NRA: Obama will ?erase? 2nd Amendment next term!
Since I now have a "right" to free contraceptives, where can I go to get my free guns since I have a "right" to bear arms?
(Washington Times) A top official with the National Rifle Association said Friday that President Obama will move to "destroy" gun rights and "erase" the Second Amendment if he is re-elected in November.
While delivering one of the liveliest and best-received speeches at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said the president's low-key approach to gun rights during his first term was "a "conspiracy to ensure re-election by lulling gun owners to sleep."
"All that first term, lip service to gun owners is just part of a massive Obama conspiracy to deceive voters and hide his true intentions to destroy the Second Amendment during his second term," he said.
"We see the president's strategy crystal clear: Get re-elected and, with no more elections to worry about, get busy dismantling and destroying our firearms' freedom, erase the Second Amendment from the Bill of Rights and excise it from the U.S. Constitution."
Mr. LaPierre said the president's two Supreme Court appointees - Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan- are "two of the most rabid anti-gun justices in history." He also accused Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg of being a foe of gun rights.
And with the possibility of two or more Supreme Court justice positions opening during the next four years, the NRA official warned that gun ownership would be in jeopardy if Mr. Obama stays in office.
"If we get one more like those three, the Second Amendment is finished," he said. "It'll be the end of our freedom forever."
Mr. LaPierre, who said "there is no greater freedom than to own a firearm," predicted that gun owners will rally en masse to defeat Mr. Obama in November.
"All of what we know is good and right about America, all of it could be lost if Barrack Obama is re-elected," he said. "It's all or nothing."
(Washington Times) A top official with the National Rifle Association said Friday that President Obama will move to "destroy" gun rights and "erase" the Second Amendment if he is re-elected in November.
While delivering one of the liveliest and best-received speeches at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, NRA Executive Vice President Wayne LaPierre said the president's low-key approach to gun rights during his first term was "a "conspiracy to ensure re-election by lulling gun owners to sleep."
"All that first term, lip service to gun owners is just part of a massive Obama conspiracy to deceive voters and hide his true intentions to destroy the Second Amendment during his second term," he said.
"We see the president's strategy crystal clear: Get re-elected and, with no more elections to worry about, get busy dismantling and destroying our firearms' freedom, erase the Second Amendment from the Bill of Rights and excise it from the U.S. Constitution."
Mr. LaPierre said the president's two Supreme Court appointees - Sonia Sotomayor and Elena Kagan- are "two of the most rabid anti-gun justices in history." He also accused Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg of being a foe of gun rights.
And with the possibility of two or more Supreme Court justice positions opening during the next four years, the NRA official warned that gun ownership would be in jeopardy if Mr. Obama stays in office.
"If we get one more like those three, the Second Amendment is finished," he said. "It'll be the end of our freedom forever."
Mr. LaPierre, who said "there is no greater freedom than to own a firearm," predicted that gun owners will rally en masse to defeat Mr. Obama in November.
"All of what we know is good and right about America, all of it could be lost if Barrack Obama is re-elected," he said. "It's all or nothing."
0
-
Don't worry, the NRA will help us work out a compromise. [xx(] 0 -
And send us money. 0 -
So, what part of what LaPierre said was wrong? 0 -
quote:Originally posted by Rocky Raab
So, what part of what LaPierre said was wrong?
Well for starters there is this: quote:"All of what we know is good and right about America, all of it could be lost if Barrack Obama is re-elected," he said. "It's all or nothing."
It's never been "All or nothing" with them. They are always willing to compromise and then cut and run. "Now more than ever we need your support(money), we have to stand up to anti-gun politicians, for gun owners(sportsmen)". "We got the best deal we could". "We saved SOME rights". "Our lobbying took some of the bite out of that bill". They have been running a smoke and mirriors production for a hundred years. All or nothing my azz.0 -
Time to start priming the pump for another firearms buying frenzy like we saw in late 2008-early 2009. Expect shelves to empty of guns and ammo and ammunition to sell for three times the previous price. .380 was the big "winner" last time around, selling for about a buck a shot...If you could find it. 0 -
"...erase the Second Amendment from the Bill of Rights and excise it from the U.S. Constitution" [?]
