The ORIGINAL gathering place for a merry band of Three Percenters. (As denounced by Bill Clinton on CNN!)
Monday, May 26, 2014
CNN analyst says 'countless restrictions' on 2nd Amendment acceptable
Ah, so that's his standard--as long as the government's recognition of the right to keep and bear arms does not "vanish altogether," we're golden. In an instant, shall not be infringed, has become "shall not vanish altogether," and that's supposed to be good enough for us. It's not, O'Mara, and it's not good enough for the brave men and women we celebrate today who died upholding their oath to defend the rights you are so casually willing to toss away, as long as it's done in small enough pieces.
Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)
Acceptable? Yes! But to whom? And to whom are they not acceptable? And to what lengths are those who disagree prepared to go to "convince" the others to go along with their vision?
My crystal ball is still in the shop so I'm not in any position to say for certain how this is going to be settled if ever. But I'm pretty sure it will be argued more and more as we, and the other nation that lives within the borders we share go down this road together, at least for now.
I'm also pretty sure a few broken windows aren't going to be the deciding factor. Most of them never even heard of "The Window War".
and their viewership just keeps on dropping...I think more and more Americans are finally getting the first verse to Jefferson Airplanes "Want Somebody to Love"..."when the truth if found to be lies...."
It's true you can't yell "fire" in a theater, but they don't duck tape your mouth closed when you buy a ticket to prevent it. They trust you to be responsible, and punish the ones who aren't. Thus it should be with firearms.
Uh-huh. .. .
Let's see him apply that same standard to the First (MOSTLY freedom of speech, ALMOST freedom of the press) or to the Fourth (. . . and no Warrants shall issue, but upon RUMOR and INNUENDO. . . ). I'm sure we could work through the rest of the BoR in such fashion to satisfy this CNN dickweed.
I wish that people would get that "fire in a crowded theater" correct.
The more correct quote pulled from Holme's SCOTUS brief, is that "You cannot FALSELY yell fire in a crowded theater".
Now if we could just continue to use that hammer against the collectivists whenever they try to shut us up, we just might start to make some "progress" (pun, and reversion to the original meaning, intended) in our fights back to our full rights.
Actually Hoffman's article included a link that showed the old "can't shout fire in a crowded theater" is completely bogus. It is well worth the read because that argument is so often used to justify trampling rights.
Post a Comment