Monday, June 22, 2009

"A Poorly Worded Amendment"

As opposed to that hallmark clarity of expression separating Jason Linkins from mere Framers. [More]

Ri-ight.

And why not hashtag "Neda"?

If she were your daughter, wouldn't you want to shoot back?

[Via SJ]

12 comments:

TJP said...

Anyone who lacks the reading skill to understand the concise wording of the Second Amendment is not capable of reading the owner's manual for a firearm, and is therefore not trustworthy enough to be armed, in order to shoot back.

Some of the best political and legal minds this country has ever produced employed considerable knowledge and direct experience in order to create the Bill of Rights. Someone who has difficulty understanding this short enumerated list, written in his native language, should consider the safety benefits of always wearing a red plastic helmet.

Cemetery's Gun Blob said...

What's more scary, are the comments. People are actually against the opposition obtaining guns, or even returning fire if they already have guns.

We're doomed.

Anonymous said...

The comments there make me sick. How the hell did this country spawn so many cowardly idiots?!

Anonymous said...

The availability of arms is only part of the equation. Willingness to use them is another. Firearms were availabe to many at the time of the American Revolution, but few took up arms against the Crown, and few supported them. Many more were apathetic or openly opposed the American Revolution.

What is important to remember is that speeches, writings and mass protests did not win our own independence from the oppresive government of King George III and his Parliament. The initial response to opposition to the Crown was to send troops to sieze weapons and to arrest those who did not demonstrate loyalty to the Crown. Successful armed opposition sustained over several years, not days or weeks, won our independence.

Anonymous said...

I wonder if that doof has figured out how the good guys(unarmed) are going to take their country away from the bad guys(armed)?
Didn't think so.

Only time that happens is when the bad guys are pretty good guys -ie. (what used to be) Great Britain and the U.S.

Paul W. Davis said...

It's the Huffington Post, just what did any of you all expect?

I certainly hope you didn't think the vast majority of readers there had a lick of sense. I certainly did not and do not. They are liberals, and not in the classical sense.

Remember, they wear their feelings and live by them. Reason and common sense have no place in their existence.

And no, I do not expect that either of the two will ever get a place in their existence — even in Hell.

Kent McManigal said...

People do not understand that which they do not wish to understand.

Laughingdog said...

This is a perfect example of why I don't plan to attend my high school reunion. You see, I graduated with Jason. Like most idiot kids, we were all a little left-wing back then. I turned into a libertarian, and nearly everyone else I know veered so far to the left that they make the average San Franciscan look like Rush Limbaugh.

I thank God that I clearly missed school the day they passed out the leftie kool aid.

AvgJoe said...

The judges and government lawyer who take and oath to defend and serve the United States Constitution who nit pick the Second Amendment to death are going to have a huge problem. These idiots think on judgement day after they die they are going to play lawyer and debate God on the meaning of the Second Amendment. Ain't going to happen any more than some idiots trying to tell God that they had a right to kill their baby or babies because of Roe v Wade.
Frankly, I believe that Roe v Wade was in part put in place by five activist judges to draw a line in the sand. The people who believe in God on one side and the people who believe in government and man's laws on the other. You can bet the people who believe in God and God's laws are supporters of the Second Amendment.
As FDR said, nothing happens in Washington without it meaning to happen.

Anonymous said...

I wonder how Mr. Linkins expects the people of Iran to gain the rights he wants them to have (speech, assembly, religion, et al) without wresting them from a semi-tyrannical government? And without weapons/arms, yet? Beg "pretty please"? Petition the government for redress of grievences? Yeah, as if.

B Woodman
SSG (Ret) US Army
III
"Molon Labe"

Kent McManigal said...

"The people who believe in God on one side and the people who believe in government and man's laws on the other."

Except that that "line" doesn't wash. I don't believe in "God" OR "government". And I personally know plenty of people who seem completely devoted to both.

bob r said...

"Anyway, it's symbolic of how much has changed that a conservative now thinks Iran could use more readily available weaponry.

Seems to me he meant it would be better if Iranians had "more readily available weaponry." Completely different meaning.