Legally Armed Citizens Urged to Carry

[Whatshername]

I am so sick of these people and their culture and language and mentality and most of all, their ideology.  And I’m just talking about the PC progressives… I have even less use for the radical Muslims!  WE ARE AT WAR!  Let us embark on this “Pitiless and Merciless” war that has been brought to us!  Anyone reading this that is of sound mind, has had a little training and possesses a legal firearm should seriously consider carrying it concealed.  Forget the permit, pay no attention to the “Gun Free Zone” signs and profile away (you have nothing to lose – they already think you’re a racist).  This is freaking WAR.  And it’s not on a battlefield over there where it should be… it is HERE.  And it’s only just beginning.  How fantastic would it be if the next time they come to slaughter us… one of us slaughters them first?  The first private citizen that stops a mass murder or terrorist attack will be a national hero.  Maybe it’s you… WHN

 

 

 

 

 

Legally armed citizens urged to act as deterrents against mass shootings, terrorism   By Valerie Richardson and Tom Howell Jr. - The Washington Times - Thursday, December 3, 2015

 

Democrats ramped up their push Thursday for more firearms restrictions even as alarm over recent mass shootings, including one linked to Islamic terrorism, fueled calls for citizens to play a greater role in their own protection.

 

The Senate defeated two gun control amendments, one that would have expanded background checks for guns purchased online and at gun shows, and another that would have prohibited suspected terrorists from buying firearms.

 

It’s unclear whether either measure would have prevented Wednesday’s deadly San Bernardino shooting, given that California law already requires universal background checks and the two perpetrators were apparently on no terrorism lists.

 

While Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, decried Republicans for being “complicit” in recent mass shootings, several law enforcement authorities said Thursday that there is a case to be made that licensed gun owners may act as deterrents to mass shooters.

 

“I think after Paris, and as we learn more about this event [in San Bernardino] we need to be nimble enough and pragmatic enough to recognize that there’s definitely a small number of documented mass-casualty shootings that have been ended by off-duty law enforcement and civilians,” said Eugene O’Donnell, a professor at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York.

 

A former police officer, Mr. O’Donnell said about half of mass shootings are finished before the first officer arrives, given that “these are people that are coming in to kill.”

 

“They’re coming in to kill as many people as they can, as quickly as they can, so the old model — the police would get there, they would cordon the place off, you could talk people through — a large number of these events are going to be over before the cops get there,” Mr. O’Donnell said.

 

Ulster County Sheriff Paul J. Van Blarcum encouraged residents of his New York jurisdiction Thursday to carry their firearms if licensed.

 

“In light of recent events that have occurred in the United States and around the world, I want to encourage citizens of Ulster County who are licensed to carry a firearm to PLEASE DO SO,” Sheriff Van Blarcum wrote in a Facebook post.

 

The sheriff, whose county is about two hours north of New York City, also reminded retired and active-duty police officers to “please carry a weapon whenever you leave your house.”

 

He issued the reminder hours after two gun-wielding assailants stormed a San Bernardino regional government office, killing 14 people and wounding 21, in an attack that has been linked to Islamic terrorism.

 

“We are the thin blue line that is entrusted in keeping this country safe, and we must be prepared to act at any given moment,” said Sheriff Van Blarcum.

 

A day before the San Bernardino attack, Detroit Police Chief James Craig said legally armed citizens can discourage terrorists. He told the local CBS-TV affiliate, “If you’re a terrorist, or a carjacker, you want an unarmed citizenry.”

 

Democrats, led by President Obama and presidential front-runner Hillarious Clinton, have sounded the cry for Congress to pass additional restrictions on firearms in the wake of two mass shootings in the past week.

 

“No matter what motivation these shooters had, we can say one thing for certain — they shouldn’t have been able to do this,” Mrs. Clinton said in a Thursday post on Twitter.

 

The Senate voted 45-54 to reject an amendment by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California Democrat, that would bar people on the terrorist watch list from acquiring firearms or explosives if they are likely to use them to commit violence.

