Liberals Always After our Guns 15 December 2015

One of the ultimate and pressing goals of our domestic enemies, liberals (democrats) is to disarm the American people.  As is virtually always the case, liberals create the problem, then the first thing they do is attack conservatism, attack our fundamental God-given rights, then demand more power and control over our lives.

Let’s look at some recent headlines of the liberals’ call for our disarmament.

“Obama Uses Facebook to Push Gun Control”

“Obama Criticizes Congress on Gun Control Failings”

“Obama Renews Gun Control Push”

Ok, enough about Obama, we all know he’s the NRA’s number one gun saleman.

Let’s look at Obama’s mini-me, Hillary Clinton

“Hillary Clinton Says Opponents of Gun control laws Terrorize Americans”

One is enough from this criminal who’s been running to stay one step ahead of the law for decades.

We’ll list one last headline, a real laugher,

“Top Constitutional Lawyers Explain What the Second Amendment Really Says About Gun Control”  (naturally that the 2nd Amendment doesn’t say what it says)

For liberal lawyers and judges today to claim that the 2nd Amendment was not intended to protect our rights (uninfringed) to own firearms is laughable for those of us who can read. The Supreme Court is mentioned in the U.S. Constitution and given the following jurisdiction: Section 2. The judicial Power shall extend to all Cases, in Law and Equity, arising under this Constitution, the Laws of the United States, and Treaties made, or which shall be made, under their Authority;

-to all Cases affecting Ambassadors, other public Ministers and Consuls;

-to all Cases of admiralty and maritime Jurisdiction;

-to Controversies to which the United States shall be a Party;

-to Controversies between two or more States;

-between a State and Citizens of another State;

-between Citizens of different States;

-between Citizens of the same State claiming Lands under Grants of different States, and between a State, or the Citizens thereof, and foreign States, Citizens or Subjects.

Hmmmm, you scratch your head looking for the vast powers it exercises today. “So, this goof, left out that part”, you say to yourself. No, my friends, that’s all there is.  Our founders never intended for an oligarchy of moron judges to control our nation, especially our social policies.  Sadly, it jumped off the tracks quickly, as the court usurped its right of “judicial review” of federal law rather quickly, in 1794, then the most famous case of Marbury vs. Madison in 1803. Then they never stopped because no one stopped them, much to our everlasting regret today.

Thomas Jefferson observed in 1823, “At the establishment of our constitution, the judiciary bodies were supposed to be the most helpless and harmless members of the government. Experience, however, soon showed in what way they were to become the most dangerous; that the insufficiency of the means provided for their removal gave them a freehold and irresponsibility in office; that their decisions, seeming to concern individual suitors only, pass silent and unheeded by the public at large; that these decisions, nevertheless, become law by precedent, sapping, by little and little, the foundations of the constitution, and working its change by construction, before any one has perceived that that invisible and helpless worm has been busily employed in consuming its substance. In truth, man is not made to be trusted for life, if secured against all liability to account.”

Interestingly it was only in modern times that the floodgate opened for the Supreme Court to rule on state law, with the 1954 Brown vs. board of education.  Only a couple and more minor trampling of states rights and law had occurred prior to that point.  Now, it seems so natural that we don’t even give it a second thought, but our “supreme court” today is nothing but an extra-constitutional totalitarian institution that controls so much of our lives.

As far as what the second amendment truly means, once again if you can read, its meaning is readily apparent.  Liberals belong to what they believe is an exclusive upper caste of intellectuals who we commoners must rely on.  Our founders wrote a very simple to understand founding document (ok, at the time, I realize late 18th century English can be a bit laborious).

What would liberals think of their beloved first Amendment if it read thusly: “Freedom of speech, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to speak freely shall not be infringed.”

Their only argument in the 2nd amendment as written is the militia means a state sanctioned military organization.  Did the authors of the amendment mean that?  Prior to the constitution and the addition of the bill of rights, the colonists viewed the God-given right of private gun ownership, among other reasons, as providing a “natural right of self defense”.

All of the early state constitutions had nearly identical wording as “the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state”.  When the bill of rights was ratified, that was the background and intent of our 2nd Amendment.

As Alexander Hamilton explained, “If circumstances should at any time oblige the government to form an army of any magnitude, that army can never be formidable to the liberties of the people while there is a large body of citizens, little, if at all, inferior to them in discipline and the use of arms, who stand ready to defend their own rights and those of their fellow-citizens.”

As Noah Webster observed, “Before a standing army can rule the people must be disarmed; as they are in almost every kingdom in Europe.  The supreme power in America cannot enforce unjust laws by the sword; because the whole body of the people are armed, and constitute a force superior to any band of regular troops that can be, on any pretense, raised in the United States.”

As George Mason observed, “to disarm the people; that it was the best and most effectual way to enslave them …Who are the militia? They consist now of the whole people, except a few public officers.”

James Monroe said is was a basic “human right” for the people to “keep and bear arms”.

Samuel Adams, “Be never construed to authorize Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms…”

I could go on forever. Only a complete liar claims contrary to what those who fashioned our country meant.  Not a single one of our founders envisioned the people being disarmed, they all held the European powers in derision for disarming their citizens.  So, I can take the word of our modern day scoundrels masquerading as constitutional scholars or I can side with those that actually wrote and ratified our constitution.

These modern day preening fools act as if only after consulting horse livers or digging up ancient runes from the desert can we understand our constitution.  And we wonder why our country is going to hell in a hand basket as liberals slowly squeeze the life out of us.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.