Thursday, January 24, 2013

DEMOCRATS DECLARE WAR ON THE RIGHT OF LAW ABIDING CITIZENS TO OWN A GUN...

 
 
So we now have yet another example in what has become, over the course of the last several years, a very disturbing and, I think it fair to say, very dangerous trend. A trend where we continue to see Democrats demonstrate, and with increasing regularity, a willingness, even an eagerness, to flagrantly disregard, or to apply their own interpretation to, what the Constitution actually says. And, to put it quite simply, this sordid behavior by our politicians must not be allowed to go unchallenged, nor should it be tolerated. The desires of the people, those whom these corrupt politicians are supposed to be working for, seem to matter very little these days. Our 'leaders', it can be safely said, are now officially out of control as they work to get us even further under the thumb of an increasingly oppressive government. They persist in claiming jurisdiction over aspects of our lives that they simply do not possess. They have no right to do what it is they are attempting to do here in essentially making one of our God given rights null and void and for no other reason than because they don’t like it. Also, and something I’m sure they see as a fringe benefit, if they succeed, it would make the road to tyranny all that much smoother.

 
So they now see this as being their moment to strike while the iron is hot, because, as in the words of Democrat, Ed Rendell, "the good thing about Newtown is that it was so horrific." So as it still remains, at least, fresh enough in everyone's memory, we have yet another attempt being made by the Democrats to essentially make the Second Amendment more to their liking by making less of a right and more a grouping of pretty words that, if the Democrats are allowed to have their way, will come to mean absolutely nothing. Of course this most recent attempt that I reference here, comes to us in the form of Dianne Feinstein's proposed ‘gun control’ legislation. The purpose of which, or so she says, is to ban assault weapons and the intent, she says, "is to dry up the supply of these weapons over time." If it was simply about 'assault weapons, that would be bad enough, but this blatantly unconstitutional action goes well beyond that, because it would actually ban the manufacture of 158 named firearms including certain handguns and shotguns. This is so obviously unconstitutional, but, as we all remember, we have recently been down this same road before. Those in government seem to have forgotten their role in things.

 
We have allowed those in positions of power to stray more than just a little too far from what their purpose, again as laid out by our Constitution, actually is. They insist upon creating new and ever more creative avenues into areas that the government has no business delving into. And by our being so willing to allow ourselves to be bribed into allowing these people to encroach further and further into our private lives they have now begun operating as if we don’t even exist. And Democrats like Ms. Feinstein, here, is the perfect living example of just how dangerous that can be. In speaking of her brilliant little piece of legislation on Thursday, she made the claim, "We have tried to recognize legal hunting rights, we have tried to recognize legal defense rights, we have tried to recognize the right of a citizen to legally possess a weapon." This pathetic hypocrite went on to say, "No weapon is taken from any one, the purpose is to dry up the supply of these weapons over time. Therefore there is no sunset on this bill." Does she really expect any of us to genuinely trust her and her fellow Democrats? They have tried to recognize nothing more than what they see as being the need to disarm those who essentially form that last line of defense against tyranny.

 
Feinstein’s proposal aims to achieve several goals: 1) Ban the sale, transfer, importation or manufacturing of 158 named firearms, including certain rifles, handguns and shotguns that accept detachable magazines and have one military characteristic. 2) Ban semiautomatic rifles and handguns with a fixed magazine that can accept more than 10 rounds. 3) Create a one-characteristic test to determine what constitutes an assault weapon. Eliminating easy-to-remove bayonet mounts and flash suppressors from the characteristics test. Banning firearms with "thumbhole stocks" and "bullet buttons." And finally, 4 ) Ban semiautomatic ammunition magazines that hold more than 10 rounds. Feinstein’s bill would grandfather in weapons legally owned on the day of enactment and exempts over 900 specific weapons used for sporting purposes. However, the legislation requires that grandfathered weapons be registered under the National Firearms Act, which includes a background check of owner and any transferee, type and serial number of the firearm and positive identification, including photograph and fingerprints.

 
And it's we the people who are seen, by the pompous elitists like Feinstein, as being not responsible enough or capable enough to live out our lives with their interference. We're perceived as being just not being bright enough to recognize what's in our own best interest. So we need those in power to watch over us, to protect us and to keep us safe. They feel that because they see themselves as the privileged class, and as such they are entitled to operate well outside of the confines that have been set up by our Constitution regarding their particular branch of the federal government. And the really scary part of this whole scenario, is the fact that we can no longer rely on the Supreme Court to reliably come down on the side of freedom and the Constitution. We now have a sufficient number of individuals on the court who place a greater importance on furthering a political agenda than they do in defending the Constitution. And if that fact doesn't terrify you, you're either dead or a Democrat. A point that was recently, and quite correctly, made by a veteran in Chicago in his effort to defend the Second Amendment, is that tyranny is no less of a threat today that it was when those words granting the people the right to keep and bear arms, were first conceived.


No comments:

Post a Comment