 

Sen. Mark Kirk, an Illinois Republican locked in a tough re-election fight, bucked his party and voted for the measure, which would have needed 60 votes to succeed. Sen. Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota was the only Democrat to vote against it.

 

Opponents of the proposal raised concerns about the risk of law-abiding citizens winding up on the list mistakenly or for political activism. Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican, offered an alternative that would have given federal authorities 72 hours to step in and offer probable cause to deny a gun sale to someone on the watch list.

If the authorities fail to act, Mr. Cornyn said, it would be unfair to let the federal government swoop in and deny someone their constitutional right to bear arms.

 

Though it would not become law — Mr. Obama is poised to veto the underlying bill — Democrats wanted to put senators on record in the aftermath of the San Bernardino shooting and last week’s attack on a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs, which left three dead and nine injured.

 

Mr. O’Donnell is hardly an National Rifle Association guy — he believes there are “too many guns available to the wrong people” — but argued that “we have to take off our partisan political blinders and recognize that there could be situations where law enforcement, off duty, and gun owners could play a role here.”

 

“I think that this requires a pragmatic, honest approach, and it should be driven by data and analysis, and not by emotion and the need to win a political debate at this point,” Mr. O’Donnell said.

[dog53]

Good to know that I have been doing my part for over 30 years now.

 

 

You wouldnt leave home without your wallet

Why would you leave home with out your gun. ?

[Yukon Silvermoon]

Gun free zone signs have no legal weight to them.  Go ahead and carry in there.  The only thing they can do is ask you to leave, then if you don't, they can get you for trespassing.  

[usndiver]

Amen Dog & Yukon. I carry all of the time and open carry on my property. A right not exercised is one that can be lost.

 

BTW, if you are not insured in regards to a critical incident you need to get coverage. Check out CCW Safe. Best and most comprehensive program out there.

[Shabibilicious]

I am so sick of these people and their culture and language and mentality and most of all, their ideology.  And I’m just talking about the PC progressives… I have even less use for the radical Muslims!  WE ARE AT WAR!  Let us embark on this “Pitiless and Merciless” war that has been brought to us!  Anyone reading this that is of sound mind, has had a little training and possesses a legal firearm should seriously consider carrying it concealed.  Forget the permit, pay no attention to the “Gun Free Zone” signs and profile away (you have nothing to lose – they already think you’re a racist).  This is freaking WAR.  And it’s not on a battlefield over there where it should be… it is HERE.  And it’s only just beginning.  How fantastic would it be if the next time they come to slaughter us… one of us slaughters them first?  The first private citizen that stops a mass murder or terrorist attack will be a national hero.  Maybe it’s you… WHN

 

Hand over your "lawful citizen" card at the booking desk.    

 

GO RV, then BV

[Whatshername]

Good to know that I have been doing my part for over 30 years now.

 

 

You wouldnt leave home without your wallet

Why would you leave home with out your gun. ?

 

Thanks Dog, for your many years of service to your fellow citizens!

 

Hand over your "lawful citizen" card at the booking desk.    

 

GO RV, then BV

I'll take my chances! I'm certain we can make a good case for our selfless diligence. Urban warfare suspends all laws that prevent a citizen with a legal weapon from defending themselves and others. They are attacking US and they NEED an unarmed public to pull it off! You may cower in the corner if you prefer... We got this.

Ya know what they say Shabs... When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns.

[SgtFuryUSCZ]

***///

 

Remember when NY was publishing lists of people who owned guns addresses trying to shame them and make them targets of radical left loons...?

 

And whilst Sheriff Blarcum was telling folks to arm themselves, the POC mayor of NYC was towin' the lefty-loon party line tellin' folks to be tolerant and understanding and suggested more dialogue...  ... whatta tool.

