Huffington Post: Get Rid of the Second Amendment

“All of us take it for granted that the Second Amendment says something important about gun ‘rights’ and all of us know that the Second Amendment isn’t about to be changed,” George Kenny writes at huffingtonpost.com. “Or is it? Even though in the face of deranged men with assault rifles we have allowed constitutional law arguments to eclipse our common sense, our learned helplessness is by no means absolute. Americans are capable of saying ‘No, gun control is a political issue that must be fixed.’  If that means getting rid of the Second Amendment, so be it . . .

For those who feel this may be too much to ask an interim step could be to Amend Article Five, thus making further Amendments to the Constitution an easier, more straightforward and more democratic process. But unless and until we get rid of the Second Amendment no gun control law can escape remorseless, caustic litigation. Mass murder will remain a perpetual threat. And we will remain mired in helplessness.

Well he got that exactly backwards. And now, time to wave the bloody shirt.

Indeed, we defer far too many questions to constitutional law when we should be asking, at every opportunity, what kind of society do we want to live in? Where is the moral justice in what we do? How can we live fulfilling political lives without being in thrall to the dead hand of the past?

If the children of Sandy Hook could ask “Why?” they would not be wondering about the so-called “Bill of Rights.”

Wow. You gotta admit it: what with a new assault weapons ban in the works and gun control advocates willing to throw our basic freedoms into the pyre, these are some scary ass times for gun owners and gun rights advocates.

Then again, maybe it’s a good thing. Kinda. In disguise . . .

David Cordrea once asked me “How do we motivate gun owners to fight for their rights?” This. As the Brits are wont to say, there’s all to play for. To which the Talking Heads might add, same as it ever was.

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

89 Responses to Huffington Post: Get Rid of the Second Amendment

  1. avatarJesus says:

    One does not touch the Bill of Rights.

    • avatarJoke & Dagger says:

      Do these Progressives have some sort of secret school where they learn how to pose for pictures with these smug, self important looks. He looks so much more intellectual than the rest of us.

    • avatarAPBTFan says:

      A group of men far wiser than any of us now created a document that no one at any point has any business changing. Anyone that thinks we are now somehow wiser need only look at the state of our current society and the “quality” of our politicians. The last grasp and beacon of rationality that we can fall back on is our Constitution.

      • avatarCulpeper Kid says:

        Why bother to repeal the Second Amendment, the Constitution is an anachronism, it’s only meaning is what the current Supreme Court says it means, in other words, it is meaningless.

    • avatarS.CROCK says:

      the second they touch the 2nd amendment, the 1st and all the rest are open for interpretation.

  2. avatar6 gunner says:

    I have a compromise plan. Those of us that own and want to continue to own guns remain where we are; those that don’t can inhabit the Atlantic and Pacific oceans at their earliest convenience.

    • avatarWade says:

      I’m all for it.

      Another option, all sensible gun owners can migrate to Texas! We can create a úber gun friendly superstate! The other states can ban guns if they want, then the Texans (and co.) can make the rules.

    • avatarRokurota says:

      Gasp! Murderous thoughts! Quick! Reprint this in the Times!

  3. avatarJoe Grine says:

    I’d rather get rid of the liberals than get rid of the Second Amendment.

  4. avatarokto says:

    The Second protects the First.

    /thread

    • avatarCA_Chris says:

      And he wants to gut the legal protections for the entire Constitution. This guy is a fascist nut.

      • avatarBen Keim says:

        As well as a big believer in American exceptionalism, since he apparently thinks that, despite every other society in human history collapsing whenever someone takes total power to fulfill their utopian vision, this is the country that’ll get it right this time. Or he really is just a no-bones-about-it fascist with zero delusions about what he’s doing. Honestly not sure which would be worse.

    • avatarRedleg says:

      And the Third, Fourth, Fifth, etc.

  5. avatarBLAMMO says:

    Wouldn’t matter. The 2nd Amendment doesn’t confer the right. The right is universal and self-evident.

    The 2nd Amendment is a mandate to the Federal Government to protect the right. Mandated by WE THE PEOPLE. Just like the paper says.

    • avatarhmmmmmmmm says:

      LOL – such tough talk but I bet you piss your pants and hand in your guns when the time comes Mr. internet tough guy!