Excuse me Mr. LaPierre, can you please explain exactly how this will be carried out?0 -
quote:Originally posted by bigcitybill
"...erase the Second Amendment from the Bill of Rights and excise it from the U.S. Constitution" [?]
Excuse me Mr. LaPierre, can you please explain exactly how this will be carried out?
25 years ago would you have thought you would HAVE to-
wear a seatbelt
pay more med ins cause you smoke, drink, consume sugar
have car ins
have med ins
so on
Our free wiil/rights are being taken away bit by bit, across the board.
Like them or not, we need EVERY pro gun org that we have.
After Nov, then hate all you want.0 -
Amen Brother! Now how DO we save our rights, since NRA isn't?
quote:Originally posted by Horse Plains Drifter
quote:Originally posted by Rocky Raab
So, what part of what LaPierre said was wrong?
Well for starters there is this: quote:�All of what we know is good and right about America, all of it could be lost if Barrack Obama is re-elected,� he said. �It�s all or nothing.�
It's never been "All or nothing" with them. They are always willing to compromise and then cut and run. "Now more than ever we need your support(money), we have to stand up to anti-gun politicians, for gun owners(sportsmen)". "We got the best deal we could". "We saved SOME rights". "Our lobbying took some of the bite out of that bill". They have been running a smoke and mirriors production for a hundred years. All or nothing my azz.0 -
I apologize for my stupidity....
But our government is like a three legged stool...
The Judicial...
The Congress...
The Executive...
A balancing act of sorts to assure the "Will of the People" was maintained
and NOT some rogue branch of government's mandates...
Need two out of three to make anything stick...
And the third can always defeat the two.
ALL three have to be in agreement... I've always understood.
Now if Obama gets a second [** cough ** ** puke ** ** spit **] term in office...
AND he can replace enough justices on the Supreme Court...
AND the congress goes completely Socialist to the left...
Well laws have to get started in congress first.. Right?
Passing both the house and the senate... Right?
Seems to me the Judicial branch's purpose is to "correct" un-constitutional wrongs that are placed by Congress or the Executive branch.
Would NOT Congress or the president be required to submit a move to do away with the 2nd amendment first?
With the opposing side ratifying or signing it into law..?
And then the SC would ratify (accept) the move...?
In order to make a change to the constitution...?
AND... If the president moves first isn't his move required to be ratified by congress first BEFORE hitting the SC?
And in parallel... If the congress moves first, doesn't the president have to sign off before it can go to the SC?
Seems that the only way the 2nd amendment would get revoked is if the congress AND the president were aligned... first.
And then the SC would be called in to accept or deny the new "Law"...
Am I correct on this???
Or am I rather out in right field waiting for a fly ball that'll never come... [:(]0 -
So, you guys REALLY want it to truly be all or nothing?
Because the one thing you won't ever get is "all" and that leaves you with...0 -
quote:Originally posted by bigcitybill
"...erase the Second Amendment from the Bill of Rights and excise it from the U.S. Constitution" [?]
Excuse me Mr. LaPierre, can you please explain exactly how this will be carried out?
prohibition ring a bell?
if he signs us up with the U.N. the small arms treaty it will override the second amendment in one day0 -
quote:Originally posted by 1911a1fan
quote:Originally posted by bigcitybill
"...erase the Second Amendment from the Bill of Rights and excise it from the U.S. Constitution" [?]
Excuse me Mr. LaPierre, can you please explain exactly how this will be carried out?
prohibition ring a bell?
if he signs us up with the U.N. the small arms treaty it will override the second amendment in one day
Sweet!0 -
quote:Originally posted by CDMead
And send us money.
They again started to send me renewal and requestsd for Money mail.
They again will get it right back in the return envelope not filled out of course.0 -
If I remember my senior year of civics all international treaties must be ratified by the Senate to become law. So all Obummer has to do is sign that Treaty and wait for a dem controlled Senate to ratify it. They already proved that they are willing to pass legislation (health care) knowing full well they'd get fried in the polls. They don't care. They do whatever they please with no concern for SHORT TERM consequences. The people are always dumb enough to let them back in later. THAT is how liberty is destroyed. 0 -
Everybody be sure and get out and vote for Romney....or....Newt... 0 -
Well, this ought to be a lively debate!