[divemaster5734]

I am so sick of these people and their culture and language and mentality and most of all, their ideology.  And I’m just talking about the PC progressives… I have even less use for the radical Muslims!  WE ARE AT WAR!  Let us embark on this “Pitiless and Merciless” war that has been brought to us!  Anyone reading this that is of sound mind, has had a little training and possesses a legal firearm should seriously consider carrying it concealed.  Forget the permit, pay no attention to the “Gun Free Zone” signs and profile away (you have nothing to lose – they already think you’re a racist).  This is freaking WAR.  And it’s not on a battlefield over there where it should be… it is HERE.  And it’s only just beginning.  How fantastic would it be if the next time they come to slaughter us… one of us slaughters them first?  The first private citizen that stops a mass murder or terrorist attack will be a national hero.  Maybe it’s you… WHN

 

 

That's a very important reference.

You obviously get it.

Unfortunately, so many other are ignorant of the difference between Private and Public.

Each of us has a dual existence.

As we go about our business every day, we only represent the public citizen, while we live as a private individual human.

 

The government would have you believe that you ARE the public person, but that is impossible.

Once people understand the difference, they can then enforce their rights as the private human.

The government is here to serve the individual humans that have given their consent to be governed.

In return, the government has "allowed" some privileges that are parallel to human rights, but have reserved the right to take away those benevolent privileges as they see fit.

They can not take away any private human rights, those rights were given by God, and the government is not God.

 

We have only to take back our power from the government.

 

Perhaps this daesh issue will finally help our fellow humans feel compelled to enlighten themselves to the reality of our status.

 

Thank you WHN.

 

Hand over your "lawful citizen" card at the booking desk.    

 

GO RV, then BV

 

It's all about perspective, or lack thereof.

[Shabibilicious]

It's all about perspective, or lack thereof.

 

Honest question, Dive.  Are you suggesting the 2nd Amendment is non-binding.....that each private individual human has a God given right to protect themselves with a firearm.....free of government permission?    

 

GO RV, then BV

[sxsess]

I am so sick of these people and their culture and language and mentality and most of all, their ideology.  And I’m just talking about the PC progressives… I have even less use for the radical Muslims!  WE ARE AT WAR!  Let us embark on this “Pitiless and Merciless” war that has been brought to us!  Anyone reading this that is of sound mind, has had a little training and possesses a legal firearm should seriously consider carrying it concealed.  Forget the permit, pay no attention to the “Gun Free Zone” signs and profile away (you have nothing to lose – they already think you’re a racist).  This is freaking WAR.  And it’s not on a battlefield over there where it should be… it is HERE.  And it’s only just beginning.  How fantastic would it be if the next time they come to slaughter us… one of us slaughters them first?  The first private citizen that stops a mass murder or terrorist attack will be a national hero.  Maybe it’s you… WHN

 

Very well said WHN! I agree 100%!

 

 

 

 

Legally armed citizens urged to act as deterrents against mass shootings, terrorism

 

By Valerie Richardson and Tom Howell Jr. - The Washington Times - Thursday, December 3, 2015

 

Democrats ramped up their push Thursday for more firearms restrictions even as alarm over recent mass shootings, including one linked to Islamic terrorism, fueled calls for citizens to play a greater role in their own protection.

 

The Senate defeated two gun control amendments, one that would have expanded background checks for guns purchased online and at gun shows, and another that would have prohibited suspected terrorists from buying firearms.

 

It’s unclear whether either measure would have prevented Wednesday’s deadly San Bernardino shooting, given that California law already requires universal background checks and the two perpetrators were apparently on no terrorism lists.

 

While Senate Minority Leader Harry Reid, Nevada Democrat, decried Republicans for being “complicit” in recent mass shootings, several law enforcement authorities said Thursday that there is a case to be made that licensed gun owners may act as deterrents to mass shooters.

 

“I think after Paris, and as we learn more about this event [in San Bernardino] we need to be nimble enough and pragmatic enough to recognize that there’s definitely a small number of documented mass-casualty shootings that have been ended by off-duty law enforcement and civilians,” said Eugene O’Donnell, a professor at the John Jay College of Criminal Justice in New York.