      • avatarCasey T says:

        Seriously, why are you coming on here, trying to bait people? Are you that much of a pathetic excuse of a human being. If you want to talk tough at people pissing their pants, come talk to me when you have you big boy ones on. A lot of us have served honorably in the military to protect the Constitution, which even applies to small minded people like yourself. I’m guessing you are the type of person who couldn’t cut it in the military because you just don’t have it in you. Most people here on this big are patriots, you are just a little coward.

        • avatarAharon says:

          Yes Casey, that troll is coming here to bait people. The troll gets off on the reactions.

      • avatarSo much hatred!! says:

        Hmmmmm, I am interested in what your angle is. You smugly insult others on this forum for believing strongly in something. You may disagree with the people on this forum, and that is your right, but they did not kill the children at Sand Hook and there is no reason to vilify them. Argue with them all you want but there is no reason to personally attack somebody you have never met. It does not make you a bigger person. In fact, it makes you smaller. I hope it makes you feel better about yourself but you have not contributed anything constructive to the discourse, and will not change anybody’s mind (if that is your goal), by going about things the way that you do.

        While some TTAG commenters may be right wing extremists secretly praying for a revolution, most of us simply believe in the right to protect ourselves in the ten or more minutes it takes for the police to arrive. Many of us enjoy competing with “evil black rifles,” and most of us enjoy punching lots of holes in cardboard and paper. I dare say that none of us have murdered anybody, let alone 1st graders. Most of us, if you met us on the street, in a bar, or in a classroom, would not stand out from the rest of America.

        So maybe you are right. Perhaps most of us wouldn’t sacrifice our lives if the FBI came to confiscate our firearms, that makes us rational. It makes more sense to challenge the illegality of government action in court than to find myself six feet under. That said, I wonder wether you have anything you would be willing to die for? You are guilty of the same “internet tough guy” syndrome that you condescended to Blammo about. I wonder if you have ever had to stare down another human being with a weapon intent on doing harm to you? I wonder if you would not “piss your pants.” I have had another human being try to kill me, with small arms and IEDs, during my two tours in Iraq. Believe me, any rational human being is scared. From that, I also know that the only way to end that threat is to meet that force with equal or greater force.

        Finally, in suggesting that the government will be showing up at our doors to take our weapons, you seem to overlook other parts of the constitution that would prevent that. Article 1, Section 9, prevents ex post facto laws, and therefore any new laws cannot make the gun owners on the forum criminals for the weapons we currently own. Second, the 4th amendment would prevent the unreasonable search of our homes, and seizure of our property. Of course, if you agree with George Kenny and believe that the constitution should be amended in order to make amending the constitution easier, for the purpose of eliminating the 2nd amendment, you might not be happy with the results. The 2nd amendment might go, but the other bill of rights you no doubt covet would be in jeopardy as well.

        I hope you never have to face an armed criminal, which there will be no matter what gun laws are passed. If you do, I sure hope you don’t wish you had some way of protecting yourself apart from your lethal internet wit. That is not a risk I wish to take with my life and the life of my family.

      • hmmmmm. Why don’t you show just how “tough” you really are by volunteering to be the point man for Obama’s intended collection process.

      • avatarspeedracer5050 says:

        Tell you what I will do hmmmmmmjob
        I will meet you face to face anywhere you want, unarmed and empty handed so we can sit down like real men and discuss this.
        I honorably served in the US Army for 15 yrs. 2 back to back tours in Iraq as an 11Bravo 30 LRS Team leader. All of my men made it home by God’s Grace!!
        We fought and trained, gave up a lot of time and holidays, missed a lot of our kids growing up years just to be ready at a moments notice to stand up and fight for our country so people like you would have the right and ability to freely speak your mind.
        After reading the biased, discriminatory, accusatory bullshit you spew out of your mouth I really wonder if you even care about your country or fellow humans. As long as you can sit here spewing your lie’s and false accusations about good honest veterans and working people you are happy.
        Since you are so determined to do away with our second amendment rights then I take it you are willing to give up your first amendment rights to free speech, your right to worship and your other rights we fought for too??!!
        Are you man enough to give up your rights stated above so the government can take out second amendment rights too?? Or are you too chickenshit??!!

    • avatarJeff O. says:

      If I had a nickle for the times I’ve explained that the Bill of Rights basically says “Humans have these natural rights and this document says the United States is going to honor these natural rights” I’d be a very rich man.

      I’d have mad at least $2.50 today alone, some people don’t get it the first…or second…or seventh time.

