NAPOLITANO: The right to shoot tyrants, not deer

BARACK OBAMA: SUPPORTING THE RIGHTS AND TRADITIONS OF SPORTSMEN

[link to obama.3cdn.net]

Obama and the Second Amendment: He still 'doesn't get it'

While Obama seems intent on framing the Second Amendment as a right to go “hunting or sport shooting,” its purpose -- assuring Americans a means of self-protection -- is better clarified with the follow-up of the Third Amendment.

No soldier shall, in time of peace be quartered in any house, without the consent of the owner, nor in time of war, but in a manner to be prescribed by law.

For someone who failed as a lecturer on civil rights to repeatedly insist that the Second Amendment was primarily established to protect an American's right to go “hunting and target shooting” – when it come to the United States Constitution and “what's going on in the lives of Americans” -- it’s Obama who “doesn’t get it.”

Read more:
[link to www.examiner.com]

What makes this issue so hard is that no amount of gun control will change what is in man's heart--sin.

We are all capable of reaching a point of rage where, if a gun was near by, we might not hesitate to use it.

The sane can be driven to insanity.

"Guns don't kill people, people kill people."

Sinful people kill people, and having a gun nearby can make it a lot easier.

HE GETS IT!!!!

He and the rest of the immoral, unethical, parasitical, and unconstitutional government fears the people, and they should at this point.

:peace35:

Yep, he understands perfectly. Which is why he wants to get rid of the guns.

Some of the absolute truest words I've read during my time here.

Cain killed his very own brother many, many generations before even the concept of gunpowder had been introduced.

Sadly, these words and their implications will be lost on many as the mockery continues by those with faith only in themselves.

Good for you OP!

What will be the next thing he gets rid of?

The principal reason the colonists won the American Revolution is that they possessed weapons equivalent in power and precision to those of the British government. If the colonists had been limited to crossbows that they had registered with the king’s government in London, while the British troops used gunpowder when they fought us here, George Washington and Jefferson would have been captured and hanged.

We also defeated the king’s soldiers because they didn’t know who among us was armed, because there was no requirement of a permission slip from the government in order to exercise the right to self-defense. (Imagine the howls of protest if permission were required as a precondition to exercising the freedom of speech.) Today, the limitations on the power and precision of the guns we can lawfully own not only violate our natural right to self-defense and our personal sovereignties; they assure that a tyrant can more easily disarm and overcome us.

The historical reality of the Second Amendment’s protection of the right to keep and bear arms is not that it protects the right to shoot deer. It protects the right to shoot tyrants, and it protects the right to shoot at them effectively, thus, with the same instruments they would use upon us. If the Jews in the Warsaw ghetto had had the firepower and ammunition that the Nazis did, some of Poland might have stayed free and more persons would have survived the Holocaust.

Most people in government reject natural rights and personal sovereignty. Most people in government believe that the exercise of everyone’s rights is subject to the will of those in the government. Most people in government believe that they can write any law and regulate any behavior, not subject to the natural law, not subject to the sovereignty of individuals, not cognizant of history’s tyrants, but subject only to what they can get away with.

Did you empower the government to impair the freedom of us all because of the mania and terror of a few?

MORE at link
lewrockwell.com/napolitano/napolitano82.1.html

(I just posted about this same article from a different link & altho I ran a search check for it, I didn't find any. But then after posting I saw Koffee's post & I am going to pin Koffee's since it was here first.)

You're a sweetheart!

Napolitano's words you posted ring so much truth.

:ty8:

mostly agree, but the lameass gawd crap can go.

I've been in a few alarming situations where I've escaped without the result of any disastrous consequence.

In one, my foot was my weapon, by kicking a would-be rapist in the right place, it helped me.

Another, my speed and agility hopping onto my 12-speed bike was a definite plus in helping me to escape from a sick lunatic soliciting me for sex, but I know it was prayer that helped me.

I wasn't a Christian the first incident, the second incident, I was. I prayed, in my mind, for a way of escape.

The one time guns were involved was with my dad. When my dad wasn't drinking or taking his amphetamines, he was an ok guy. He was actually well liked by so many people who never got to see the "Mr. Hyde" side.

He owned a gun and almost shot my stepmother with it during a time when he didn't sleep for 3 days because he was high on his "uppers". Plus, my stepmother didn't know when to keep her mouth closed. She did know what buttons to push to make my dad's anger rise. When someone is under the influence of a substance that can change how they think, you should leave the issue alone until they are sober.

This is what I thought of when I said that the sane can be driven to insanity and when a gun is around it can become a dangerous weapon.

A lot of Christians are divided on this issue. Scripture provides the answer but different interpretations present a problem, too.

As a Christian, I am still weighing everything and reading what God's Word says. I’m not convinced that more gun control will lower gun crime, but I do not think that less gun control is the answer either.

