Bang / Guns
See other Bang / Guns Articles
Title: Republicans Join Democrats to Destroy Second Amendment
Source:
Infowars
URL Source: http://www.infowars.com/republicans ... s-to-destroy-second-amendment/
Published: Dec 26, 2012
Author: Kurt Nimmo
Post Date: 2012-12-26 13:06:02 by Hondo68
Ping List: *The Two Parties ARE the Same* Subscribe to *The Two Parties ARE the Same*
Keywords: None
Views: 117987
Comments: 146
In addition to surrendering to the Democrat instinct to tax Americans into oblivion, Republicans in Congress are prepared to go along with knee-jerk legislation rolling back the Second Amendment in the coming year. “Put guns on the table. Also, put video games on the table. Put mental health on the table,” Rep. Jack Kingston of Georgia said last week as the Republican leadership signaled it is ready to chip away at the right to own firearms. Kingston said Republicans are likely to move on more anti-gun legislation after a “grief stage” in response to the Sandy Hook elementary school shooting. “In the coming days and weeks, we will engage in a meaningful conversation and thoughtful debate about how to change laws and culture that allow violence to grow,” said formerly pro-Second Amendment Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid. “And every idea should be on the table as we discuss how best to do just that.” Sens. Marco Rubio of Florida and Chuck Grassley of Iowa are ready to trade off the Second Amendment in order to make a political deal with Democrats. “You’ve got to take all these things into consideration,” Grassley said. Grassley also believes the federal government should legislate on societal issues. He said Congress needs to discuss a culture that “tends to be less civil now than it has been for a long period of time.” Arguing that Republicans must abandon libertarian principles in order “to remain relevant in a country whose views are changing,” the Associated Press cites a Washington Post/ABC News poll published last week in the wake of the Connecticut shooting that shows 54 percent of Americans surveyed want restrictions placed on the Second Amendment. For statist Republicans, relevance is all the rage. Following the shooting in Connecticut, former Republican congressman from Florida, Joe Scarborough, easily betrayed the Constitution. “I knew that day that the ideologies of my past career were no longer relevant to the future that I want, that I demand, for my children,” he said. “The party is at a point where it wants to have those discussions in public, where people feel comfortable differing from what is perceived as the party orthodoxy,” said Republican consultant Dan Hazelwood, revealing the sad fact that Republican fealty to the Second Amendment and thus the Constitution at large is waning. Retiring Republican Ron Paul responded to this sudden political sea change on the part of his colleagues. “Predictably, the political left responded to the tragedy with emotional calls for increased gun control. This is understandable, but misguided,” Paul said after the massacre. “The impulse to have government ‘do something’ to protect us in the wake of national tragedies is reflexive and often well intentioned. Many Americans believe that if we simply pass the right laws, future horrors like the Sandy Hook Elementary shooting can be prevented. But this impulse ignores the self evident truth that criminals don’t obey laws. The political right, unfortunately, has fallen into the same trap in its calls for quick legislative solutions to gun violence. If only we put armed police or armed teachers in schools, we’re told, would-be school shooters would be dissuaded or stopped. While I certainly agree that more guns equals less crime and that private gun ownership prevents many shootings. I don’t agree that conservatives and libertarians should view government legislation, especially at the federal level, as the solution to violence.” Ron Paul criticized reaction to the shooting by the NRA. Following the shooting, NRA boss Wayne LaPierre said the state should respond by placing more armed cops and guards in public education schools. Paul rightly saw this as an excuse to expand an already bloated police state: Furthermore, do we really want to live in a world of police checkpoints, surveillance cameras, metal detectors, X-ray scanners, and warrantless physical searches? We see this culture in our airports: witness the shabby spectacle of once proud, happy Americans shuffling through long lines while uniformed TSA agents bark orders. This is the world of government provided “security,” a world far too many Americans now seem to accept or even endorse. School shootings, no matter how horrific, do not justify creating an Orwellian surveillance state in America. Republicans in Congress will vote with Democrats to further erode the Second Amendment. The establishment is now exploiting the Sandy Hook shooting to accomplish its long-term objective of disarming the American people. No state can strip its citizens of their natural rights if they are armed and if a large number of them understand the principles behind the Constitution and the real reason for the Second Amendment.
Poster Comment: Add in the rest of the liberal congress-critters who endorsed John "Trigger Lock" McCain, and Willard "Semiauto Ban" Romney, and some form of so called gun control seems likely to get passed.
