little darlings have their asses beaten in a mugging and see how quickly their ignorance turns to wisdom.
As for that grave-dancing Foster maggot, the schadenfreude of his running afoul of same would be hilarious.
“...meant to be reinterpreted by each generation...”
Then, why write it?
Coexistence with people that share this philosophy in the long-term is simply not possible. The Bill of Rights is a package deal none of it is up for negotiation compromise or Surrender.
I say we reinterpret this dingleberry’s breathing privileges!
Hmmm, then every amendment should be reinterpreted by each generation also? The 13th perhaps?
Democrats are so demonstrably stupid.
And dangerous.
“We should continue to progress our views on something like the Second Amendment.”
And where does the Constitution say that?
“The most accurate predictor of the rate of gun homicides, if you look at the statistics, is actually” -— the demographics of the neighborhood.
My suburban town has quite a few gun owners, and no homicides in many years.
This knucklehead should be reinterpreted out of a job.
That's why there's an Amendment process. But since it precludes making changes because a few gasbags want to, it isn't his preferred way of doing things.
ML/NJ
U.S. Rep. Bill Foster took this oath of office:
“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties of the office on which I am about to enter: So help me God.”
He has broken that oath. If he’s married, I’ll bet he broke that oath, too.
Here is how it works.
If the government (the British) have smooth bore muskets then it behoves the populace to have smooth muskets.
If the the government (deep state run military) has AR based platforms. Then it behoves “The People” now to have AR based platforms.
To be saddled with smooth bore muskets at this time would be foolish and defeat the purpose of the 2nd amendment.… to keep the people free of encroachment by tyrannical controllers.
In their wisdom, the Founding Fathers did give us a method to "reinterpret" the Constitution-through an amendment process, but it's not a method that Democrats want to use. Instead, they expect to get their way through old men and women in black robes who will simply ignore the Constitution.