I read the following article,
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment051500a.html
I was first upset because the author improperly quoted the number of cows grazing that day.
But, I'm glad that the reported stated what other's haven't had the cajones to say before, and that's that they are willing to dismantle this country to have everything they want, when they want it, and how they want it. Without regard for the rational for their arguement about a safer Amerika.
Excluding the error of the total number of chins at the march, I think it hits the 10-Ring.
Taking Aim at The Constitution
The gun controllers believe in Constitutional Nullification.
By Jaime Sneider, Editorial Page Editor of the Columbia Daily Spectator
As they passed the National Archives on their way to the Washington mall, this weekend's crowd of 750,000 marchers breezed by the Constitution. It was a characteristic act.
The Constitution may be altered only when Congress — by a two-thirds majority — proposes amendments, which are then adopted by three-fourths of the states. Such extreme checks were instituted to ensure that revision would be difficult, and occur only when sustained by the populace at large, so as to guarantee that the change reflected the general will, not just that of a particular special interest.
But the language of organizers and supporters of the Million Mom March hints at a growing trend that culminated in yesterday's March. The (generally left-leaning) disgruntled individuals who have failed politically in getting gun-control measures passed have come to support Constitutional Nullification. As David Kopel of the Independence Institute observed in Friday's guest comment, the Million Mom March website says "the Second Amendment is irrelevant."
The supporters of the March make clear that their true intentions are much more drastic than "sensible gun laws." One such organization, The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, was originally named The National Coalition to Ban Handguns. A recruitment flyer reads, "It is our aim to ban the manufacture and sale of handguns to private individuals ... the coalition's emphasis is to keep handguns out of private possession — where they do the most harm."
As head of Handgun Control, Sarah Brady has made similar remarks, echoing claims that the Second Amendment is obsolete and can be ignored. She has said, "The Second Amendment has a profound influence on the entire gun control debate, because of an erroneous interpretation that [it] grants every American the 'right to bear arms.'" The organization's website elaborates, stating that "The 'militia' was not, as the gun lobby will often claim, simply another word for the populace at large. Indeed, membership in the 18th century militia was generally limited to able-bodied white males between the ages of 18 and 45 — hardly encompassing the entire population of the nation."
The same logic could be used to dismiss the inalienable rights referred to in the Declaration of Independence, because they were made only with reference to white men. Similarly, Brady should believe that the right to vote is itself obsolete and even mythical, given the fact that in the 18th century, state and local governments regulated their elections in such a manner that only property-owning white men could vote. Instead of expanding the definition of the word militia to include women and minorities, as was done with the right to vote, Sarah Brady dismisses the notion of the right to bear arms itself.
Further comments by Brady suggest that the prospects of future generations understanding the original meaning of the Second Amendment are grim, as history is thrown down the memory hole: "A leading textbook publisher recently corrected the misinformation [that] the Second Amendment [gave people the right to bear arms]. And the newly written textbooks will soon be used in 11 state school systems. During this next year, [Handgun Control] will be communicating with every major textbook publisher...we will expand this campaign to include reference works, government publications and other materials."
Like Sarah Brady, March organizer Donna Dees-Thomases attempts to convert her political actions into nonpartisan truths by deceiving the public: Far from being an ordinary mom, Dees-Thomases is the sister-in-law of Hillary Clinton's chief political adviser.
Perhaps the scariest thing about the gun-control movement is that they want to blur the existence of truth itself. According to their own words, gun-control leaders will not stop until the private ownership of guns is illegal and the Constitution overthrown. As such, they encourage nullification of the universal moral truths contained within that document. As the gun-control activists pursue their agenda by any means necessary — supporting ever larger and more intrusive government — the true ethical purpose of the Second Amendment will only become more apparent.
Best Regards,
Don
------------------
The most foolish mistake we could make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms; history shows that all conquerers who have allowed their subjected people to carry arms have prepared their own fall.