      • avatarMark N. says:

        Too true. And even if we repealed the 2A, what then? One of the arguments against the first ten amendments is that these were natural rights of all men and, not having been granted by the government, could not be taken away either–so that it was unnecessary to enunciate them. Fortunately, those advocates were outvoted.
        The People can relinquish their 2A rights, but the government cannot take them away. Good luck with getting a 3/5ths majority of states to voluntarily relinquish 2A rights, to be immediately followed by a lawsuit contending that no government can take away this individual right, but that it must be individually relinquished.

    • avatarCA_Chris says:

      This guy doesn’t care about being right, just winning an argument.

      • avatarHanover Fiste says:

        I think he is only interested in starting the argument. He never wins anything.

        Don’t feed the trolls.

  6. avatarST says:

    We must remember history if we seek to avoid repeating it.

    Im sorry to say it, but this country is leaning more left then a sinking ship. We need to get more guns in more peoples’ hands, because the majority liberals won’t support a measure which takes guns and money out of their own hands. In the UK and Austrailia their nations’ gun buybacks and seizures were initiated via popular demand by the majority of their voting population.

    A Constitutional Convention is out of the question-today. Texas and Utah are red states-today. We can debate many things between now and 2020, but barring some form of pandemic the math’s pretty clear-by then us conservatives and libertarians will become the new minorities. The population groups which are having kids and growing fastest are the Democrat supporting categories of American society. In 8 years a constitutional convention amending the RKBA out of the Bill of Rights is a viable possibility. Us rural gun owning conservatives will be out-voted by blue state urban communes with enough people to hijack the political process and drag the rest of the rural folk into liberal serfdom . Think Illinois and Chicago’s relationship happening in Idaho, Nevada, and Texas.

    • avatarDarren says:

      More than half of state governments are controlled by the GOP. It takes 2/3 to pass an amendment. The GOP is weak at the federal level right now but comparatively strong at the state level. The Obama Administration can act how it wants but for now anyway the HuffPo d-bag has a blog and Scalia has a 5-4 majority on the SCOTUS who says the Second Amendment is an individual right.

      I’ll go with Scalia. Ten years from now I hope he’ll be around. Twenty years I’m not taking bets on. The GOP is in the wilderness for a while, but walking is good for you. I just hope they show more backbone when AWB 2.0 rolls around than they have on the fiscal cliff issue. They’re doing good to rise to the level of notochord on that issue.

      • avatarKeith says:

        The GOP establishment is out of touch, and inept. In other words it’s a toss up as where they suck worse, strategically, or tactically. Case in point: Boehner.

      • avatarDonS says:

        More than half of state governments are controlled by the GOP. It takes 2/3 to pass an amendment.

        A proposed amendment must be ratified by 3/4 (currently, 38 of 50) of the state legislatures. That’s after it has passed both federal houses of Congress with a 2/3 majority in each.

        2/3 of the states can call a Constitutional convention (bypassing federal Congress), but amendments still must be ratified by 3/4 of the states.

  7. avatarPascal says:

    “(Those) who are trying to read the Second Amendment out of the Constitution by claiming it’s not an individual right (are) courting disaster by encouraging others to use the same means to eliminate portions of the Constitution they don’t like. ” – Alan Dershowitz, Harvard Law School

    What other parts of the Constitution would like to get rid of next?

    • avatarCarlosT says:

      The Fourth, Fifth, Sixth, Eighth, and Fourteenth Amendments have already taken big hits in the War on Terror. The Constitution is being shredded and every awful thing that happens is another fresh opportunity to chuck more of it.

    • avatarDarren says:

      This.

      I have seen people on comment boards elsewhere point out that people who own “assault weapons” are the clear minority and it won’t affect the majority at all.

      I want to say, “I’ll remember you said that was OK when the gay marriage issue comes up again.”

      • avatarMark N. says:

        John Lott was on Piers Morgan to talk about “More Guns=Less Crime.” Also a “guest” was Dershowitz, who engaged in an unending and entirely rude ad hominem attack on Lott, essentially calling him a liar and a charlatan. Lott was given no opportunity to speak. Dershowitz is a gun grabber who believes that “common sense” dictates that assault weapons and large capacity clips should be banned (His terms, not mine.), and that it is insane to suggest that more guns will reduce crme. “It’s common sense!” A less than impressive performance.

  8. avatarKeith says:

    This is like MikeyB with better editing. Whoa. Sometimes I feel sorry for the more intellectual set. They are so enamored with the language. Not so much with the message.

    This is seditious BS is an elegant wrapper.