Subscribe to *The Two Parties ARE the Same*
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-33) not displayed.
.
.
.
#34. To: Abcdefg (#32)
I was thinking the same thing. He has no set a pattern. I do believe it is Fire Island,back again with a new screen name. Either him/her or it's sweetie,Yu-Tard.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
In what way? Please be specific. So what? Does that mean he didn't get it? What do you want from me? I'm not the one who decides who wins the frigging award. Who did you vote for the last two presidential elections? You asked me this already. Why can't you remember? Obama in 2008, Jill Stein last month.
In what way? Please be specific. In every way possible,starting with picking Cyrus Vance as Sec of State. No,I am not going to spend a bunch of time looking up the obvious and then giving you links. Do it yourself. Obama in 2008, Jill Stein last month. Supported by Noam Chomsky and Chris Hedges? Castro and Pol Pot weren't available? Shit,Obummer is a right-winger compared to those loons.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
The ultimate copout. Boteye would be proud of you. Shit,Obummer is a right-winger compared to those loons. Yup. Obama is hardly a leftist. Much more a centrist actually, even a bit to the right. Just not falling off the right end of the spectrum like today's average Republican.
Yeah,because it is such a big deep,dark secret that Jim-Mah was a bumbling fool and anti-American globalist asshole,right? Yup. Obama is hardly a leftist. Much more a centrist actually, even a bit to the right. Close,but no cigar. If it wasn't for your indoctrination that has you blindly believing fascism is a right-wing political movement,you would be there. Fascism is a ultra-LEFT political movement. It's the adult form of communism.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
To you rightwinguts he was. Close,but no cigar. If it wasn't for your indoctrination that has you blindly believing fascism is a right- wing political movement,you would be there. What about your indoctrination? Fascism is a ultra-LEFT political movement. It's the adult form of communism. So what to you is ultra-RIGHT?
WHAT indoctrination? The one that makes me a free-thinker? Don't worry. There seems to be no danger of you becoming infected with that "disease",comrade.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Don't worry. There seems to be no danger of you becoming infected with that "disease",comrade. Yeah, because anyone who doesn't think exactly like you is "indoctrinated," eh old geezer?
Since I believe doctrine MUST be challenged and that the best system is the one with the maximum individual freedoms and the least amount of government power,the only sensible answer to your thoughtless challenge is, "Of course,comrade."
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
What about me exactly makes you think I believe in so much government power?
Your admission that you are a leftist. It is impossible to be a leftist without supporting a police state that will give you all the freedom they think you need.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Lol..graphic metaphors are needed to make an impression on you dimwitted turd party losers. Repetition was given in response to the moron who couldn't understand the more oblique comments. -btw nobody ever said any of you whiney cunts were men.
When have I ever said I supported a police state? What specific measures do I support that leads you to believe this? By all means, list them.
Yup,it's either Fire Island or Yu-Tard.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
You are a leftist. There is no such thing as a leftist nation that isn't a police state. You,BY DEFINITION believe the state should have more power than the individual.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
He ducks, he dodges, he bobs, he weaves, he squirms, he slivers away... He blows off the question! By whose definition? You rightists'? I have no doubt you've been indoctrinated to believe that.
Some believe Thunderbird is Boofer.
Yes,you do. Or is it possible your education is so flawed you actually believe leftism is about individual freedoms? What I stated is a ABSOLUTE FACT. There is not a leftist nation on the planet that has a Bill of Rights. Therefor,since you want America to be a leftist nation,YOU want to see the Bill of Rights nullified and the government to be the master of the people instead of the people being the master of the government. You can't have it both ways. You are either for individual freedoms or an oppressive government. Make up your mind. By whose definition? You rightists'? Yup. Clearly the victim of a PC education or a inferior mind. Which is it?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
I don't know who Boofer is,but the language sure sounds like one of the Non-dynamic Duo.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Where's that list of things I said that supports my belief in a police state? In fact, can you name just ONE thing? C'mon, out with it! Incidentally, do you consider yourself a rightist?