I think what I stand against the most is what our government has been doing as far as continuing to take away our freedoms and destroying what was good and morally right for America.

But God IS IN control. Man only thinks he is.

Everything will work out according to what our Creator has planned.

"To permit murder when one could have prevented it is morally wrong. To allow a rape when one could have hindered it is an evil. To watch an act of cruelty to children without trying to intervene is morally inexcusable. In brief, not resisting evil is an evil of omission, and an evil of omission can be just as evil as an evil of commission. Any man who refuses to protect his wife and children against a violent intruder fails them morally."

Quotation taken from The Life and Death Debate: Moral Issues for Our Time, by Dr. Norman Geisler and JP Moreland

HOW DID THIS GET UNPINNED WITHIN AN HOUR OR SO???

Last Edited by Ralph--a house dog on 01/11/2013 06:12 PM

"carrying a gun is a civilized act"

snip
Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it.

When I carry a gun, you cannot deal with me by force. You have to use reason and try to persuade me, because I have a way to negate your threat or employment of force. The gun is the only personal weapon that puts a 100-pound woman on equal footing with a 220-pound mugger, a 75-year old retiree on equal footing with a 19-year old gangbanger, and a single gay guy on equal footing with a carload of drunk guys with baseball bats. The gun removes the disparity in physical strength, size, or numbers between a potential attacker and a defender.

Read more:
[link to www.corneredcat.com]

What you’ll see in the rebellion

[link to www.bob-owens.com]

I was reading some of the comments from the link posted above and one of them recommended reading this book--Lucifer's Hammer--as a way of putting you into a "preparedness mentality".

Well, I believe many of you are already in that mode, but the reason for this post is just to provide you with a link where you can read the book, in case you are interested:


[link to ny.iadicicco.com]

Last Edited by KoFFee_ on 01/11/2013 07:47 PM

This is a real find--- Lucifer's Hammer for FREE!

Considered a classic in post apocalyptic fiction, it is still timely.

In a video published Thursday on the Gretawire blog, Andrew Napolitano, the senior judicial analyst for Fox News, said the Second Amendment allowed Americans to kill “tyrants.”
Raw Story

“So since the Congress can’t change the Constitution, how could they possibly take away your right to keep and bear arms?” Napolitano continued. “Here’s the dirty little secret about the Second Amendment, the Second Amendment was not written in order to protect your right to shoot deer, it was written to protect your right to shoot tyrants if they take over the government. How about chewing on that one.”

Watch short video here:

[link to www.rawstory.com]

Yes, I'm glad I found it. I'm going to start reading it later on tonight.



By the way, I love your avatar.

Has Judge Napalitano ever been on Piers Morgan's show?

I saw this this morning via Ralph's thread linking but didn't have a chance to post, so bumping for now...

Last Edited by CeeLite on 01/11/2013 11:50 PM

Most excellent post!

Did you see that 766 page free book link above?

I'm going to attempt to read it--I heard it was pretty good.

Thanks for the bump!!
:tys3:

:smblk:

This was written by Richard Henry Lee, a Congressman and Senator from Virginia, a signer of the Declaration of Independence, author of the Anti-Fed Papers, and who proposed the Bill of Rights.

"A militia when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves, and render regular troops in great measure unnecessary. The powers to form and arm the militia, to
appoint their officers, and to command their services, are very important; nor ought they in a confederated republic to be lodged, solely, in any one member of the government. First, the constitution ought to secure a genuine [] and guard against a select militia, by providing that the militia shall always be kept well organized, armed, and disciplined, and include, according to the past and general usage of the states, all men capable of bearing arms; and that all regulations tending to render this general militia ― useless and defenseless, by establishing select corps of militia, or distinct bodies of military men, not having permanent interests and attachment in the community is to be avoided.… To preserve liberty, it is essential that the whole body of the people always possess arms, and be taught alike, especially when young, how to use them…."

Our Founding Fathers wanted everyone (including kids), to be well-armed and well-trained, so we always have the power to defend ourselves.Even if one member or faction of the government, decides to take over by forming and training a "select corps" of militia.

Think about it....
-Totally disarming citizens or allowing inferior guns only.
-Knowing exactly who has the inferior ones.
-The feds arming themselves to the teeth with superior firepower.
-Obama's “Civilian National Security Force”, which was provided for, in the unread Obamacare bill, and who already had their first graduating class.
-The DHLS getting free reign to do whatever they want.
-TSA expanding into trains, buses and even our cars.
-Fema's expanding power and those unexplained coffins and camps.

I'm probably one of the most skeptical people on here, but all this, along with fact that this administration thinks it has a license to do anything, is pretty damn scary.

The one saving grace is, this administration has shown itself to be so inept and such screw-ups, they can't get anything right.

So, if they do try to take over, it will be like watching the "Government of the United States of the Three Stooges".

"Slavery is ever preceded by sleep" - Montesquieu

:sgp: