7.29.2012

Scalia: Guns May be Regulated (Except guns needed to protect Him)

Consider the following snippet from this link:

"Justice Antonin Scalia, one of the Supreme Court's most vocal and conservative justices, said on Sunday that the Second Amendment leaves room for U.S. legislatures to regulate guns, including menacing hand-held weapons.
...

Scalia, a septuagenarian, said he had given no thought to retiring. "My wife doesn't want me hanging around the house," he joked. But he did say he would try to time his retirement from the court so that a justice of similar conservative sentiments would take his place, presumably as the appointee of a Republican president. "Of course I would not like to be replaced by somebody who sets out immediately to undo" what he has spent decades trying to achieve, the justice said."

We've heard the term "activist" judge before, and are treated to an example to drive the point home.

I find it a bit biased when the article calls hand-held weapons "menacing" - but never explains WHY they are menacing - or to who/whom they are menacing.

Let me tell you what I find menacing - a judge who thinks he knows better than our founding fathers - a judge who has such a high opinion of himself - that he will manipulate his retirement to maintain the anti-gun bias of the supreme court beyond the day he finally kicks the bucket or retires.  Thanks judge!

Another notion I find "menacing" is being faced with a situation where I'm watching a movie and a crazed gunman opens fire - I have no weapon.  Now THAT'S MENACING!  Take a look at this billboard:

http://www.kboi2.com/news/local/billboard-James-Holmes-Idaho-President-Obama-kboi-164065466.html

I don't want anybody to get the impression that ALL guns will eventually be eliminated by society if activist judges, short-sighted believers and garden-variety-nitwits have their way - on the contrary.  Guns and Ammo will be plentiful - just not for YOU or ME.  

The right to bear arms will be maintained by those who have the power of arms to excercise their right.  That means those guarding Scalia's courtroom etc... - he won't take their guns - oh no.  Just yours so during the next home invasion by police because they came to the wrong pot-smoker's house - the kids can watch the pigs kill the dogs and bust a coupla' caps in granny if they feel like it.

The right to bear arms will be alive and well - with better guns and better ammo available to criminals who have the dough the pay off the right people and purchase the goods.  It's always been about the money - and the power.

My friends - the best way to fight back against this grab for power and ultimate domination of a public is for everyone with the means to arm now, don't forget the ammo - and practice, practice practice.

It has been, is, and always will be a FACT of LIFE that ultimately YOU are responsible for your own safety.  If a firearm is necessary it is your duty to arm yourself accordingly and know how to use that firearm effectively.

It may be a sad testament to the progress of mankind, that YOU or I must arm ourselves.  That we must consider the possibility that someday - we might face a moment where our firearm is the only way to bring an end to the opening scenes of a horror show - and everyone will be depending on YOU or ME because they were too stupid to arm themselves in THEIR shortsightedness.  People like gun-grabber Schumer - oh that's right - I read that he has a special permit to arm himself up there in NYC.  People like Scalia - hmmmmm - I dunno - maybe he's armed too?  People like Barbara Boxer or that other crazy beeICEETEEH Senator out there in California that have the security of firearms protection - yet have devoted decades to hanging the rest of us out to dry - leaving YOU and ME to face the crime wave their mismanagement of this nation has predictably set upon us.  Yes - it's sad but true - a firearm is a pretty good start if you don't want to live in servitude.

The ONLY reason for the disarmament of ANY population is in preparation for TYRANNY.

Forewarned is forearmed?  Not quite - not until you buy the guns and ammo and learn how to use them.

5 comments:

  1. Hmmm

    Bear in mind that every single member of Congress the White House and the Supreme Court can easily get a FEDERAL permit to carry. And as it turns out some of the staunchest opponents of the NRA and guns in general not only have weapons at home but permits to carry as well. Total hypocrisy as usual

    ReplyDelete
  2. You are right anon - the minute "security" wasn't available for them - in the form of firearms for protection - they'd be the first to start howling.

    ReplyDelete
  3. uninformedLudditeJul 30, 2012, 1:11:00 AM

    I don't understand the two comments already here. Don't those two realise that these people aren't carrying guns hypocritically. They should be allowed to carry and we shouldn't because they are special and important people. Now get back in your cardboard boxes and wait for food stamp day.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Nice one uninformedLuddite. Took me a second or two......to get it.....

    ReplyDelete
  5. Hi! I'm at work browsing your blog from my new iphone 3gs! Just wanted to say I love reading your blog and look forward to all your posts! Carry on the outstanding work!

    Also visit my page airplane landing games

    ReplyDelete

Only by exercising YOUR freedom of speech shall you keep it. Comment now - I can handle it....