 

A former police officer, Mr. O’Donnell said about half of mass shootings are finished before the first officer arrives, given that “these are people that are coming in to kill.”

 

“They’re coming in to kill as many people as they can, as quickly as they can, so the old model — the police would get there, they would cordon the place off, you could talk people through — a large number of these events are going to be over before the cops get there,” Mr. O’Donnell said.

 

Ulster County Sheriff Paul J. Van Blarcum encouraged residents of his New York jurisdiction Thursday to carry their firearms if licensed.

 

“In light of recent events that have occurred in the United States and around the world, I want to encourage citizens of Ulster County who are licensed to carry a firearm to PLEASE DO SO,” Sheriff Van Blarcum wrote in a Facebook post.

 

The sheriff, whose county is about two hours north of New York City, also reminded retired and active-duty police officers to “please carry a weapon whenever you leave your house.”

 

He issued the reminder hours after two gun-wielding assailants stormed a San Bernardino regional government office, killing 14 people and wounding 21, in an attack that has been linked to Islamic terrorism.

 

“We are the thin blue line that is entrusted in keeping this country safe, and we must be prepared to act at any given moment,” said Sheriff Van Blarcum.

 

A day before the San Bernardino attack, Detroit Police Chief James Craig said legally armed citizens can discourage terrorists. He told the local CBS-TV affiliate, “If you’re a terrorist, or a carjacker, you want an unarmed citizenry.”

 

Democrats, led by President Obama and presidential front-runner Hillarious Clinton, have sounded the cry for Congress to pass additional restrictions on firearms in the wake of two mass shootings in the past week.

 

“No matter what motivation these shooters had, we can say one thing for certain — they shouldn’t have been able to do this,” Mrs. Clinton said in a Thursday post on Twitter.

 

The Senate voted 45-54 to reject an amendment by Sen. Dianne Feinstein, California Democrat, that would bar people on the terrorist watch list from acquiring firearms or explosives if they are likely to use them to commit violence.

 

Sen. Mark Kirk, an Illinois Republican locked in a tough re-election fight, bucked his party and voted for the measure, which would have needed 60 votes to succeed. Sen. Heidi Heitkamp of North Dakota was the only Democrat to vote against it.

 

Opponents of the proposal raised concerns about the risk of law-abiding citizens winding up on the list mistakenly or for political activism. Sen. John Cornyn, Texas Republican, offered an alternative that would have given federal authorities 72 hours to step in and offer probable cause to deny a gun sale to someone on the watch list.

If the authorities fail to act, Mr. Cornyn said, it would be unfair to let the federal government swoop in and deny someone their constitutional right to bear arms.

 

Though it would not become law — Mr. Obama is poised to veto the underlying bill — Democrats wanted to put senators on record in the aftermath of the San Bernardino shooting and last week’s attack on a Planned Parenthood clinic in Colorado Springs, which left three dead and nine injured.

 

Mr. O’Donnell is hardly an National Rifle Association guy — he believes there are “too many guns available to the wrong people” — but argued that “we have to take off our partisan political blinders and recognize that there could be situations where law enforcement, off duty, and gun owners could play a role here.”

 

“I think that this requires a pragmatic, honest approach, and it should be driven by data and analysis, and not by emotion and the need to win a political debate at this point,” Mr. O’Donnell said.

[divemaster5734]

Honest question, Dive.  Are you suggesting the 2nd Amendment is non-binding.....that each private individual human has a God given right to protect themselves with a firearm.....free of government permission?    

 

GO RV, then BV

 

 

Second paragraph of the Declaration of Independence;

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.--That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, --That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn, that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security.-

 

 

 

The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads: "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."

 

The colonists did not have "permission" to resist British troops.

It was NOT OK to refuse the Stamp Act.

 

The list goes on.

The core of the 2nd is not to let people kill Bambi.

 

Just because Iran, Cuba, North korea, Russia, and others don't want America ot have guns, does that mean we should listen?

