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 ...
If all of a sudden I lost John Kasich, then what did I lose?
Nothing.
In fact, I gained.
I seem to recall a little kerfuffle back in the 1700’s when some redcoats were on their way to take possession of certain firearms held by some colonists. Don’t remember if it resulted in much though. ;-)
And Oh BTW, the feds can never legally “erase” the 2nd Amendment.
The only way to change the 2nd Amendment is through the constitutional amendment process. Otherwise, the 2nd Amendment stays intact and all attempts to ignore or violate the 2nd Amendment should be met with the full force of law.
Also, I’m against repealing the 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 2nd Amendment only confirms the pre-existence of rights expressed in the Declaration of Independence and presumed in the Constitution. Our right to bear arms exists and is constitutionally protected with or without the 2nd Amendment.
“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.” Article [II] (Amendment 2 – Bearing Arms)
Notice the right to bear arms in the 2nd Amendment along with the other unalienable rights in the first ten amendments are PRE-EXISTING RIGHTS that are God-given, not man or government given. 2nd Amendment says the feds cannot “INFRINGE” on the pre-existing right to bear arms. The first ten amendments including the 2nd do NOT grant rights. They merely REMIND government not to violate those rights. Totalitarian governments “grant” rights. A free people know their rights come from God and know they cannot be separated from those rights.
Oh sure. Just move some commas around and it changes everything. LOL!
If I couldn’t buy an AR-15, I suppose I’d get by with an M4, AK or even a mini-14. So is he saying only the AR-15 should be banned? /rhetorical question
Point well taken.
Misplaced and uncontrolled emotion is what got us into the kind of trouble this country is in today.
Lib argument about militias. I cal, it straw grasping.
Here’s a better question Kasich - ask the shooter what he would do if he couldn’t get an AR-15?
Ummmm.....use another gun dipsh*t!
Exactly even if repealed the right still exists because the Bill of Rights merely acknowledges it as a natural right of man stowed upon them by God.
Even if I did not own a firearm, I would be grateful for the good guys who do. If young Peter Wang had been one of them, he and many of the other 17 killed at Parkland High on Valentine's Day might still be alive.
Libtards, not the NRA, are responsible for that carnage. THEY kicked God out of the schools to help spawn a culture of amorality. THEY created the gun free zone so the whack job knew he was safe to kill. THEY closed down the loony bins so the whack job was out on the loose. THEY elected the local excuse for a sheriff who paid the whack job close to 40 visits in recent years and DID NOTHING.
They want the AR15s gone because the AR15 is a symbol of resistance.
Plain and simple. It’s not a superior gun, it’s not an AR10 (It’s been NATOed up to make wounds more survivable.. IE more humane than the weapon it replaced)
They know this. They go after this rifle because it’s a symbol of resistance.
So no, they can’t have them. They aren’t even going to get a sporter stock from me. No. The profile is the symbol. The AR15 is a symbol that gun-grabbers, tyrants and criminals are -officially on notice- that we will not be pushed any further.
If they outlawed Guy Fawkes masks, would they attempt to explain that the masks are ugly, make it hard to breathe or whatever? No. everyone would know they are doing it because it’s Guy Fawkes and it’s a statement against normal, godless “men” who seek only to dominate and oppress us. Period.
God’s feelings about what so called conservatives are actually doing with faith are going to have a big impact on whether the 2A goes the way of straight marriage.
If the exercise is so poor that the main question at hand is what does a Nick Cruz do with a gun — the fight is lost in all but court ruling.
Bac in the '90s when the "assault gun"law was pssed, the local price of a used CAR went from $600 to $1,000 in a few days. Because of my personal economics, it put one past the limit of my means, thus denying me the prospect of owning one.
That is one way that "infringing" works.
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." - Amendment IX (the rights enumerated along with other rights are pre-existent to the Constitution).
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." - Amendment X (the states and the people are sovereign outside those powers delegated to the feds).
LOL!
Also, the right to carry arms that pre-exists the 2nd Amendment is confirmed by the Ninth and Tenth Amendments.
"The enumeration in the Constitution, of certain rights, shall not be construed to deny or disparage others retained by the people." - Amendment IX (the rights enumerated along with other rights are pre-existent to the Constitution).
"The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people." - Amendment X (the states and the people are sovereign outside those powers delegated to the feds).
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.