    • avatarCA_Chris says:

      Does this guy understand that he is suggesting making the US just like the despotic pariah states of the world. Does he know what they do to people like him in North Korea, Iran, etc?

  9. avatarrossi says:

    Article Five of the United States Constitution describes the process whereby the Constitution may be altered. Altering the Constitution consists of proposing an amendment or amendments and subsequent ratification.
    Amendments may be proposed by either:
    two-thirds of both houses of the United States Congress; or
    by a national convention assembled at the request of the legislatures of at least two-thirds of the states.
    To become part of the Constitution, amendments must then be ratified either by approval of:
    the legislatures of three-fourths of the states; or
    state ratifying conventions held in three-fourths of the states.
    Congress has discretion as to which method of ratification should be used.
    Any amendment so ratified becomes a valid part of the Constitution, provided that no state “shall be deprived of its equal Suffrage in the senate,” without its consent.

    • avatarCasey T says:

      Yeah, they will amend Article iv never in my life time. That idiot from Huffington doesn’t understand that the point us to keep from a majority going nuts like he wants. Seriously, it’s time people like him start being tried for treason. I’m never visiting that stupid website.

    • avatarSkyler says:

      You forgot the other method of amending the Constitution: by the Supreme Court making things up.

  10. avatarChris says:

    “our learned helplessness is by no means absolute” It will be if you deny us our rights to defend ourselves.

  11. avatarJR says:

    That is some of the most un-American crap I have ever read.

    “the so-called ‘Bill of Rights’”

    What an asshole. And what a smug picture. Robert you know how to fire people up!

  12. avatartjlarson2k says:

    Can we please create a special “gun free” town and move all the anti-gun people that really believe that a society without the 2nd Amendment and guns is the answer to all of our violence problems there? And let’s pretend it already doesn’t exist in the UK.

    They get what they want, and we get what we want. Call it a social experiment in coming to grips with reality.

    Oh, and they can’t have armed guards, or bodyguards, or anyone with a gun even remotely nearby. This includes police and a military. After all, guns are evil and we can’t have magic evil inanimate objects around that our children or adults might accidentally touch and go on a spree “out of nowhere”!

    One other thing, criminals that visit your town are free to come and go, because, well, they do anyway and you will never know they’re up to no good until it’s too late. But don’t worry! You can post all the well-wishing signs you want and “no weapons” signs all over any building you want. You know, because that keeps the bad man away. Post away to your heart’s content.

    If you run into trouble, well, you’ll have to fend for yourselves. After all, no one is capable of being evil. Surely not. It’s the gun’s fault. And no one with a gun is allowed to help you. Sorry. You made the rules, you live by them.

    Please report back what life is like in that utopia after a month (if any of you are alive). I’m very curious to know what comes of it.

    Sincerely,
    A rational person

    • avatarWSBS says:

      We already have these special “gun-free” towns. They’re called New York City and Chicago, and they are two of the most violent crime-ridden cesspools in this country. I’d be down with taking those cities mayors’ armed security forces away, however. Make those two elitist scumbags live in a one-bedroom apartment in Brooklyn and the South Side, respectively, without anything to protect them but their bleeding hearts and “common sense,” and see how quickly they come around on the whole Second Amendment thing.

    • avatarCasey T says:

      I love this, but you have to put in the correct mix of criminals and drug addicts too.

  13. avatarRandy Drescher says:

    Oh yeah, kill the 2nd but don’t touch the criminal safe zones. We ask too much of all Americans, some have a very limited mental capacity. I watched some of the school area interviews & the question was asked “do you support gun bans” & at least 2 said, yes, gun is bad, very very bad. Folks, when you aint got you aint got it, Randy

  14. avatarQueFah says:

    OK scumbag, we’ll give up the 2nd Amendment right after you surrender the 1st Amendment.

    I had the honor of seeing the Bill of Rights this past weekend at the National Archives in DC. All I can see after that moving experience and hearing this guy is … FUCK YOU.

  15. I wonder if they would sell out he First Amendment just as fast. How about he rest of the Amendments in the bill of Rights?

    There is a reason why it is so hard to make “changes” to the constitution. Because “change” is usually for the worst!

  16. avatarCarrymagnum says:

    Lets just tell the media we want their 1A rights for our 2A rights. I’d assume they hold free speech as dearly as we do our guns. And good one on the Heads reference Farago.

