Is The Second Amendment Really Just for Hunting?

Comments Off on Is The Second Amendment Really Just for Hunting?

“[M]ilitary-style weapons are precisely what the 2nd Amendment guarantees our right to keep and bear.”….got this from Bryan Fischer on AFR.

My friend Brett Joshpe has published an uncharacteristically soft-headed piece in the San Francisco Chronicle arguing that in the wake of the massacre at Sandy Hook, conservatives and Republicans should support what he calls “sensible” gun-control laws. It begins with a subtext of self-congratulation (“As a conservative and a Republican, I can no longer remain silent . . . Some will consider it heresy,” etc.), casts aspersions of intellectual dishonesty (arguments for preserving our traditional rights are “disingenuous”), advances into ex homine (noting he has family in Sandy Hook, as though that confers special status on his preferences), fundamentally misunderstands the argument for the right to keep and bear arms, deputizes the electorate, and cites the presence of teddy bears as evidence for his case.

Brett, like practically every other person seeking to diminish our constitutional rights, either does not understand the purpose of the Second Amendment or refuses to address it, writing, “Gun advocates will be hard-pressed to explain why the average American citizen needs an assault weapon with a high-capacity magazine other than for recreational purposes.” The answer to this question is straightforward: The purpose of having citizens armed with paramilitary weapons is to allow them to engage in paramilitary actions. The Second Amendment is not about Bambi and burglars — whatever a well-regulated militia is, it is not a hunting party or a sport-clays club. It is remarkable to me that any educated person — let alone a Harvard Law graduate — believes that the second item on the Bill of Rights is a constitutional guarantee of enjoying a recreational activity.

There is no legitimate exception to the Second Amendment for military-style weapons, because military-style weapons are precisely what the Second Amendment guarantees our right to keep and bear. The purpose of the Second Amendment is to secure our ability to oppose enemies foreign and domestic, a guarantee against disorder and tyranny. Consider the words of Supreme Court justice Joseph Story — who was, it bears noting, appointed to the Court by the guy who wrote the Constitution:

The importance of this article will scarcely be doubted by any persons, who have duly reflected upon the subject. The militia is the natural defence of a free country against sudden foreign invasions, domestic insurrections, and domestic usurpations of power by rulers. It is against sound policy for a free people to keep up large military establishments and standing armies in time of peace, both from the enormous expenses, with which they are attended, and the facile means, which they afford to ambitious and unprincipled rulers, to subvert the government, or trample upon the rights of the people. The right of the citizens to keep and bear arms has justly been considered, as the palladium of the liberties of a republic; since it offers a strong moral check against the usurpation and arbitrary power of rulers; and will generally, even if these are successful in the first instance, enable the people to resist and triumph over them.

“Usurpation and arbitrary power of the rulers” — not Bambi, not burglars. While your granddad’s .30-06 is a good deal more powerful than the .223 rifles that give blue-state types the howling fantods, that is not what we have a constitutional provision to protect. Liberals are forever asking: “Why would anybody need a gun like that?” And the answer is: because we are not serfs. We are a free people living under a republic of our own construction. We may consent to be governed, but we will not be ruled.

The right to keep and bear arms is a civil right. If you doubt that, consider the history of arms control in England, where members of the Catholic minority (and non-Protestants generally) were prohibited from bearing arms as part of the campaign of general political oppression against them. The Act of Disenfranchisement was still in effect when our Constitution was being written, a fact that surely was on the mind of such Founding Fathers as Daniel Carroll, to say nothing of his brother, Archbishop John Carroll.

Power corrupts. Madison knew that, and the other Founders did, too, which is why we have a Second Amendment.

Continue reading

Advertisements

California Homeowner Shoots and Kills Armed Home Invader-wounds two others

1 Comment

Bet you won’t hear this on any Main Stream Media station and in California none the less. You might also be interested in this: 15 Yr Old Boy Uses Dad’s AR-15 to Shoot Invader,which just happened as well.

SACRAMENTO, CA – A robbery suspect was shot and killed during a home invasion robbery in Sacramento’s Pocket neighborhood early Saturday morning.