How is that any different from ANY collective that wishes to harm, oppress, or infringe on our God given rights?

 

 

Until 1934, there was no restriction.

It was under "the new deal" that the government claimed to own America, everything in America, and they even claim to own the fruits of YOUR labor.

That is the "authority" they use to take homes, and property.

Forget for the moment the "debt economy" the government forced on America in 1913.

 

It was only after the demon-cratic POTUS instituted national socialism as a way to "fix" the problem they created, that they began to infringe on our God given rights.

[Whatshername]

Concealed Carry Permit Holders Across the United States

Since President Obama’s election the number of concealed handgun permits has soared, growing from 4.6 million in 2007 to over 12.8 million this year. Among the findings in our report:

-- The number of concealed handgun permits is increasing at an ever- increasing rate. Over the past year, 1.7 million additional new permits have been issued – a 15.4% increase in just one single year. This is the largest ever single-year increase in the number of concealed handgun permits.

-- 5.2% of the total adult population has a permit.

-- Five states now have more than 10% of their adult population with concealed handgun permits.

-- In ten states, a permit is no longer required to carry in all or virtually all of the state. This is a major reason why legal carrying handguns is growing so much faster than the number of permits.

-- Since 2007, permits for women has increased by 270% and for men by 156%.

-- Some evidence suggests that permit holding by minorities is increasing more than twice as fast as for whites.

-- Between 2007 and 2014, murder rates have fallen from 5.6 to 4.2 (preliminary estimates) per 100,000. This represents a 25% drop in the murder rate at the same time that the percentage of the adult population with permits soared by 156%. Overall violent crime also fell by 25 percent over that period of time.

-- States with the largest increase in permits have seen the largest relative drops in murder rates.

-- Concealed handgun permit holders are extremely law-abiding. In Florida and Texas, permit holders are convicted of misdemeanors or felonies at one-sixth the rate that police officers are convicted.

http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2629704

[nstoolman1]

Honest question, Dive.  Are you suggesting the 2nd Amendment is non-binding.....that each private individual human has a God given right to protect themselves with a firearm.....free of government permission?    

 

GO RV, then BV

Not Dive and YES we have a God given right and duty to protect ourselves and those around us with whatever tools are handy. 

[Whamby]

I would rather have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. Slow is smooth and smooth is fast. One shoot one kill all skill, two to the chest one to the head.

[Muleslayer]

Amen Dog & Yukon. I carry all of the time and open carry on my property. A right not exercised is one that can be lost.

BTW, if you are not insured in regards to a critical incident you need to get coverage. Check out CCW Safe. Best and most comprehensive program out there.

member 2 years now. I do not want to be ruined financially like Zimmerman.

I am doing my part Whn!

I am packing so much heat every day that I lose my balance from time to time.

Pulled in to have oil changed and the kid saw the 2 car holsters, asked me what I was afraid of.

Looked the snotnosed punk in the eye and replied "not a damn thing!"

That's my Gun story!

P.S. I have CCH permit only for my backwards brethren in Missouri,South Carolina,Colorado, etc......

Edited December 5, 2015 by Muleslayer

[dog53]

Honest question, Dive.  Are you suggesting the 2nd Amendment is non-binding.....that each private individual human has a God given right to protect themselves with a firearm.....free of government permission?    

 

GO RV, then BV

 

 

 

YEP  !!

[George Hayduke]

Honest question, Dive.  Are you suggesting the 2nd Amendment is non-binding.....that each private individual human has a God given right to protect themselves with a firearm.....free of government permission?    

 

GO RV, then BV

 

Wrong definition Shabs.  The 2nd Amendment RESTRICTS the government not the citizen.  The 2nd Amendment doesn't allow anything but does support the underlying premise of the acknowledgment that all men are created equal and have a right to the unencumbered pursuit of life, liberty and happiness AND that THAT truth is self evident.  There was no need then when those words were penned, just as there is no need now for a law to define which weapon a citizen may use to insure his life, liberty and pursuit of happiness is not terminated by another.  I'll claw, shoot, stab, strangle and stuff a dirty sock down the throat of anyone who tries to take my life or a family member's life or, my neighbor's life (well, except for the old cat lady) and call their mother a ***** at the same time.