  17. avatarBruce says:

    Why stop with the second, just delete the whole thing. Forget we every had one.

  18. avatarRalph says:

    Since people say bad things, let’s kill the First Amendment. No? Okay, then, let’s just bump off HuffBlo.

  19. avatarCurzen says:

    There is an amendment process. Use it. If your opinion fails to garner sufficient support things remain as they are.

    • avatarWSBS says:

      Even this bloviating jacka$$ knows that ain’t gonna happen. Hence publishing his post (which, BTW, reads like some 12 year-old girl’s diary entry: “Mommy and Daddy won’t repeal the Second Amendment, they’re such total jerks! I hate them! I want a pony!”).

    • avatarPascal says:

      I saw your post and it reminded me of this qoute

      “If the American people really tire of democracy and want to make a trial of Fascism, I shall be the last person to object. But if that is their mood, then they had better proceed toward their aim by changing the Constitution and not by forgetting it.” – H.L. Mencken

  20. avatarAharon says:

    Even pro-liberal comments at the HP call out that site as a rag.

  21. “Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor Safety.”…
    Ben Franklin

  22. avatarCA_Chris says:

    Fascist.

  23. avatarCA_Chris says:

    It’s a witch hunt, and this guy is recommending the Spanish Inquisition.

  24. avatarLance says:

    Find it funny like most idiot liberals he thinks by banning gun no more school killing will occur yet in the PRC (China) last week where no guns are allowed our of the PLA a man stabbed 22 kids to death with a knife. Shows how dumb liberals are.

  25. avatarNick says:

    Like I said in an earlier post, libs are control freaks. The DO feel morally superior and DO feel entitled to tell you how to live and think. The Soviet Union was run by “progressives” and look what a paradise it was! We didn’t get where we are now overnight. This country is being run by the a-hole hippies and student radicals who came of age in the 60′s and 70′s. They’re marxist utopians who have spent the last 50 years teaching our kids to hate and distrust the traditional values that made the US so successful and so unusual. Their acolytes now think collectivism is the goal, not individualism. They believe individualism is selfish and wrong. I’m not optimistic about where we’re headed. Societies that place an emphasis on the needs of the collective rather than ensuring individual liberty become tyrannical.

  26. avatarSanchanim says:

    I just wont comment, anything I might say at this point would be a flame anyway.

  27. avatarLow Budget Dave says:

    Because gun owners never fight for their rights.

  28. avatarDan says:

    George,

    If you revoke my right to defend myself, then you assume 100% liability for ensuring my absolute safety.

    if you fail, the legal and financial consequences will be severe.

  29. Americans Won’t Give Up Their Guns, Law Or Not
    Published on Monday, 17 December 2012 06:54
    Written by J.D. Longstreet
    Reads: 3089

    Ordinarily, I’d agree that THIS is no time to be arguing gun control. With the pain still intense in Connecticut, there should have been a truce declared, to allow for grieving. But the plain truth is, those who declare that a good crisis must not be wasted, jumped the gun (as they usually do) and began a nationwide PR war through the national Mainstream Media to bring as much pressure to bear as they possible could on our government for laws to ban certain guns, eventually ALL guns in the hands of US civilians.

    To those on the political and those pushing gun control — in the childish naivete — You need to understand two things: One — Americans are NOT going to give up their guns! That’s one. Number two is this: If you really want to begin a civil war in this country, continue your efforts to take those guns and you will most certainly have one, and I do not think you have any idea, any inkling, of just how ferocious and brutal such a war can be.

    If you thought for one moment that American gun owners would assume the fetal position and begin sucking their thumbs — please allow me to disabuse you of that monstrously mistaken assumption!

    For the past four years gun owners across America have been planning for just such a move by the gun control crowd. They have been purchasing weapons in record numbers and they have created secret caches of both weapons and ammunition that you simply will not believe. I’d go so far as to say some are even “leaning forward,” eager for the chance to protect the US Constitution.

    Look. Trying to confiscate Americans guns will erupt in pitched firefights, gun battles, between American civilians and government law officers.

    The government will, as Charlton Heston famously stated, have to “pry the weapons from their cold dead hands.” Heck, the government might actually get away with a couple of such encounters before the backlash begins.

    But it will begin — and when it does, there will be hell to pay. In the end, it will be the end of the United States as we know it.

    Understand. There are some states that will move to secede rather than obey federal laws that force their citizens to disarm. Other states will arrest and incarcerate federal officers attempting to disarm that states citizens within the physical boundaries of that state.

