The Second Amendment was NOT written to enshrine every American with the right to own a gun for hunting, sport or self-defense from violent crime. These un-enumerated rights are merely incidental benefits of what the framers of the constitution originally meant. Pure and simple, the Second Amendment was intended for one thing and one thing only: power. The framers wanted citizens to have the literal firepower to rein-in their politicians and unelected bureaucrats. Our founding fathers were revolutionaries. Extremists. Radicals. Insurgents. Guerrillas . . .
Since Hector was a pup, Universities, Colleges, and institutions of higher learning have been heralded as the keepers of the eternal flames of knowledge, reason, and intellectual freedom. In recent years, they’ve also been a fertile breeding ground for “politically correct” speech – that euphemistically enriched dialect that is long on obfuscation and short on logic and reason. Now the same philosophy that made it illegal to think ill thoughts of someone (or at least add to your guilt if you acted upon them) brings you a page right out of 1984 and Brave New World – and right in the heart of academia.
I spend waaaay too much time online. (If I spent as much time at the range as I do Facebook, I could qualify for Top Shot.) Anywho, I got into it recently with a couple of people of the far-Left persuasion, one of whom was from California. You know. The Home of Legislation Designed To Drive Gun Manufacturers Out of Business. Now I don’t mean to insult the Conservatives that live in the Golden State (yes, Virginia, there ARE Conservatives in California. I know two of them personally). But I’ve always wondered why the most vocal of Californians seem to be Hell-bent for leather to ban guns, ban oil, ban nuclear energy, fast food, and every other thing that makes America great. And I think I have an idea why, courtesy of a flame war on Facebook.
Look past the repetitious (and somewhat cheezy) graphics. Listen to what Whittle has to say. If you’re a gun owner and you’re not a Tea Party supporter, watch the video with an open mind, if you can. You might discover that the Tea Party has an awful lot in common with the principles you believe in, as a gun owner.
Say it isn’t so. Please. According to the New Orleans-based examiner.com, the National Rifle Association has endorsed the re-election campaign of U.S. Senate majority leader Harry Reid. Excuse me; I have to run to the restroom for a little Technicolor® yawn. Seriously, has the NRA taken leave of their ever-lovin’ minds? Apparently. And as one of their newest Life Members, I am seriously ticked off about this. Here’s the 411 on this surreal moment, straight out of a Rod Serling nightmare . . .
Well. Sort of. What the Newspaper For Those Who Find People Magazine a Challenging Read asks in their “Quick Question” online is, “Does the Second Amendment give Individuals the right to bear arms.?” I’m guessing “Yes,” based on the Supreme Court’s decision in the landmark Heller case. But there’s been a spirited discussion surrounding another 2nd Amendment-related article I penned here on TTAG. Anywho, you have a chance to vote your own self. The poll (link provided by a TTAG reader) is, as far as I can determine, as unscientific as they come, meaning that, since the Nattering Nabobs of Negativism aren’t getting the results they want, you should expect to see the poll results buried in Section W (for Wastebasket), or thoroughly discredited by the very paper that hosted the poll. Still, click here to add your voice to the muddled asses yearning for free brie.
The internets are abuzz re: this morning’s Frank Rich editorial: Axis of the Obsessed and Deranged. The New York Times’ liberal extremist builds on a previous Sunday magazine piece painting the Tea Party movement as a bunch of loons. Rich launches a dietribe [sic] linking the populist protest with terrorists and, well, deranged people. The only thing missing from Mr. Rich’s viscous and unfounded smearicle: a link to the movement’s belief in Second Amendment rights. Maybe that’s because his boss, publisher Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., has a concealed carry permit. Or maybe Mr. Rich knows there is a pale beyond which he shouldn’t go. Nah. It’s coming. Meanwhile, the Arizona Sun’s editorial board has got its proverbial knickers in a twist re: the state’s move towards “Open Carry” gun laws (whereby legal citizens can carry firearms without a special licensing procedure). Here’s the headline again, complete with self-righteous rhetorical flourish: “Arming a bunch of amateur civilians in place of passing gun laws with teeth sends up the white flag of surrender in the battle for a civil society governed by laws, not force.” That’s how it ends, of course. Here’s how it starts . . .