2nd Ammendment rights? think so?

Not to say "I told you so," but I TOLD YOU SO!

You can't take away the rights of others, without losing your own rights. Once the Constitution becomes an option, it's all optional.

 

Well said and amen!

 

And folks say the abuses of Clinton's administration were evil? Remember Ruby Ridge and Waco?
Don't get me wrong, I never was a fan of Clinton, but what is the difference between his adminsitration and this one?
The ONLY difference is that folks weren't killed by police to get their guns. But police got them just the same.

And America is a 'christian' nation?

hrmph

 

Although you don't say it, I assume this is a jab at the Bush administration.

I hate to throw a wrench into the works here, but the seizure of these weapons was ordered and carried out by Mayor Ray Nagin and the New Orleans Police Department. This has nothing to do with the federal government whatsoever. In fact, based on one of the videos from the site posted, a federal court has ordered the return of the guns to their rightful owners. Nagin has thusfar refuesed to fully cooperate with the order.

This has nothing to do with the Constitution or the federal government or laws. It has everything to do with an extremely corrupt little city, and her political machine, on the banks of the Mississippi.

 

Then you assume wrong.

And it has everything to do with the Federal government for the 2nd Amendment is a Constitutionally gauranteed right of citizens of this nation. For anybody, whether they be individual or a local authority to deny this right to citizens is a fedral crime. The fact that the mayor and his thugs is not complying makes it doubly heinous.

The Mayor should be arrested on federal firearms charges and the guns returned to their rightful owners.

I can't believe I have to explain this to you.

edit: On second thought. Considering the mindset of the majority of people I encounter on this board, I am not surprised at all.

 

Ruby Ridge occured on Daddy Bush's watch. Wasn't a nickel's worth of difference, was there?

And yes, the N.O. confiscation of guns relates to the erosion of our liberties under Bush. The democrats in New Orleans made the same argument that Bush is making.

"We can't afford to be free, because it's too dangerous."

They intend to make the a nation of free men into a nation of sheep. And it's well on the way.

 

First, you have.

Second, you are correct in most circumstances.

However, the Constitution allowed for flexibility. Ironically, you would want the Constitution to bend in ways that I probably would not . . .

 

I can't imagine how. What "bending" do you think I like? You do notice that the Constitution does not grant us rights, but only lists some of the rights we have. Notice also that such list specifically states that others exist which are not listed.

Hence, the right to privacy which is inherent in the English Constitution, was assumed by the Founders to be a right, as it was considered a natural right by all Englishmen.

"The poorest man may, in his cottage, bid defiance to all the forces of the Crown. ... The storm may enter, the rain may enter, but the King of England cannot enter."
William Pitt