Boteye
I've already told you at least 3 times right here on this thread. You are a leftist. I don't know how to dumb it down any further to help you understand it. "Incidentally, do you consider yourself a rightist?" Of course. Despite the propaganda you have been programed to believe,a right-winger is someone who has conservative values,and that in turn means you MUST have strong Libertarian beliefs because the people who formed our country and who wrote and voted on our Constitution with a Bill of Rights were Libertarians.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Boteye I don't remember Boteye writing that kind of nonsense.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Now why do you think the Left is constantly re-writing history to make themselves look like the good guys when the truth is just the opposite!! Heck just the last century alone should tell them something about what lies ahead of them... Their masters killed about 200 million people all in the name of Leftardism, many of them were supporters who had outlived their usefulness...
“We have four boxes with which to defend our freedom: the soap box, the ballot box, the jury box, and the ammunition box.”
Not even close Pete. They were liberty lovers yes. But libertarians no way. They weren't for open borders like libertarians. They were a moral people. Libertarians can be summed up with the same doctrine as satanists. Do what thou wilt.
Read the thread you're posting in, dumbass. YOU are the one crying like a little girl because some wouldn't vote for your Massachusetts socialist. Now kindly FUCK OFF LOL! No, I think I'll stay, as long as it pleases me, and make you cry some more. If you're too big a pussy to handle it, use the filter.
"If men through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce and give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great end of society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation; the right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and voluntarily become a slave." Samuel Adams, Rights of the Colonists, 1772
That would certainly explain some things.
"If men through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce and give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great end of society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation; the right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and voluntarily become a slave." Samuel Adams, Rights of the Colonists, 1772
Good God man! You can't be serious?!? You and I have always been on different sides but at least your comments have made some sort of sense... until this one.
"If men through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce and give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great end of society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation; the right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and voluntarily become a slave." Samuel Adams, Rights of the Colonists, 1772
I see that thrown around a lot. Mitt may not have been perfect. But calling him a socialist isn't honest.
Isn't honest? Did he or did he not institute socialist healthcare, THE model for Obamacare, in Massachusetts? Is he for or against a welfare and warfare state? Is he for or against progressive taxation? Is he for or against government controlled schools for your children? Mitt Romney is a socialist.
"If men through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce and give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great end of society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation; the right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and voluntarily become a slave." Samuel Adams, Rights of the Colonists, 1772
Yeah,they were. You just don't want to admit it because you want a theocracy, They weren't for open borders like libertarians. Libertarians want open borders? Sure of that,are you? They were a moral people. Libertarians can be summed up with the same doctrine as satanists. Do what thou wilt. Thank you for proving my point. You want to destroy the Bill of Rights and establish a theocratic police state. WHO are the leftists now?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Yeah,and the Titanic may have sprung a leak.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
You can't be serious?!? I sure am, Weeps. Happy New Year!
And yet you can't cite just one instance of where I explicitly stated I support anything remotely resembling a police state. LOL! I understand alright. Game, set, match. I rest my case.
Game, set, match. I rest my case. Reading between the lines together a large dose of fantasy is sneaky's specialty, in order to reach his comfort level which is: anyone not agreeing with him is a commie.
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
Thunderbird prefers to support serial adulterers running for president. As Cain was his "man".
Almost every country in the Middle East is awash in oil, and we have to side with the one that has nothing but joos. Goddamn, that was good thinkin'. Esso posted on 2012-01-13 7:37:56 ET
From their platform moron. They like killing babies too. http://www.lp.org/platform 1.4 Abortion Recognizing that abortion is a sensitive issue and that people can hold good-faith views on all sides, we believe that government should be kept out of the matter, leaving the question to each person for their conscientious consideration. 3.4 Free Trade and Migration We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property.
Peter eater thinks this is a quote from the founding fathers.
Happy New Year! Happy New Year to you too, faggot. Celebrating the Chinese New Year too?
"If men through fear, fraud or mistake, should in terms renounce and give up any essential natural right, the eternal law of reason and the great end of society, would absolutely vacate such renunciation; the right to freedom being the gift of God Almighty, it is not in the power of Man to alienate this gift, and voluntarily become a slave." Samuel Adams, Rights of the Colonists, 1772
Yup, all the crusty old geezer has is his vacuous rhetoric.
Comments (74 - 146) not displayed.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestJudging from your repeated references to male anal rape, one might think you are LP's Grand Island.
#35. To: sneakypete (#21)
Carter deserves nothing less than a horsewhipping. He is nothing more than a anti-American asshole.
#36. To: meguro (#35)
Carter deserves nothing less than a horsewhipping. He is nothing more than a anti-American asshole.