Adolf Hitler
http://www.nationalreview.com/comment/comment051500a.html
I was first upset because the author improperly quoted the number of cows grazing that day.
But, I'm glad that the reported stated what other's haven't had the cajones to say before, and that's that they are willing to dismantle this country to have everything they want, when they want it, and how they want it. Without regard for the rational for their arguement about a safer Amerika.
Excluding the error of the total number of chins at the march, I think it hits the 10-Ring.
Taking Aim at The Constitution
The gun controllers believe in Constitutional Nullification.
By Jaime Sneider, Editorial Page Editor of the Columbia Daily Spectator
As they passed the National Archives on their way to the Washington mall, this weekend's crowd of 750,000 marchers breezed by the Constitution. It was a characteristic act.
The Constitution may be altered only when Congress — by a two-thirds majority — proposes amendments, which are then adopted by three-fourths of the states. Such extreme checks were instituted to ensure that revision would be difficult, and occur only when sustained by the populace at large, so as to guarantee that the change reflected the general will, not just that of a particular special interest.
But the language of organizers and supporters of the Million Mom March hints at a growing trend that culminated in yesterday's March. The (generally left-leaning) disgruntled individuals who have failed politically in getting gun-control measures passed have come to support Constitutional Nullification. As David Kopel of the Independence Institute observed in Friday's guest comment, the Million Mom March website says "the Second Amendment is irrelevant."
The supporters of the March make clear that their true intentions are much more drastic than "sensible gun laws." One such organization, The Coalition to Stop Gun Violence, was originally named The National Coalition to Ban Handguns. A recruitment flyer reads, "It is our aim to ban the manufacture and sale of handguns to private individuals ... the coalition's emphasis is to keep handguns out of private possession — where they do the most harm."
As head of Handgun Control, Sarah Brady has made similar remarks, echoing claims that the Second Amendment is obsolete and can be ignored. She has said, "The Second Amendment has a profound influence on the entire gun control debate, because of an erroneous interpretation that [it] grants every American the 'right to bear arms.'" The organization's website elaborates, stating that "The 'militia' was not, as the gun lobby will often claim, simply another word for the populace at large. Indeed, membership in the 18th century militia was generally limited to able-bodied white males between the ages of 18 and 45 — hardly encompassing the entire population of the nation."
The same logic could be used to dismiss the inalienable rights referred to in the Declaration of Independence, because they were made only with reference to white men. Similarly, Brady should believe that the right to vote is itself obsolete and even mythical, given the fact that in the 18th century, state and local governments regulated their elections in such a manner that only property-owning white men could vote. Instead of expanding the definition of the word militia to include women and minorities, as was done with the right to vote, Sarah Brady dismisses the notion of the right to bear arms itself.
Further comments by Brady suggest that the prospects of future generations understanding the original meaning of the Second Amendment are grim, as history is thrown down the memory hole: "A leading textbook publisher recently corrected the misinformation [that] the Second Amendment [gave people the right to bear arms]. And the newly written textbooks will soon be used in 11 state school systems. During this next year, [Handgun Control] will be communicating with every major textbook publisher...we will expand this campaign to include reference works, government publications and other materials."
Like Sarah Brady, March organizer Donna Dees-Thomases attempts to convert her political actions into nonpartisan truths by deceiving the public: Far from being an ordinary mom, Dees-Thomases is the sister-in-law of Hillary Clinton's chief political adviser.
Perhaps the scariest thing about the gun-control movement is that they want to blur the existence of truth itself. According to their own words, gun-control leaders will not stop until the private ownership of guns is illegal and the Constitution overthrown. As such, they encourage nullification of the universal moral truths contained within that document. As the gun-control activists pursue their agenda by any means necessary — supporting ever larger and more intrusive government — the true ethical purpose of the Second Amendment will only become more apparent.
Best Regards,
Don
------------------
The most foolish mistake we could make would be to allow the subjected people to carry arms; history shows that all conquerers who have allowed their subjected people to carry arms have prepared their own fall.
Adolf Hitler