Saturday, October 9, 2010

Your enemies always tell you what they fear most, often without intending to.

The latest in a long line of denunciations of the so-called "insurrectionist" theory of the Second Amendment.

Largely unnoticed was Clement's comment that the Second Amendment guarantees "an armed citizenry as a deterrent to abusive behavior by the federal government itself."

This is a remarkable statement by a lawyer for the United States government. Does it not maintain that the potential for citizens to fire upon federal agents is an important constitutional value? Does it not imply that the greatest Second Amendment protection should be given to citizens who are arming themselves against the threat of government abuse, like the rightwing militias now training with assault rifles?

You bet yer ass it does, Dennis. Live with it.


Sean said...

Or die with it.

Anonymous said...

Heavily armed militias? What have they been buying M-60's and RPG's from Mexico?

TPaine said...

This is what MY copy of the Declaration of Independence says:

That whenever any form of government becomes destructive to these ends, it is the right of the people to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their safety and happiness.

Seems like a cut-and-dry case to me. The people have the right to replace a corrupt government, and the 2nd Amendment gives us the maens to do that.

Lock and load!

Taylor H said...

At least one person gets it.

TPaine said...

I don't think it's going to start with the govt. trying to take away our guns. Right now, it looks like it may start when armed gangs backed by the govt. (NBP, unions, etc.) start resorting to violence when they lose the upcoming elections and the associated power.

Andy Stern said (ominously) that they will use the power of persuasion, and if that doesn't work, they'll use the persuasion of power. And Obama himself stated the other day that if the elections go "right", there will be hand-to-hand combat in the Capitol. When the left decides that they don't have the political power to accomplish what they want, they'll take it to the next stage - violence. The Weather Underground did that years ago, and the same agenda is in their plans.

Again - lock & load!

W W Woodward said...

“… the guys with the guns make the rules." Very true. And, as long as only one side (Government) has all the guns, as the Brady bunch seems to advocate, that side will exercise total control over the rest of us.

Henry Kissinger said something to the effect that, “Success in negotiations hinges upon what the people on the other side believe we have the ability to do to them if they don’t agree.”

So far, the DC and Chicago governments are defying the right of We The People to keep and bear arms decisions made by the SCOTUS. The federal government found force of arms was necessary to implement racial integration in the nation’s schools (both North and South), and to deny the Confederate States of America its very existence. The federal government obviously isn’t willing to go to those lengths to protect our rights guaranteed by the Second Amendment. So … What’s left?


Defender said...

Brings us back to long-time CONGRESSman Henry Waxman. "If these people are going to use guns to defend their rights, I'm not comfortable with them having guns at all."
You can tell what he has in mind, and you'd be right, judging by his record. What he's saying is "I'm not comfortable with them having RIGHTS at all."

Brock Townsend said...

It's a Natural Right,Henigan.Perhaps you need to refresh your mind with some Bastiat.

Defender said...

Commenter says " "The Time article describes, in chilling terms, the proliferation of heavily armed, right wing militias engaged in paramilitary training to resist the perceived "tyranny" of government authority."

Would that be the London Times in 1775? " "

Many commenters are setting the Huffandpuffs straight.

thedweeze said...

"Um, there's no *implying*, Dennis. That's exactly what the 2A means and what it's for. Congrats! It looks like you're finally going to pass 10th grade Social Studies.... "

That's my comment, which, if things go as usual, will never see the light of day.

pdxr13 said...

Why would I mess around with "an assault carbine" like an MP5 when I can shoulder a weapon firing a proper .30 full-power rifle cartridge?

I'm not so inept that I might shoot my buddy in the back.

Government forces should be prohibited from having concealable weapons in the presence of Citizens. The Militia will keep legitimate Administrators safe.


Dedicated_Dad said...

Brock Townsend said...

"It's a Natural Right,Henigan. Perhaps you need to refresh your mind with some Bastiat."

Bastiat sure beats an acute case of plumbism.

Anonymous said...

What kind of rich man's militia is out there training with NFA firearms?

Oh, what's that? You didn't actually mean "assault rifles", which by definition are selective fire, you ignorant asshole? Die in a fire.

Concerned American said...

I like it, DD...

"Honey, I've got a plumbing job tonight. Yes, I'll be careful."

Defender said...

Plumbism sounds rather like cement poisoning.
You didn't think all the financiers who left the office by way of high windows after the market crash of 1929 did so under their own power, did you? It wasn't just their own money they lost.