Comments on: Taking The Second Amendment To Court
Add a Comment
- "Tyrants from Hitler to Mao to Stalin have sought to disarm their own citizens, for the simple reason that unarmed people are easier to control. Our Founders, having just expelled the British army, knew that the right to bear arms serves as the guardian of every other right. This is the principle so often ignored by both sides in the gun control debate. Only armed citizens can resist tyrannical government."
-- Congressman Ron Paul, June 27, 2006
ronpaul2008.com - Reply to this comment
- "It''s a nasty truth that those who seek to inflict harm are not phased by gun control laws. I happen to know this from personal experience."
- President Ronald Reagan, 1983 - Reply to this comment
- "A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government.
A free people ought...to be armed."
-- President George Washington Speech of Jan. 7, 1790 in the Boston Independent Chronicle, Jan. 14, 1790
www.A-HUMAN-RIGHT.com - Reply to this comment
- "Today we need a nation of minute men; citizens who are not only prepared to take up arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as a basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom.
The cause of liberty, the cause of American, cannot succeed with any lesser effort."
- President John F. Kennedy, January 29, 1961
A-HUMAN-RIGHT.com - Reply to this comment
- a liberal would protect your rights and the constitution even if it means taking your rights away and re-writting the constitution to do it..
give liberals time and we will be swimming in laws and regulations, with the govt involved in every aspect of my life that I cannot pick the proper tooth paste without breaking the a law..give them time they will make THIS COUNTRY INTO A TRUE POLICE STATE..a situation that is nothing more than to control our lives under one corrupt liberal ideology.. - Reply to this comment
- pesos_galore,
If it were not for the Southern States exporting excess electricity, the liberal northeasterners would be freezing in the dark each winter.
Hey! What a wonderful idea... - Reply to this comment
- pretty simple.fbi agent takes laptop listing all military info home with him, leaves it there, takes family to dinner, house burglarized. No military id theft. However, aprx 6500 military men/women commit suicide that year. How many more with "accidents"? Developers claim "they" have Big Money backing them; who do u think of when u think of Big Money? house market in slump due to overbuilding, letting folks in for small sums, little interest, now mortgage rates doubling & interest soaring; Everyone watches Calif as what goes on there reachs rest of world about year later; homes $500,000 to $700,000 auctioned IF they could get buyers, min bid $285,000. Who takes the fall? developers? no BANKS. Merrill Lynch fired man who cost them $8million,.1st, take out threats. Done. Military personnel or trained military.2nd, cause bank problems.done. 3rd, remove food source. Any time our country loses its source of food (which is really extremely frightening already how much food is imported)whatever nation has the supply will rule it. When we were kids, we learned to survive in the woods, etc. Not our kids. They haven''t even got a clue. The only way for evil 2 rule is 4 good men to do nothing. My sister said it was extremely frightening what happened in Portland, Ore, she said it was like they (developers) targeted specific groups of people and went after them, just like during WWII.
- Reply to this comment
- I think it pretty obvious that the supreme libs will say, "No, we won''t allow the masses to have guns", with the other four saying the opposite, while Kennedy will mull over what he''ll allow the Nation to do (as nearly always he does), and if people are dumb enough to listen to him, as leftist as he so often is, kiss off private gun ownership rights. If the supreme court lawyers pull off this sort of diktat, as they did with abortion, it''s going to give rise to catastrophic difficulty.
This lawyer/''judge'' lawmaking debauch is a cataclysmic debacle, long since out of hand, and it''s remarkable stupidity that people are dumb enough to so sheepishly put up with it, and for so long. - Reply to this comment
- I think it pretty obvious that the supreme libs will say, "No, we won''t allow the masses to have guns", with the other four saying the opposite, while Kennedy will mull over what he''ll allow the Nation to do (as nearly always he does), and if people are dumb enough to listen to him, as leftist as he so often is, kiss off private gun ownership rights. If the supreme court lawyers pull off this sort of diktat, as they did with abortion, it''s going to give rise to catastrophic difficulty.
This lawyer/''judge'' lawmaking debauch is a cataclysmic debacle, long since out of hand, and it''s remarkable stupidity that people are dumb enough to so sheepishly put up with it, and for so long. - Reply to this comment
- krazykat2525,
My point is that I don''t believe, as you apparently do, that the members of the Supreme Court have already decided how they will rule in this case.
I think that it remains very much up in the air.
I suppose you could say that I am somewhat less cynical.
Certainly, the other issues you raise are of interest, and each should be carefully evaluated.
I would be interested in seeing much more detail on each of these issues. With the limited information provided, I don''t feel that I can give an intelligent answer at this time. - Reply to this comment
