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: 115575
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
Begin Trace Mode for Comment # 76.
#1. To: hondo68 (#0)
You turd party losers are a BIG reason Harry Reid is still in office and Bronco Bama is getting a second term so..stfu and deal with it or move overseas.
No,shithead it is you dumbass loser Party People who continue to blindly support any traitor or just flat-out dumbass for sale that the Party Fathers you worship push out in front of the pack. Just like you have done over and over since Reagan left office,and just like what has happened since Reagan left office,you will at first be shocked one more loser globalist got the nomination,and then throw all your support behind him because "YOUR loser sucks more than MY loser!" Then,IF Massachusetts Mitt had gotten elected and passed more gun laws than Obummer is proposing or could even get passed because the Party People in Congress would have backed a president with a R behind his name in a show of Party Unity,you would be making excuses for him. Do NOT blame us for YOUR blindness and stupidity!
Just like you have done over and over since Reagan left office,and just like what has happened since Reagan left office,you will at first be shocked one more loser globalist got the nomination,and then throw all your support behind him because "YOUR loser sucks more than MY loser!" Then,IF Massachusetts Mitt had gotten elected and passed more gun laws than Obummer is proposing or could even get passed because the Party People in Congress would have backed a president with a R behind his name in a show of Party Unity,you would be making excuses for him. Do NOT blame us for YOUR blindness and stupidity! Are you one of those who believes in Reagan mythology? You must REALLY want to have your taxes raised.
Red Ink Ronnie is his demigod.
And you have Nobel Peace Prize winners like Jim-Mah Cawtur and Barry Soetoro,not to mention "the first black president and defender of whymen's rights,Bubba Bill Clinton". You must be sooo proud!
You must be sooo proud! Carter deserves his for brokering a peace agreement between Israel and Egypt. Obama didn't deserve his, and I never made the claim that he did. Are you really dumber than a fence post, or are you just being disingenuous? How many times have a voiced my opposition to Obama's "droning" before?
Carter deserves nothing less than a horsewhipping. He is nothing more than a anti-American asshole. Obama didn't deserve his, and I never made the claim that he did. So what? Does that mean he didn't get it? Are you really dumber than a fence post, or are you just being disingenuous? How many times have a voiced my opposition to Obama's "droning" before? Who did you vote for the last two presidential elections?
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.
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.
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.
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."
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.
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.
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.
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.
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?
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?
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.
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.
The other day you said something to the affect that you were happy Obama was running rings around the Republicans. Everything the usurper does is to advance himself and his police state. Everything.
Not quite, but sure I hope Obama prevails. Now what's this got to do with a police state?
There are no replies to Comment # 76. End Trace Mode for Comment # 76.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/LatestAdd 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.
#6. To: Thunderbird (#1)
(Edited)
You turd party losers are a BIG reason Harry Reid is still in office and Bronco Bama is getting a second term
#8. To: sneakypete (#6)
No,shithead it is you dumbass loser Party People who continue to blindly support any traitor or just flat-out dumbass for sale that the Party Fathers you worship push out in front of the pack.
#17. To: mininggold, sneakypete (#8)
Are you one of those who believes in Reagan mythology? You must REALLY want to have your taxes raised.
#19. To: meguro (#17)
Red Ink Ronnie is his demigod.
#20. To: sneakypete (#19)
And you have Nobel Peace Prize winners like Jim-Mah Cawtur and Barry Soetoro,not to mention "the first black president and defender of whymen's rights,Bubba Bill Clinton".
#21. To: meguro (#20)
Carter deserves his for brokering a peace agreement between Israel and Egypt.
#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?
#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.
#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.
#51. To: meguro (#49)
He ducks, he dodges, he bobs, he weaves, he squirms, he slivers away... He blows off the question!
#53. To: sneakypete (#51)
#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!
#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.
#75. To: meguro (#67)
And yet you can't cite just one instance of where I explicitly stated I support anything remotely resembling a police state.
#76. To: A K A Stone (#75)
The other day you said something to the affect that you were happy Obama was running rings around the Republicans.
Replies to Comment # 76.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]