In the absence of the government infringing our rights, the next best step is to shame or scorn people into not exercising their rights. The technique has been around long before The Scarlet Letter of 1850. The whole political correct effort is an attempt to accomplish through shame or scorn what cannot be accomplished in the strict legal sense. That is why such terms as racist & ????Phobic are used to impede debate.
I think that the encroachment on our "constitutionally defined rights" is a gradual metamorphosis rather than a dramatic single event. There is an old myth about the best way to cook a frog is to put them in a pot of cold water and gradually build up the heat. By the time they realize they are in hot water, they are cooked. While this is not true, it is illustrative of the technique of chipping away at rights not by using a hammer and chisel but a gradual flow of water. Over time, the original structure of any rock will become smooth and so dissimilar to the original rock that it is not recognizable as the same initial rock. |
Bobby Tony,
I can't remember if I ever posted this, but I remember writing once that my original plan was for my writing to particularly focus on the first amendment. Then I realized that by government (and partially citizen) infringement on other rights, the first amendment will crumble along with the others. Would you speak against government corruption if the eye of Big Brother were constantly staring down at you? In the wake of various power grabs (beaufortcountynow.com), I broadened it significantly because I didn't feel it was being discussed enough (yes, including the "conservative media.") |
That's a bingo Bobby Tony.
"F$%^ing A" man. |
I agree and I think the 2nd was a warning for the government to heed in case they tried to trample the other rights. Once passed all 10 assumed the same significance. The argument about no one needing a large capacity magazine or semi-automatic rifle begs the underlying principle that to properly defend one's self against an over reaching government requires access to similar fire power (within reason?)
|
Yeah me too Bobby Tony on the three rounds.
But in regards to your "talk Radio" show, the 2nd Amendment has so many purposes, and the issue that once the 1st Amendment is gone, most of the other Amendments that offend the Liberal Fascists, in time, would probably fall as well. At that point, America's real patriots will need their guns, not to protect themselves, but to show the patriots in the military that they are serious in saving the Republic, and that the military, their leaders, or otherwise, should fully question their loyalties, whether to men, or to their true oath of allegiance to their Republic's Constitution. |
I rarely listen to talk radio anymore, but yesterday on the way to the grocery after my finance show on WSB there was a talk show. One of the commentators made the point that the 2nd Amendment is nothing more than a fall back in case the 1st Amendment does not work. Kind of like a last resort when all else fails. Not sure I agree, but it is an interesting take on the subject.
I particularly like the part where the three guns all used a 22 round but people only hose to ban the funny looking one. |
Loved the Crowder on "Common Sense" Gun Control.
it was almost as if Crowder was searching for men who had a "fanny pack", or wish they had one, to sign his petition to ban guns in America. With these vapid Liberals growing in numbers, it might be a better idea to not lock-up your guns, but hide them instead from these vacuous fascists. |
McCrory Campaign Calls On Roy Cooper To Disavow Endorsement | Plight, Editorials, Op-Ed & Politics | "Honest Men Are Dangerous" |
I well get the gist of what you are saying, and i believe others would as well.