Repeal the 2nd? You gotta be kidding me...

This site may earn a commission from merchant affiliate links, including eBay, Amazon, and others.

ConstitutionCowboy

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jul 5, 2006
Messages
6,291
Reaction score
5,194
Location
Kingfisher County
There have been many a dictator running countries that protected no right of the people to keep and bear arms.


I can't see why Stevens would want to go through the trouble of repealing the Second Amendment when he and many before him simply construed it to their liking. Thank the Lord those justices were finally outnumbered.

Repealing the Second Amendment doesn't remove the right. There is a lot that would need to be done as well. The Ninth Amendment would still afford protection of the right. Congress would have to be given power to write law to disarm We the People. Many minions would have to be willing to give their life in an attempt to disarm We the People.

We the People fought and won posession of this country over a battle with a dictatorship that tried to disarm We the People. We retain our arms to keep this country and to keep it free.

Woody
 

rawhide

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Mar 12, 2008
Messages
4,237
Reaction score
1,311
Location
Lincoln Co.
There have been many a dictator running countries that protected no right of the people to keep and bear arms.


I can't see why Stevens would want to go through the trouble of repealing the Second Amendment when he and many before him simply construed it to their liking. Thank the Lord those justices were finally outnumbered.

Repealing the Second Amendment doesn't remove the right. There is a lot that would need to be done as well. The Ninth Amendment would still afford protection of the right. Congress would have to be given power to write law to disarm We the People. Many minions would have to be willing to give their life in an attempt to disarm We the People.

We the People fought and won posession of this country over a battle with a dictatorship that tried to disarm We the People. We retain our arms to keep this country and to keep it free.

Woody

I've always maintained that my position on the right to bear arms would be the same regardless of the 2nd Amendment. The right precedes the amendment which was put in place to protect the right, not grant the right.
As already stated, at least the former justice acknowledges that government's ability to restrict rights is limited by the Constitution. He's just in favor of lifting the limitations.
 

Slim Deal

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Dec 16, 2017
Messages
1,591
Reaction score
2,667
Location
NE OK
That old man wants to disarm every gun owner in America and he will advocate doing it legally or illegally. Combine this idiots ideas with those of the punkazzed March for our lives people and you have a very dry tinder box waiting/hoping for a spark to happen. I don't think the status quo is going to last thru the summer.
 

Shadowrider

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Jan 28, 2008
Messages
21,557
Reaction score
9,386
Location
Tornado Alley
That old man wants to disarm every gun owner in America and he will advocate doing it legally or illegally. Combine this idiots ideas with those of the punkazzed March for our lives people and you have a very dry tinder box waiting/hoping for a spark to happen. I don't think the status quo is going to last thru the summer.
It was those very marchers that girded him into his statement. He said he was "moved" by the march. Poor old bastage is to too senile to understand that probably 98% of those school kids were just enjoying a free trip to sight see in D.C. on Bloomberg, the Brady bunch, Soros, and a few rich actors and athletes that "donated". They couldn't have cared less but probably had fun hanging with their friends and seeing the sights. I doubt they even have a clue what the event was about, but it makes for great pictures and false attendance counts.
 

dennishoddy

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Dec 9, 2008
Messages
84,931
Reaction score
62,786
Location
Ponca City Ok
It was those very marchers that girded him into his statement. He said he was "moved" by the march. Poor old bastage is to too senile to understand that probably 98% of those school kids were just enjoying a free trip to sight see in D.C. on Bloomberg, the Brady bunch, Soros, and a few rich actors and athletes that "donated". They couldn't have cared less but probably had fun hanging with their friends and seeing the sights. I doubt they even have a clue what the event was about, but it makes for great pictures and false attendance counts.
Oh yeah, they didn't have a clue why they were even there, and didn't even know what an AR-15 even was in some on the street interviews. They were asked if they would ban ar barrels that could just be unscrewed and make it into an MP9, or an axe that was mounted on the gun should be illegal. They had no clue about the definition of what an assault rifle was and just want to ban the AR-15 which is not the same thing.
They had no clue. It's doubtful that the adult marchers knew that either. Professional marchers. Nice day to get a couple of free hot dogs and a bus ride to break up the day of standing on a street corner with a cardboard sign begging for money.
 

Slim Deal

Sharpshooter
Special Hen
Joined
Dec 16, 2017
Messages
1,591
Reaction score
2,667
Location
NE OK
The liberals and the organizers wanted to get this crap in the press so the average person would see this. It is an attempt to sway public opinion and to brainwash the minds of the youths in this country. The liberals are using these tactics to guide young people to their political party.

The communist revolution in China used the kids to turn in their parents and neighbors to the party officials. This will most likely be a tactic used by the liberals in the USA. We should have started eliminating the bastards in 1972, our country would be better off today if we did. Jut think there would not have been no Slick Willie or O'turd presidencies.
 
Last edited:

gerhard1

Sharpshooter
Supporting Member
Special Hen Supporter
Joined
Dec 8, 2008
Messages
4,555
Reaction score
3,510
Location
Enid, OK
I agree with his analysis.

He thinks Heller was incorrectly decided. He recognizes that--under current jurisprudence--it would take a constitutional amendment to overturn Heller.

Shouldn't we be applauding such honesty? A SCOTUS justice, publicly conceding that to implement his agenda, we'd need to go through the amendment process?
Thank God, that amending COTUS is an awkward, cumbersome process. It has been proposed before, but didn't get any traction.
 

Latest posts

Top Bottom