Posts Tagged ‘National Rifle Association’

Right to Bear Arms: The Legal Question

November 17, 2013

I’m not trying to be argumentative, just curious. The current Court has struck down most recent attempts of states and municipalities to regulate arms. The NRA wages legal and electoral campaigns against anyone who breathes a hint to restrain a “right to bear arms“. The U.S. Congress, as well as the President, refuses to consider any restrictions.

The Supreme Court in the past few decades, has trashed the Constitution and allowed lots of infringing against the right of the people to keep and bear arms.

Finally Illinois forced the issue with an obvious hit against the collectivist misinterpretation, and ruled that it was an individual right, not a state militia right.

[Cue the snicker sound track here.] After all, if the right to bear arms is a right of governments and not a right for individuals, then the Second Amendment really means, according to this insanity:

Does it say this?

2nd Amendment: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the [government???] to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

[Cue riotous laughter at that…].

So to protect the “security” of a

Dred Scott, whose famous case to gain his free...

Dred Scott, whose famous case to gain his freedom began as a lawsuit filed in St. Louis in 1846 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

“free” state, the right of the government to bear arms shall not be infringed. Under this misinterpretation, the Second Amendment would presumably include the right to “bear” nuclear weapons.

So, are Steve and I permitted to own (keep) and use (bear) nuclear weapons (again, sorry, Norm, you were born on the wrong side of the pond)? If not, why not? That is, if I can keep and bear an AK-47 or AR-15 why not a thermonuclear device?

There are MUCH WORSE people than you or Steve that already own (as in possess the use of) nuclear weapons.

#1. For example, one person who could throw nuclear weapons at somebody right now include one who arranged a massacre in a theater in which 130 innocent people died:
…But some 130 hostages died – most not at the hands of the gunmen and women, but apparently because of the effects of the gas….

#2. Another group killed an estimated 5,000 with over 10,000 hurt critically, all in cold blood to stop a peaceful protest.. The troops they sent in were ordered to shoot anybody that got in the way; they were brought from distant bases (presumably so that they would not include too many who would worry about relatives being among the victims:

#3. Another one has arrogated to himself the illegal and unconstitutional “authority” to order secret kills on anybody he wants to anywhere in the world and has done it with full public knowledge. He (and his subordinates in command) continue their and unconstitutional and interventionist wars in five foreign countries.

For survivors, he has put command-and-control death panels in their future. Special treatment for special friends.

Rational people would demand all means possible to defend themselves against these obvious pathological maniacs, ruthless killers. And the list above is of the ones currently in possession of the worst nuclear weapons in the world. It does not include criminal dictators and rulers from the past or the future.

I’m serious. I admit that a reasonable person would not want Jason to have a tight rubber band, much less a nuke, but seriously should that be a limitation (no matter how logical and reasonable)? Instead is there case law which delineates what is protected by the 2nd amendment and not? Perhaps case law defines “arms”, which means that there would be a line in the sand; what is that line? I.e., what is protected and what is not?

Case law is worse than useless when it numbs the mind of erudite attorneys at law and of citizens who accept it. Case law changes on the whim of those who make it, including 100s of reversals by the most respected Court in the world, the U.S. Supreme Court. Their ruling on the Republicans’ Civil RIghts Act in the 1960s reversed the Dred Scott case, for which you cannot find one little phrase of justification in even the slaver-protecting Constitution. (Justification was provided by the horror they felt at the prospect of blacks being able to carry arms, because if they are free men they carry arms).

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.

And some people out there in the cackling industry actually try to pretend it means that governments have the right to arm themselves!

Imagine that! Next thing they’ll pass a law that says chickens shall lay eggs and water shall flow downhill!

At least those amendments and laws would make lots more sense than the sewage pouring forth from looters’ governments today!




They won’t confiscate the guns, you think? It already happened!

March 13, 2013
Adolf Hitler Target - Jews For The Preservatio...

Adolf Hitler Target – Jews For The Preservation of Firearms Ownership (Photo credit: Marshall Astor – Food Fetishist)

Senator questions Holder about Katrina guns:

Some people go along with what they’re told to think so much that the laugh at the idea that what the gun control lobby really wants is to “confiscate” (meaning, ROB) all the guns that decent citizens.

This is why so many people are members of the NRA. The NRA is made up of decent neighbors of yours. But NRA members are beginning to flock toward other associations because the NRA has compromised on some issues. Membership is going up in other associations like Gun Owners of America, and Black Gun Owners of America and Jews for the Preservation of Gun Ownership

Government gains ever more power with background help from front groups like SPLC that condemn people who disagree with their

Violence-inspiring group demands probe of their victim:

So SPLC is no less dangerous than a tyrannical government, because they use all of government’s lethal force to get rid of anybody with any voice they disagree with.