    I just don’t think the gun control folks are thinking with their brains. They exude emotion — PURE emotion, and a dangerous lack of common sense. What they are pushing for will bring nothing less than wreck and ruin to this country.

    Do you realize that the number of armed American hunters, alone, surpasses the numbers of all the standing armies of the world — combined? Deer hunters in just one state, alone, number more than the armies of Iran, France, and Germany combined! SOURCE

    Do you realize that a HUGE proportion of them are veterans of the finest military on the planet?

    And don’t think you can just track gun hoarders down and arrest them. It took the US military TEN YEARS to find Osama Bin Laden — and he was one man! Try rounding up millions. Can you see the nightmare?

    A law that would try to confiscate guns in America would, like Prohibition, suddenly turn America into a nation of criminals. The Eighteenth Amendment to the Constitution, and the Volstead Act caused multiple deaths. “Effective enforcement of the alcohol ban during the Prohibition Era proved to be very difficult and led to widespread flouting of the law. The lack of a solid popular consensus for the ban resulted in the growth of vast criminal organizations, including the modern American Mafia, and various other criminal cliques. Widespread disregard of the law also generated rampant corruption among politicians and within police forces.” SOURCE:

    Banning so-called assault weapons (otherwise known as “scary looking” weapons) does next to nothing to reduce gun crime. “The Justice Department’s interviews also showed so-called “assault weapons” are not a major cause of gun violence. Only about 8 percent of the inmates used one of the models covered in the now-expired assault weapons ban… .”

    Read more…

    Consider this: “Meanwhile, a study released by the Justice Department suggesting background checks at gun shows would do little to keep firearms out of the hands of criminals.

    The study noted the number of criminals who obtained guns from retail outlets was dwarfed by the number of those who picked up their arms through means other than legal purchases. The report was the result of interviews with more than 18,000 state and federal inmates conducted nationwide. It found that nearly 80 percent of those interviewed got their guns from friends or family members, or on the street through illegal purchases.”

    Read more

    As I write this in my office, behind me on my desk are five containers of ammunition from 30 caliber to 12 gauge double-ought buckshot. Leaning against the wall is one of my guns — well within arm’s length. Visitors to my office think nothing of it. It is a way of life. I began shooting at the age of six. I am always armed — either with an “edged weapon” or a firearm.

    Let’s be clear. ASKING gun owners to give up their guns is insulting. DEMANDING that we give them up is going to get someone hurt.

    I realize the words above are strong. That is intentional. I am trying to convey to gun control advocates and the Mainstream Media the seriousness of what they are doing and the indelicate manner in which the are approaching the issue. DEMANDING that an American citizen give up a constitutional right is bad enough, but demanding that he give up a constitutional right upon which his freedom and his very life may depend is the ultimate insult and is nothing less than an assault on the constitution itself. This we cannot, we will not, abide.

    A note to our national legislators. Those of you supporting gun control legislation should understand it will be a career-ending move on your part. We will brook no such unpleasant nonsense from you.

    Gun owners did not seek this fight. We most certainly did not initiate it. Too, we are sick, ad nauseum, of your continuous attacks on our way of life, on our constitutional as well as God given rights as American citizens, and we are sick, beyond words, of your elitist attitude.

    As red-blooded Americans have done throughout our history, we will avoid a fight for as long as it is practicable to do so. But when the fight is brought to us we WILL engage with our considerable resources with one goal in mind and that is the utter defeat of our adversary, and a guarantee that the conflict will never be resuscitated, EVER, again.

    “Molṑn labéis” ( Molon Labe) is a classical expression of defiance reportedly spoken by King Leonidas I in response to the Persian army’s demand that the Spartans surrender their weapons at the Battle of Thermopylae.

    I am seeing more and more e-mails and commentaries on blogs, all over the Internet theses days, close with these two words of defiance. It has quickly become the signature phrase for gun control resistance.

    So what does “molon labe” mean? Well, it is an invitation — and a challenge — all rolled into one. From the original Greek molon labe means: “Come and take ‘em.”

    Since self-defense is a God-given right I would add a second phrase of recognition one which my Confederate ancestors affixed often to their missives: “Deo Vindici,” which means: “God is with us.”

    This is a struggle gun owners of America did not seek, do not want, but — intend to win decisively.

