search
top

Understatement of the Year

From an article in the Pittsburgh Post Gazette talking about Obama and Rendell driving gun sales up:

“The president believes the Second Amendment creates an individual right, and he respects the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms,” an official said in an e-mailed statement. “His administration is committed to protecting the rights of hunters and other law-abiding Americans to purchase, own, transport and use guns while stopping firearms traffickers and keeping guns out of the hands of criminals, terrorists and others prohibited from owning them.”

But it’s safe to say that many gun owners don’t trust the president.

You don’t say!  I can’t possibly imagine why that would be.

4 Responses to “Understatement of the Year”

  1. Arnie says:

    AAAAARRRRGH!!!!! We HAVE to start getting this point across: The 2nd Amendment was not written to protect my right to hunt, sport shoot, or even to protect my family from other civilians (although as a side-benefit it would). These are common-law rights protected by the Ninth Amendment. The Second Amendment defines its purpose in its preamble: to secure the freedom of our States and, by extension, our communities and ourselves, from tyranny and usurpation by the central government! And the arms protected by that right are military “assault” rifles equivalent in EVERY way to the weapons we would face from any federal force sent to extinguish that freedom. We MUST NOT let Mr. Obama or anyone else redefine that purpose or those types of arms. We MUST NOT! Otherwise, the 2nd Amendment becomes worthless, ineffective in securing our right to defend our Constitution, our freedom, and our “Creator-endowed” right to “alter or abolish” a trannical central government (Thomas Jefferson, The Declaration of Independence). We must not compromise on this! We must not waver or give a single inch. “Shall not be infringed” is another statement whose meaning is clear, absolute, and must not be mitigated or compromised: NO central government regulations on the individual right to keep and bear military arms will be tolerated whatsoever! NONE! I just cringe every time these would-be tyrants try to tell me they believe in my so-called “2nd Amendment right to hunt or sportshoot or defend my family from a burglar,” and then in the same breath tell me they “only” intend to take away my REAL Second Amendment right to a military assault rifle to protect our liberty FROM THEM! I get so angry at their two-faced, treasonous double-speak that I call up my dealer and order another box of .50 caliber! Thomas Jefferson put it bluntly when he described the right to bear arms as my right and duty to kill government tyrants in order to nourish the tree of liberty with their blood! If we let them get away with changing that defiition, then we deserve to be slaves! Whew! Thanks for letting me unload. I needed that.

  2. Carl in Chicago says:

    I contacted the author with this comment …

    Thanks for covering this issue. I am interested in gun rights, gun control, politics, and constitutional law.

    I wanted to comment on something regarding your article. President Obama has come out and said he supports the second amendment, and supports the Supreme Court decision called “DC v Heller.” But given this craze to buy guns, it’s obvious that people don’t believe him. I think part of that is from statements like this:

    “The president believes the Second Amendment creates an individual right, and he respects the constitutional rights of Americans to bear arms,” an official said in an e-mailed statement.

    That statement doesn’t so much imply that Obama supports gun rights … it implies that he fundamentally misunderstands the amendment and the right it protects. The amendment does not create anything. The right is a natural one, a “human right.” The second amendment simply commands that the Congress shall not infringe the pre-existing right.

    And what is even more telling is that even after the Heller decision, the Democrats that have always supported gun control are just carrying on as usual … to this day they support gun bans, registration, magazine restrictions, repeal of carry laws, banning private sales, serializing ammunition, UN gun ban treaties, etc., etc. And, they say all those things are permissible constitutionally. Frankly, people just don’t believe them. I think for Obama and other democrats to succeed in the future, they will need to do more than simply paying lip-service to the second amendment. They will have to embrace it, and back that up with actions to repeal gun control laws, and to pass laws further protecting the right.

  3. Arnie says:

    Right on, Carl! Excellent points, esp. regarding the creation of rights versus securing of rights. I missed that atrocious error on Mr. Obama’s part. Nice catch!

  4. Matt Groom says:

    Obama supports the Second Amendment and Constitution in general the same way most Americans support the bailouts, TARP, The Stimulus, and the steady decay of the American economic system. There appears to be little we can do, but that doesn’t mean we like it!

top