 

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

 

Simple.

[Jaxinjersey]

Wrong definition Shabs.  The 2nd Amendment RESTRICTS the government not the citizen.  The 2nd Amendment doesn't allow anything but does support the underlying premise of the acknowledgment that all men are created equal and have a right to the unencumbered pursuit of life, liberty and happiness AND that THAT truth is self evident.  There was no need then when those words were penned, just as there is no need now for a law to define which weapon a citizen may use to insure his life, liberty and pursuit of happiness is not terminated by another.  I'll claw, shoot, stab, strangle and stuff a dirty sock down the throat of anyone who tries to take my life or a family member's life or, my neighbor's life (well, except for the old cat lady) and call their mother a ***** at the same time.

 

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

 

Simple.

Well-said George!  Thanks for clarifying the common misconception.  As I've always said, there is no such thing as "gun control"... it's another made-up term to confuse and condition the ignorant public.  And as that goes, there's also other made-up terms, like "separation of Church and State", among others.  No such thing exists.

[Whatshername]

Amen Dog & Yukon. I carry all of the time and open carry on my property. A right not exercised is one that can be lost.

 

BTW, if you are not insured in regards to a critical incident you need to get coverage. Check out CCW Safe. Best and most comprehensive program out there.

 

Meant to thank you for that important reminder, usndiver. 

 

http://ccwsafe.com/mobile-home/

 

member 2 years now. I do not want to be ruined financially like Zimmerman.

I am doing my part Whn!

I am packing so much heat every day that I lose my balance from time to time.

Pulled in to have oil changed and the kid saw the 2 car holsters, asked me what I was afraid of.

Looked the snotnosed punk in the eye and replied "not a damn thing!"

That's my Gun story!

P.S. I have CCH permit only for my backwards brethren in Missouri,South Carolina,Colorado, etc......

 

Thank you as well, Muleslayer!  Your local brethren are reason enough!  Put an ingot in the other pocket for balance    Nice Gun Story!  

[Whatshername]

[divemaster5734]

Wrong definition Shabs.  The 2nd Amendment RESTRICTS the government not the citizen.  The 2nd Amendment doesn't allow anything but does support the underlying premise of the acknowledgment that all men are created equal and have a right to the unencumbered pursuit of life, liberty and happiness AND that THAT truth is self evident.  There was no need then when those words were penned, just as there is no need now for a law to define which weapon a citizen may use to insure his life, liberty and pursuit of happiness is not terminated by another.  I'll claw, shoot, stab, strangle and stuff a dirty sock down the throat of anyone who tries to take my life or a family member's life or, my neighbor's life (well, except for the old cat lady) and call their mother a ***** at the same time.

 

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

 

Simple.

 

 

I forget sometimes that educated Americans don't know what the constitution is for, thanks for the backup.

 

The constitution is strictly an outline defining the federal government scope of operation.

The Amendments, commonly referred to as The Bill of Rights, written by Thomas Jefferson.

While he was in France, there were a few others that refused to sigh without the 1st 10 amendments.

 

Dang George, it still amazes me how little others know, and how that fact does not bother them.

[Whatshername]

I forget sometimes that educated Americans don't know what the constitution is for, thanks for the backup.

 

The constitution is strictly an outline defining the federal government scope of operation.

The Amendments, commonly referred to as The Bill of Rights, written by Thomas Jefferson.

While he was in France, there were a few others that refused to sigh without the 1st 10 amendments.

 

Dang George, it still amazes me how little others know, and how that fact does not bother them.

 

I like to think of it this way...

 

Government is the BEAST

The Constitution is the CAGE that contains it.

[Jaxinjersey]

I forget sometimes that educated Americans don't know what the constitution is for, thanks for the backup.

