
|
NOTE!
This is a real-time comments system. As such, it's also a
free speech zone within guidelines set forth on the Post
Comments page. Opinions expressed here may or may not
reflect those of KeepAndBearArms staff, members, or
any other living person besides the one who posted them.
Please keep that in mind. We ask that all who post
comments assure that they adhere to our Inclusion
Policy, but there's a bad apple in every
bunch, and we have no control over bigots and
other small-minded people. Thank you. --KeepAndBearArms.com
|
The
Below Comments Relate to this Newslink:
Huffpo: Self-Defense A ‘Laughable’ Way To Defend Gun Rights
Submitted by:
Bruce W. Krafft
Website: http://www.keepandbeararms.com/
|
There
is 1 comment
on this story
Post Comments | Read Comments
|
"On Monday, the Huffington Post ran a column arguing that the Constitution is the weakest of all grounds for defending gun rights, and an appeal to self-defense to justify gun ownership is simply 'laughable.'"
"According to the Huffington Post, the Constitutional argument for gun rights is flawed because the 2nd Amendment only protects the rights of persons serving in the militia and, contrary to the Supreme Court’s decision in McDonald v. Chicago, it does not bar states or local governments from regulating firearm ownership." ... |
Comment by:
Millwright66
(1/6/2015)
|
"Self-Defense" is an "inalienable right" ; one of the core concepts of our constitution. The second amendment was written at the insistence of the states in order to further define the prohibitions on government's powers to regulate or constrict the exercise of the "inalienable rights, every citizen is empowered to exercise.
"Offense" is the purview of government, (under strict citizen control), exercised thru Congress. This "control" has featured prominently in several key conflicts between Congress and the White House over the decades.
Small wonder a "anti-gun organ" would countenance another attempt to erode one of the keystones of our freedom. |
|
|
QUOTES
TO REMEMBER |
"Some people think that the Second Amendment is an outdated relic of an earlier time. Doubtless some also think that constitutional protections of other rights are outdated relics of earlier times. We The People own those rights regardless, unless and until We The People repeal them. For those who believe it to be outdated, the Second Amendment provides a good test of whether their allegiance is really to the Constitution of the United States, or only to their preferences in public policies and audiences. The Constitution is law, not vague aspirations, and we are obligated to protect, defend, and apply it. If the Second Amendment were truly an outdated relic, the Constitution provides a method for repeal. The Constitution does not furnish the federal courts with an eraser." --9th Circuit Court Judge Andrew Kleinfeld, dissenting opinion in which the court refused to rehear the case while citing deeply flawed anti-Second Amendment nonsense (Nordyke v. King; opinion filed April 5, 2004) |
|
|