    J. D. Longstreet is a conservative “Carolina Boy.” A Southern American (A native sandlapper (South Carolinian) and an adopted Tar Heel — A North Carolinian) with a deep passion for the history, heritage, and culture of the southern states of America. At the same time he is a deeply loyal American believing strongly in “America First.” J. D. Longstreet is a very proud direct descendent of several Confederate soldiers. He is a thirty-year veteran of the broadcasting business, as an “in the field” and “on-air” news reporter (contributing to radio, TV, and newspapers) and a conservative broadcast commentator. Longstreet is a veteran of the US Army and US Army Reserve. He is a member of the American Legion and the Sons of Confederate Veterans. A lifelong Christian, Longstreet subscribes to “old Lutheranism” to express and exercise his faith.

    Longstreet’s Commentaries are posted at “INSIGHT on Freedom” at: and at “The Sentinel Factor” at: and “Target: Freedom” at: , and at: “Liberty2Express” at: and “Freedom Dossier” as well as many conservative sites across the World Wide Web.

    • avatarJoatmon says:

      Great piece Jeff. I don’t know that it will come to an all out ban on all guns but I do know that within the next month, we will see what they(the government) wants to do.
      Many people have said it on here and i’ll repeat it again. If you get rid of the 2nd Ammendment, what’s to say you won’t get rid of more of them. How about the 4th Ammendment? Maybe some of these anti-gun people would like their houses searched without the need for a warrant. That would be comforting huh? How about the 7th Ammendment? Trial by jury. Get rid of that too. Bring in defendants and just pass judgement on them. Hell, just scrap the whole thing.
      This is an emotional subject for everyone. How do you please both sides? Do you please both sides? Those kids were innocents and I feel for all the parents(i’m one) but stop blaming the gun. You don’t see roving bands of handguns and assault weapons prowling the streets looking for people to kill. It takes a person to pull the trigger. How do you cure the people? That’s even tougher than all this. That’s why they’re going after weapons. It’s way easier to do that than try to put a plan in place to deal with mental health and believe me, any person who commits this type of crime is not mentally stable.

      • Joatman:

        As a Connecticut resident, parent and fellow human being, last Friday’s tragedy really got to me as well. In fact, I haven’t had a restful night of sleep since. Unfortunately, Obama is forcing us to terminate the grieving process to combat his long-standing commitment to abridge our Second Amendment rights. The very survival of our beloved Republic is at stake and there’s no room for compromise.

        I’ve dedicated the past nine years of my life to country – combating the Jihad on our soil. The existential threat currently facing our beloved nation clearly overshadows that which was posed by the the Third Reich. Few Americans realize that the terrorist Muslim Brotherhood has not only seized control of the discourse but is exerting its recently-granted “authority” over the Federal law enforcement community – controlling both training curriculums and investigative processes.

        We’re in it deep and our children’s security and well-being is at stake. This is no time for civil disarmament, apathy or compromise.

        My friend, I’ve taken the liberty to post allegations that might not be well-received by the readership. Please trust, however, that everything I’ve presented is based upon fact and can be substantiated.

        • avatarVinny says:

          Jihad? Muslim Brotherhood conspiracies in our government? Are you high?

          Stop making the rest of us look like morons.

  30. avatarJAS says:

    These days I listen to and read these peoples’ arguments on the net and the news and dissect their statements to the basics below and stop listening or reading immediately depending on where their arguments fall in the continuum. I don’t waste my time with illogical rants.

    I believe therefore I want…. = I’m done

    I think therefore I believe…. = I’m done

    I think and I know therefore …… = Close, but not good enough

    I think, I know and I have proof therefore….. = Now you have my attention

    As has become too common these days, and although highly disguised in prose, the whole rant above doesn’t get past the “I believe therefore I want” stage. Kind of pitiful for such a “thinker”. I stopped reading after his first sentence when he started with “All of us…”.

  31. avatarBob G says:

    While we are at it, Let’s get rid of the 1 st & 5th Amendment. We can then call ourselves North China! Stupid People!!!!!

  32. The Huffington Post isn’t saying anything new. The Chicago Tribune carried a front page editorial after the MacDonald decision entitled “Repeal The Second Amendment.” The rag’s owner, Sam Zell, was one of Obama’s most vocal supporters before his first election and he has been heard to make occasional anti Obama noises since. Now that his rag is dying, I’m guessing The Huffington Post must have picked up the cue.

  33. avatarBilly Wardlaw says:

    “thus making further Amendments to the Constitution an easier, more straightforward and more democratic process.”