#37. To: sneakypete (#36)
No,I am not going to spend a bunch of time looking up the obvious and then giving you links. Do it yourself.
#38. To: meguro (#37)
The ultimate copout.
#39. To: sneakypete (#38)
(Edited)
Yeah,because it is such a big deep,dark secret that Jim-Mah was a bumbling fool and anti-American globalist asshole,right?
#40. To: meguro (#39)
What about your indoctrination?
#41. To: sneakypete (#40)
WHAT indoctrination? The one that makes me a free-thinker?
#42. To: meguro (#41)
Yeah, because anyone who doesn't think exactly like you is "indoctrinated," eh old geezer?
#43. To: sneakypete (#42)
Since I believe doctrine MUST be challenged and that the best system is the one with the maximum individual freedoms and the least amount of government power,the only sensible answer to your thoughtless challenge is, "Of course,comrade."
#44. To: meguro (#43)
What about me exactly makes you think I believe in so much government power?
#45. To: Abcdefg (#32)
Judging from your repeated references to male anal rape, one might think you are LP's Grand Island.
#46. To: sneakypete (#44)
(Edited)
Your admission that you are a leftist. It is impossible to be a leftist without supporting a police state that will give you all the freedom they think you need.
#47. To: Thunderbird, Abcdefg (#45)
-btw nobody ever said any of you whiney cunts were men.
#48. To: meguro (#46)
When have I ever said I supported a police state?
#49. To: sneakypete (#48)
You are a leftist. There is no such thing as a leftist nation that isn't a police state. You,BY DEFINITION believe the state should have more power than the individual.
#50. To: sneakypete (#47)
Yup,it's either Fire Island or Yu-Tard.
#51. To: meguro (#49)
He ducks, he dodges, he bobs, he weaves, he squirms, he slivers away... He blows off the question!
#52. To: meguro (#50)
Some believe Thunderbird is Boofer.
#53. To: sneakypete (#51)
#54. To: sneakypete (#52)
I don't know who Boofer is,
#55. To: meguro (#53)
Where's that list of things I said that supports my belief in a police state? In fact, can you name just ONE thing? C'mon, out with it!
#56. To: meguro (#54)
I don't know who Boofer is,
#57. To: sneakypete, meguro (#51)
Or is it possible your education is so flawed you actually believe leftism is about individual freedoms?
#58. To: sneakypete (#55)
the people who formed our country and who wrote and voted on our Constitution with a Bill of Rights were Libertarians.
#59. To: Thunderbird (#31)
snot nosed whiners like you
#60. To: sneakypete, Abcdefg, Thunderbird (#34)
I do believe it is Fire Island,back again with a new screen name.
#61. To: meguro (#37)
Obama is hardly a leftist. Much more a centrist actually, even a bit to the right.
#62. To: We The People (#59)
vote for your Massachusetts socialist.
#63. To: A K A Stone (#62)
I see that thrown around a lot. Mitt may not have been perfect. But calling him a socialist isn't honest.
#64. To: A K A Stone (#58)
Not even close Pete. They were liberty lovers yes. But libertarians no way.
#65. To: A K A Stone (#62)
Mitt may not have been perfect.
#66. To: We The People (#61)
Good God man!
#67. To: sneakypete (#55)
(Edited)
I've already told you at least 3 times right here on this thread. You are a leftist. I don't know how to dumb it down any further to help you understand it.
#68. To: meguro, sneakypete (#67)
And yet you can't cite just one instance of where I explicitly stated I support anything remotely resembling a police state. LOL! I understand alright.
#69. To: We The People (#59)
(Edited)
LOL! No, I think I'll stay, as long as it pleases me, and make you cry some more. If you're too big a pussy to handle it, use the filter.
#70. To: sneakypete (#64)
Libertarians want open borders? Sure of that,are you?
#71. To: Thunderbird, sneakypete (#45)
We support the removal of governmental impediments to free trade. Political freedom and escape from tyranny demand that individuals not be unreasonably constrained by government in the crossing of political boundaries. Economic freedom demands the unrestricted movement of human as well as financial capital across national borders. However, we support control over the entry into our country of foreign nationals who pose a credible threat to security, health or property.
#72. To: meguro (#66)
I sure am, Weeps.
#73. To: mininggold, sneakypete (#68)
(Edited)
Reading between the lines together a large dose of fantasy is sneaky's specialty, in order to reach his comfort level which is: anyone not agreeing with him is a commie.
.
.
.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]