According to Officer Doug Morse, a homeowner, a robbery suspect and two other people were in a gun battle outside of the home on the 900 block of Haven Court just after 3:30 a.m.

When officers arrived, they found one robbery suspect fatally wounded; the suspect was pronounced dead at the scene. The homeowner was also shot and was transported a hospital with non-life threatening injuries.

Another robbery suspect, 21 year old Thomas Ordonaz, who was injured in the shooting was later arrested on charges of assault with a deadly weapon and accessory.

A third person showed up at a local hospital with gunshot wounds. It’s unclear how this person is connected to the incident, but was detained by police, Morse said.

News 10

City Attorney Tells San Bernardino Residents To ‘Lock Their Doors,’ ‘Load Their Guns’ Because Of Police Downsizing

Comments Off on City Attorney Tells San Bernardino Residents To ‘Lock Their Doors,’ ‘Load Their Guns’ Because Of Police Downsizing

Well in a previous post we had Mayor Bloomberg of NYC stating people wanted more gun control…now we read this: City Attorney Tells San Bernardino Residents To ‘Lock Their Doors,’ ‘Load Their Guns’ Because Of Police Downsizing…….

The city attorney of San Bernardino is under scrutiny for telling residents to “lock their doors and load their guns” during a city council meeting.

The official explained that because the city is bankrupt and slashing public safety budgets people will need to start protecting themselves.

City Attorney Jim Penman said he doesn’t regret what he said.

“You should say what you mean and mean what you say,” Penman said.

The city attorney said approximately 150 residents came to a council meeting to voice their concerns about recent crimes in the area, including the murder of an elderly woman last week.

“You could tell the swell of frustration was coming over a lot of folks. They did not feel like they could get an officer out as quickly to some of the quality-of-life issues that they were dealing with as they would have preferred,” said councilwoman Wendy McCommack, who organized the meeting and was present that night.

“Well, if I remember right, I told them to ‘lock their doors and load their guns,’” Penman said.

Penman said the city is dealing with bankruptcy, which has forced officials to cut its police force by about 80 officers. Consequently, there’s been growing criticism about the police department’s response time.

“Let’s be honest, we don’t have enough police officers. We have too many criminals living in this city. We have had 45 murders this year…that’s far too high for a city of this size,” Penman said.

The city attorney said it’s important for people to be smart about protecting themselves and their families.

Local CBS

 

Bloomberg: NRA Dying, Americans Want More Gun Control

Comments Off on Bloomberg: NRA Dying, Americans Want More Gun Control

You’ve got to wonder, what is Bloomberg smoking? If Americans want more Gun Control, then why are gun sales at record highs?

NYC Mayor Michael Bloomberg and his infamous “Mayors Against Illegal Guns” have struck again—this time with a conference call where he proclaimed the recent presidential elections “proved” the NRA is dying and the American people want more gun control.

Did Bloomberg miss the Black Friday sales of a week ago—where gun sales shattered the last Black Friday guns sales record by 20%? Or did he miss Louisiana’s Nov. 6 pro-gun constitutional amendment, where the citizens of that state made it absolutely clear that the 2nd Amendment is a fundamental right which is hands off to gun grabbers?

Or maybe he overlooked the fact that people responded to the Colorado Theater shooting not by calling for more gun control but by arming themselves?

https://i1.wp.com/theantigov.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/bloomberg-jfpo-300x227.jpg

The examples are legion. But they do not matter to Bloomberg, nor do they matter to Mayors Against Illegal Guns. All they care about are events they can exploit for their own gain: the shooting of former-Congresswoman Gabby Giffords, the shooting at the Milwaukee Sikh temple, or the fact that Obama won the presidential election.

Bloomberg and his cohorts joined hands with the Center for American Progress Action Fund to carry out their conference call Friday. Their message: “Voters trust Barack Obama on guns and support gun-law reforms.” The apparent intent of this messaging is to prove the NRA has lost the ability to “move the needle” in national elections.

What Bloomberg and those who support his views need to keep in mind is that the next set of elections are Congressional (2014). And the pro-gun states will use those elections to be sure Congress continues as a firewall against Bloomberg, Mayors Against Illegal Guns, and all those who share their anti-2nd Amendment views.

Breitbart