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: 113513
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 # 89.
#5. To: hondo68 (#0)
It WILL get passed,the gun grabbers and Dim politicians will be as giddy as schoolgirls over it,the press will be orgasmic,and the majority of us will ignore it until the come to OUR houses to arrest us after we have been turned in by a greedy relative who wanted the rat-fink reward money. Then we will be arrested and charge with the felony offense of having a newly banned rifle or magazine,and THEN it will become real to us. 95 percent of the gun owners will continue to not give a damn as long as it is somebody else being arrested.
Cry me a river you turd party loser. It wasn't like you weren't WARNED what would happen in a second Obama term. You made your bed...now go lie in it and stfu.
YOU made this bed, you fucking retard. You and every other so called conservative who trotted out and supported a Massachusetts socialist and actually thought that conservatives would vote for him! Wow, that was really a brainfart, wasn't it Einstein? You made this bed retard, now you can't stop pissing in it.
Waah...stop cying like a little girl. Just imagine its a 30 round magazine Obama is shoving up your "conservative" anus Oh wait..it is!
One thing that never ceases to amaze me, is the sheer number of you fucking idiots on the internet who want to engage others on a political discussion forum, who first of all, call yourselves conservatives when its obvious to even the dumbest SOB on here that you are NOT conservatives. But secondly that you idiots would even attempt to engage in discussion or debate when you're so F'ing bad at it that it's laughable.
Lol..snot nosed whiners like you who vote turd party then complain about getting ass-raped by liberal/socialists are the "dumb" ones. Now kindly FUCK OFF and enjoy the Mac10 strap-on Diane Feinstein has prepared for you.
Judging from your repeated references to male anal rape, one might think you are LP's Grand Island.
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.
Peter eater thinks this is a quote from the founding fathers.
Since you are incapable of thinking,how would you know what or how anybody else thinks? Hell,you still believe in miracles.
You just said libertarians don't believe in open borders. I just showed you the contrary. Quit whining about it and admit that you are wrong.
No,I wrote that not all Libertarians believe in open borders. YOU need to quit whining and admit that YOU are wrong.
#90. To: sneakypete (#89)
You used no such qualifier. Here is my quote followed by yours. "They weren't for open borders like libertarians." "Libertarians want open borders? Sure of that,are you? "
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latestsome form of so called gun control seems likely to get passed. (1 image)
#16. To: sneakypete (#5)
95 percent of the gun owners will continue to not give a damn as long as it is somebody else being arrested.
#26. To: Thunderbird (#16)
You made your bed...now go lie in it
#28. To: We The People (#26)
#30. To: Thunderbird (#28)
#31. To: We The People (#30)
#32. To: Thunderbird (#31)
#45. To: Abcdefg (#32)
Judging from your repeated references to male anal rape, one might think you are LP's Grand Island.
#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.
#83. To: A K A Stone (#71)
Peter eater thinks this is a quote from the founding fathers.
#84. To: sneakypete (#83)
Since you are incapable of thinking,how would you know what or how anybody else thinks?
#89. To: A K A Stone (#84)
You just said libertarians don't believe in open borders.
Replies to Comment # 89. No,I wrote that not all Libertarians believe in open borders. YOU need to quit whining and admit that YOU are wrong.
End Trace Mode for Comment # 89.
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]