"There is no “emergency powers” doctrine that authorizes the government to restrict Second Amendment rights. Such a doctrine would advance the Democrats’ statist objective: an omnipotent government . . . run by Democrats."
Problem is, David, he's NOT wrong - not if he can get Congress, POTUS and SCOTUS to go along with him. In the same way, Hillary committed no crime. No act is illegal - for a given individual - unless said individual is successfully prosecuted for the act.
Remember what Jefferson wrote about changing long established governments. It will come down to what conditions individuals consider to cross the dividing line between "light and transient causes" and "a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism". It need not be a majority or even a significant majority. If the Dutchman is right (and I most heartily believe he IS) even a tiny fraction of We the People, sufficiently motivated, can effect genuine change and correct the situation. After all, a sufficient number of highly motivated unarmed surfs can bring down a fully armed and armored, mounted knight. The problem we learn from history is that no power elite has ever gone gently "into that good night". The ratio of "indians" to "chiefs" has always favored the "indians".
and as I read the article
ReplyDelete"There is no “emergency powers” doctrine that authorizes the government to restrict Second Amendment rights. Such a doctrine would advance the Democrats’ statist objective: an omnipotent government . . . run by Democrats."
I'm thinking.... sounds like California...
Problem is, David, he's NOT wrong - not if he can get Congress, POTUS and SCOTUS to go along with him. In the same way, Hillary committed no crime. No act is illegal - for a given individual - unless said individual is successfully prosecuted for the act.
ReplyDeleteRemember what Jefferson wrote about changing long established governments. It will come down to what conditions individuals consider to cross the dividing line between "light and transient causes" and "a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism". It need not be a majority or even a significant majority. If the Dutchman is right (and I most heartily believe he IS) even a tiny fraction of We the People, sufficiently motivated, can effect genuine change and correct the situation. After all, a sufficient number of highly motivated unarmed surfs can bring down a fully armed and armored, mounted knight. The problem we learn from history is that no power elite has ever gone gently "into that good night". The ratio of "indians" to "chiefs" has always favored the "indians".