    This single statement exemplifies the complete lack of understanding, by a great many Americans, of the purpose of the Constitution and our Republic. The very point of which is to defend individual liberty from the whims of the majority.

  34. avatartdiinva says:

    The First Amendment is as responsible for spree shootings as the Second. Spree shooters thrive on the notoriety they will receive dead or alive. These little Stavrogins get primed by watching the news media spend weeks talking about the tragedy. I am sure the next sociopath has begun his planning for immortality after watching all the coverage. So as a modest proposal I suggest Congress pass a law allowing the government to regulate and censor news reports pertaining to spree killers. It’s only common sense to deny these creeps the publicity they desire.

    • avatarSammy says:

      WRONG! 1 The mother, may she rest in peace, was primarily responsible for not securing her guns and allowing a mentally changed boy access to same. And the shooter himself to a miniscule lesser degree. I suggest you and that screw ball arianna huffington be deported. Less fascists our land.

  35. avatarSammy says:

    I guess this falls under “fundamental changing the United States. Whod a thunk it?

  36. avatarTotenglocke says:

    Honestly, I’d rather they tried to push an amendment getting rid of the Second Amendment. It would most likely fail and if not, spark a rebellion.

  37. avatarelnonio says:

    Posted as a response on the HP:

    I think the “small price to pay” type of argument is really a red
    herring, for you can have both the freedom to have and carry firearms
    AND more controls to prevent tragedies. However, you also need to
    take a good hard look at the whole system, and not just blindly
    concentrate on firearms. There were multiple failure points that led
    to the killings.

    Unfortunately, most “pro 2nd Amendment” voters also tend to disfavor
    government intrusion and larger budgets for things like healthcare,
    thus resulting in LESS avenues to help families that have members
    suffering from the type of psychological disorders that result in mass
    murders. On the other hand, so called “anti 2nd Amendment” types
    generally tend to favor better/more healthcare expenditures, but seem
    fixated on only talking about firearms as the root of all evils,
    without recognizing that “evil”/criminal/muderous behaviors aren’t
    related to firearms, and firearm ownership is not a gateway to
    criminal behavior.

    As far as changing the Constitution, careful what you wish for. I
    think a referendum on the question (the most democratic process of
    all, as long as the question are framed in neutral ways and give
    meaningful choices) may not yield the results you would want…

    • avatarCarrymagnum says:

      This guy said it right. We don’t have a very good system for the mentally ill anymore. Though I don’t think we ever did. I’d like to see a change in the governments approach to this.

  38. avatarJoe says:

    The reason why our other freedoms are encroached upon at best is because of the 2nd amendment. It embodies the spirit that we will stand up to any oppression. You can look to Iraq, Libya, Syria, and Egypt where personal freedoms are easily crushed.

  39. avatarBob Wilson says:

    Look what gun control did for humanity in the 20th century…
    Following gun control/bans, the following governments murdered huge numbers of their own people.
    Comunist China 20 Million Murdered
    Soviet Union 20 Million Murdered
    Nazi Germany 18 Million Murdered
    Ottoman Turkey, Laos, Cambodia and the list goes on and on.
    I guess it only makes good sense in the 21st century to dispose of our 2nd Ammendment Right to keep and bear arms so that United States citizens can enjoy the same treatment others experienced??? Get real and peddle your insane babble elsewhere.

  40. avatarSad. says:

    Um, while this may have been debated in the south, and may have been part of the discourse around the 2a, to say this was even a primary reason for the 2a is a terribly ahistorical statement to make. First, this is hardly a scholarly source. Second, there are hundreds of documents that support founders intent for the 2a was, indeed, as protection against tyranny both domestic and foreign.

  41. avatarDave S says:

    The second amendment was a safeguard put in by folks who had just fought the British, and were coming together as a new nation. they didnt completely trust each other, there was disagreement amongst the colonies on a number of fronts (1st amendment protecting religious freedoms was a key point)

    The second amendment provided for the states to mobilize effective militias to spank an out of control federal government and its standing army. End of the story.

    Where your day to day life involved hunting to survive, and the possibility of hostile persons of many different persuasions, the right of self protection and the issue of hunting as a sport were not foremost in the founders mind.

    Our politicians are so good at protecting and serving us now, they dont want to think about the true meaning of the Second Amendment of the Constitution. And they have already started attacks on the Freedom of Religion, and I suspect if they can muzzle the voice of dissent, they will continue to work on that too!

Leave a Reply

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