 

The constitution is strictly an outline defining the federal government scope of operation.

The Amendments, commonly referred to as The Bill of Rights, written by Thomas Jefferson.

While he was in France, there were a few others that refused to sigh without the 1st 10 amendments.

 

Dang George, it still amazes me how little others know, and how that fact does not bother them.

DM... it's that darn "living/breathing document" interpretive crap they've been teaching about the Constitution for the last 50 plus years, or more!  These "educated" Americans don't know any different.  My younger sister graduated college with a degree in political science... and I debate this with her all the time!  She's the Lib in the family... and refuses to understand the defined clarity and simplicity of such a great document.  "It must change with the times", is what she was taught.  And since her professors told her this, my viewpoint is subordinate.  So sad.  THAT is why it doesn't bother them!

[AoK]

Wrong definition Shabs.  The 2nd Amendment RESTRICTS the government not the citizen.  The 2nd Amendment doesn't allow anything but does support the underlying premise of the acknowledgment that all men are created equal and have a right to the unencumbered pursuit of life, liberty and happiness AND that THAT truth is self evident.  There was no need then when those words were penned, just as there is no need now for a law to define which weapon a citizen may use to insure his life, liberty and pursuit of happiness is not terminated by another.  I'll claw, shoot, stab, strangle and stuff a dirty sock down the throat of anyone who tries to take my life or a family member's life or, my neighbor's life (well, except for the old cat lady) and call their mother a ***** at the same time.

 

Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness.

 

Simple.

 

”By calling attention to ‘a well-regulated militia,’ ‘the security of the nation,’ and the right of each citizen ‘to keep and bear arms,’ our founding fathers recognized the essentially civilian nature of our economy… The Second Amendment still remains an important declaration of our basic civilian-military relationships in which every citizen must be ready to participate in the defense of his country. For that reason I believe the Second Amendment will always be important.”

~John F. Kennedy

 

”The right of self-defense is the first law of nature; in most governments it has been the study of rulers to confine this right within the narrowest possible limits. … and [when] the right of the people to keep and bear arms is, under any color or pretext whatsoever, prohibited, liberty, if not already annihilated, is on the brink of destruction.” 

~St. George Tucker, 1752 –1827

 

 

”The Constitution shall never be construed to prevent the people of the United States who are peaceable citizens from keeping their own arms.” ~Samuel Adams, 1722 – 1803

[divemaster5734]

DM... it's that darn "living/breathing document" interpretive crap they've been teaching about the Constitution for the last 50 plus years, or more!  These "educated" Americans don't know any different.  My younger sister graduated college with a degree in political science... and I debate this with her all the time!  She's the Lib in the family... and refuses to understand the defined clarity and simplicity of such a great document.  "It must change with the times", is what she was taught.  And since her professors told her this, my viewpoint is subordinate.  So sad.  THAT is why it doesn't bother them!

 

 

It kills me.

Those professors are slaves to their ego.

My dad was one. By the time I was eight years old I only knew that if having a PhD turned you into him, or one of his friends, I would never, ever, ever, get one.

By my 2nd year in college, I had learned how to push each professors buttons, in order work them like a toy solder.

It was fun in class, but at the same time sad and pathetic.

The other kids in my classes understood how shallow the teachers were, and how easily manipulated they were when their ego was fed properly.

The problem is there's hundred of thousands of kids suffering through classes run by an egomaniac who don't understand.

These professors rule their little universe with omnipotent impunity.

While academia may be the keepers of knowledge, the lack of humility creates a fractured application that lacks all wisdom.

It is the God like worship of professors, and the truth they can serve only one God, themselves, that has forced Jesus out of schools.

Good luck, bro, one of my son's is giving into "the dark side".

I am very scared that soon we will have a falling out that may take decades to repair, if ever.

I like to think of it this way...

 

Government is the BEAST

The Constitution is the CAGE that contains it.

  dang out of pluses.

 

I like it.