Quote of the Day: Ordered Liberty Edition

“We have a gun culture that’s here to stay. Despite decades of violence, including mass killings, the National Rifle Associated has scored numerous legislative victories in the liberalization of gun laws, and the Supreme Court has supported the trend to reverse even modest, common-sense efforts at gun control. ‘It is clear,’ Supreme Court Justice Samuel A. Alito Jr. wrote for the majority in as (sic) important 2010 case, ‘that the framers and ratifiers of the Fourteenth Amendment counted the right to keep and bear arms among those fundamental rights necessary to our system of ordered liberty.’ We pay a heavy price for ‘ordered liberty.’” – Dan Rodricks

14 Responses to Quote of the Day: Ordered Liberty Edition

  1. avatarLipo Davis says:

    We would pay an even greater price without them…our liberty. Guns are necessary in order to protect and defend ourselves and to defend our liberty from a self serving government that might be tempted to run roughshod over them like the Chinese Communist Party does in China. Without them, taking away our liberties would be easy. Without guns we couldn’t fight back. Over a billion Chinese are condemned to an authoritarian state because they don’t have guns.

    • avatarTotenglocke says:

      I hope that eventually we get enough supporters of the Constitution in this country that we can add another amendment – anyone who opposes anything in the bill of rights gets deported to China or North Korea, where they can learn the value of those rights that they did not respect.

      • avatarTom says:

        North Korea would be best.

      • avatarDaveL says:

        Anyone who supported such an amendment would be supporting the repeal of the 1st Amendment, which of course is in the Bill of Rights, and therefore would have to deport themselves.

  2. avatarTom says:

    We pay a heavy price for ‘ordered liberty.’”
    …and many countries pay a much higher price for for having ” ordered security ” over essential Liberties.
    Soviet Russia, Nazi Germany, Communist China, North Korea, Boznia, Kurds, many African nations, many South American nations, Mexico.
    Looks like England is getting ready to follow from the previous Blog.

  3. avatarPaul says:

    Now let me get this correct, in 1917 Lenin led a revolution against the Czar of Russia. How did this come about if they, (the revolutionaries) didn’t have arms? Proir to WWII in China, Mao Tze Tung led an army against the govt. The Japanese invade China in the 30′s, and Mao then leads his army against that invading force. After WWII, he then continues his revolt until 1949, when he is able to get the Nationalist Chinese to leave, and take up residency on a little island off of the coast of China. Again I ask how he did this if he did not have the proper means to do so?

    Now in both cases, the govt. that is then established removes all firearms from the populace, in order to maintain their status as a ruling communist regime. The ONLY ones to have weapons is the military and the police. This equates to a subjucated populace. One that is placed under the ruling class thumb. It also places heavy taxes upon the people, with NO voice in how the govt. is run. Now before someone brings up that great party guy Adolph Hitler, I left him out on purpose. His Third Reich was toppled, and is no longer in power in Germany. But just to asuage hurt feelings, he too, disarmed the populace.

    Now how is it that some of the finest, and I might add expensive firearms are made in countries where, the people have not the right to own the very item that keep freemen free, how is that possible? Let us not forget that these very same firearms are sold WHERE(?), HERE! To the very people that have fought the wars to keep the tyrants and dictators at bay.

    Sending these people to other countries that maintain complete control over the nation would do little in changing their minds. These learned scholars are already so indocrinated that they would be unable to seperate the chaf from the wheat.

  4. avatarRalph says:

    We pay a heavy price for ‘ordered liberty.’

    Yes we do. Rodricks has forgotten that freedom ain’t free.

  5. avatarvirtualjohn says:

    You can have peace. Or you can have freedom. Don’t ever count on having both at once.
    Robert A. Heinlein

  6. avatarSanchanim says:

    I think based on statements of our founding fathers that when they spoke of tyrants, they were talking about themselves. People like Jefferson realized that power corrupts. So it is a form of checks and balances that should remain in place.

  7. avatarJOE MATAFOME says:

    I’m sure these whiney ass fools would love to live in those countries that force them to think and do everything they’re told like a mindless little puppet. I guess some people just love to have power hungry morons control their entire life.

  8. avatarJoseph says:

    Freedom is indeed not free. Countless lives and limbs have been lost so that we may be molested at the airports. Take a good look at your country my friends…what you have known is about to go away. Firearms freedoms….hahahaha, you must me Yoking!

  9. avatarChewbacca Defense says:

    No one ever defines “common sense gun laws.” it’s a made up term, but sounds real good on its own.

  10. avatarDerry M says:

    I would REALLY like to see a list of “common sense gun laws”, just so I have a better idea of what we are up against. Funny thing is that specificity about these “common sense gun laws” are as elusive as Unicorns and Leprechauns’ Pots of Gold…oh, but that would mean we would have something defined to argue against rather than innuendo and wildly emotion-charged exaggerations, and the gun control crowd would shortly lose the argument once and for all.

  11. avatarAccur81 says:

    Sounds like another person who I won’t be bumping shoulders with at the local ranges. Bummer.

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.