They use government and “law” to beat up on people who say things that do not directly harm anybody, while they say nothing about the vile despicable language that is used to insult Christians. Gays can put crosses in urine and they say nothing, but let an ex-homosexual help others that ask for help to go straight. Denying them what they want –a different lifestyle, break the habit– is hateful, for sure. What an insult to “gays”! That they cannot think for themselves or shed a hedonistic obsession. (Sex is not equal to love)>

Jesus is love. He said:

Greater love hath no man than this, that a man lay down his life for his friends.– John 15:13

Anti-gun media loves the NRA, avoids Gun Owners of America and especially Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership, Why?

January 19, 2013
Gun Owners of America

Gun Owners of America (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The Daily Bell – Media Mogul Stewart Calls NRA a False-Flag Operation – Is It?–Is-It

I’ve said this for a long time. If the Controlled Media builds up a bogeyman, or a hero, always ask what is behind this. The link at the Daily Bell quotes a comment from a guy who quit the NRA:

“Yes, the NRA is a FRAUD ! … Sun, 04/12/2009 – 22:18 … With over 30,000 gun laws on the books … the NRA has successfully reversed 2 (partially) pieces of gun legislation. I would give you the batting average of that ratio, but my calculator only goes to the 6th negative decimal. Having a membership of 3.5 MILLION, 550 employees, hundreds of thousands of volunteers and an annual budget of over $120 MILLION…based on their track record…I CALL THAT FRAUD! … The NRA not only compromises, but they help write almost every piece of anti-gun legislation, just to generate donations. Gun Owners of America and Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership are the only way to go.”

Controlled Media tells you they are your loyal opposition.

When NRA’s LaPierre came out for more government money and yet more government security, after we’ve seen the mess at the TSA and the brutality of the ATF and the FBI in violating rights under federal orders, wanting more security by government instead of security by free and independent citizens,I thought it was a very lame rebuff to disarmament freaks, and I thought it was rather obvious.  Having more government force in our face, much less, getting kids to grow up surrounded by government force, is not just the wrong message but just the kind of psychological conditioning a tyranny would love.

See Gun Owners of America’s web site here.

See Jews for the Preservation of Firearms Ownership here.

See Judge Andrew Napolitano’s clear, articulate explanation of the intent of the Second Amendment, its purpose, which is more important today in the days of voter suppression and voter fraud, election fraud, and international tyranny associations:

And an armed government force in schools is hostile to the spirit of the 2nd Amendment and the natural right of self-defense, because freedom demands not that the government be armed with overwhelming force, but the people themselves.

The people are their own best defenders until they are told to sit down and shut up and let the Big Boss protect you and take care of you –and they obey.

The pen is mightier than the sword, and this is my pen telling the truth. The truth is one mighty sword.

Colorado theater called ‘gun-free’ zone

July 22, 2012
English: Samson Destroys the Philistines with ...

English: Samson Destroys the Philistines with an Ass’ Jawbone (Jud. 14:1-17) Русский: Самсон убивает тысячу филимистян ослинной челюстью (Суд. 14:1-17) (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

The shooter got in through an emergency exit door. So much for gun-free zones. How’s that workin’ out for you?

One guy with a gun could have stopped him. Feinstein retorted on one news show: “And maybe you could have had a fire fight and killed many more people.”

Oh yeah, right.

There are witnesses that say apparently someone else apparently opened it from inside and left it cracked open, where the shooter entered.

Of course the Yellow Press Corps quotes the control freak spokesfolks more than the ones that support self-defense, but the fact is this cinema chain has a very strict no-guns policy.

Can you confiscate every gun in the entire world? Then your dictators would be the only ones with them, and it would create a homemade-arms industry overnight and the next thing would make the current drug wars look like a shuffleboard competition.

What would Jesus do?

Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a purse, let him take [it], and likewise [his] scrip: and he that hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

But Peter told him they already had two among them. So yes, they carried protection.

You think it’s different today because there’s guns?

Nyet. When the Philistines had the Hebrews under their thumbs, they had prohibited all weapons to them. Samson was the answer to that.

The only reason gun control is a political issue is to protect the gang that owns the institutions that would carry them. That’s why we nned a regular militia that’s totally independent from government.

If early American colonial laws required arms in every home, they were still independent.