IBTL0 -
yea right...come n git em[;)][;)] 0 -
This isn't anything like prohibition at all. There is no amendment guaranteeing a person's right to drink.
The Arms Trade Treaty has been bandied about since 2003 and explicitly states that it is "the exclusive right of the (UN member) States to regulate internal transfers of arms and national ownership, including through constitutional protections on private ownership."
LaPierre and Chicken Little have a lot in common and sending money to the NRA is akin to paying protection money to the mob.
Sorry Waynie but you're not scaring me.0 -
What you stick a thumb in the NRA's eye mullets don't understand (apparently, according to the thoughts here)is that the Treaty has already been accepted by our lovely State Department (Hillary Clinton), judged to be acceptable by our idiot Judiciary (allowing Sharia Law to be considered in a U.S. court case), and has been talked about widely in our vaunted halls of Congress (House Joint Resolution concurring with the sentiment of U.N. Treaty to ban Small Arms Proliferation), and will be approved if Oblammy gets another bite at the apple.
His "Lame Duck" session will be nothing more than an all-out assault on what few Freedoms we have left.
Join the NRA, Don't join the NRA; who gives a s%$7 in Australia or Britain, or Hawaii?!0 -
OK, it's been accepted by the hag. So what? 0 -
Another step on the path... 0 -
quote:Originally posted by 1911a1fan
if he signs us up with the U.N. the small arms treaty it will override the second amendment in one day
The United States Constitution is the supreme law of the United States, and cannot be "overrode" by any other document.
The UN Small Arms Treaty, even if ratified, has no more power in this country than what we allow.0 -
quote:Originally posted by gunnut505
What you stick a thumb in the NRA's eye mullets don't understand (apparently, according to the thoughts here)is that the Treaty has already been accepted by our lovely State Department (Hillary Clinton), judged to be acceptable by our idiot Judiciary (allowing Sharia Law to be considered in a U.S. court case), and has been talked about widely in our vaunted halls of Congress (House Joint Resolution concurring with the sentiment of U.N. Treaty to ban Small Arms Proliferation), and will be approved if Oblammy gets another bite at the apple.
His "Lame Duck" session will be nothing more than an all-out assault on what few Freedoms we have left.
Join the NRA, Don't join the NRA; who gives a s%$7 in Australia or Britain, or Hawaii?!
Good, good, bring it on! Enough of these delaying tactics that have been going on for the last century, in the guise of "Fighting for our gun rights". We need all this crap out in the open so American patriots can see who the real terrorists are.0 -
time is near: THERE WILL BE BLOOD SHED ACROSS OUR LAND 0 -
Time to buy stock in Remington & ATK [;)] 0 -
On the Mexican forums l am known as 'n0bamacasablanca' [:0] 0 -
quote:Originally posted by bigcitybill
This isn't anything like prohibition at all. There is no amendment guaranteeing a person's right to drink.
The Arms Trade Treaty has been bandied about since 2003 and explicitly states that it is "the exclusive right of the (UN member) States to regulate internal transfers of arms and national ownership, including through constitutional protections on private ownership."
LaPierre and Chicken Little have a lot in common and sending money to the NRA is akin to paying protection money to the mob.
Sorry Waynie but you're not scaring me.
the 18th amendment prohibited alcohol, then was repealed by ratification of the 21st
so essentially it is similar because one can over ride another
and its all about interpretation if treaties can supersede the constitution, and become law of the land, but dont forget who is running the country, and how they already pizz all over the constitution already0 -
quote:Originally posted by Rocky Raab
So, you guys REALLY want it to truly be all or nothing?
Because the one thing you won't ever get is "all" and that leaves you with...
An absolute and utterly predictable continuation of inevitable totalitarianism.
Collectivism leads directly there and your posts indicate that you are a willing assistant.0 -
Ratification of the 18th amendment did not negate nor repeal any previous amendment. 0
Please sign in to leave a comment.
Comments
44 comments