Mission statement:

Armed and Safe is a gun rights advocacy blog, with the mission of debunking the "logic" of the enemies of the Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms.

I can be reached at 45superman@gmail.com.You can follow me on Twitter at http://twitter.com/45superman.

Sunday, November 23, 2008

Gun rights: safe and sound, now and forever

Yep, you read that right. I am categorically declaring that an Obama/Biden presidency (with the HopeadChange™ Anti-Gun Dream Team cabinet and staff), combined with Democratic hegemony in Congress, is no threat to gun rights--and I'm not being sarcastic.

I have also not taken leave of my senses. Before you dispute that assertion, you need to understand what I am not saying. I don't, for example, deny that the Obammuist and his acolytes want to implement every restrictive gun law they can--they have left no doubt that they do. Nor am I claiming that they'll necessarily be prevented from putting in place the most draconian gun restrictions in our nation's history--I think there's a good chance they'll have the power to do just that.

What I am saying is that, their wishes notwithstanding, our gun rights are beyond their filthy reach. That's why, after all, they're called rights--if they could be taken away at the whim of the government, they would be privileges. Whatever executive orders Obama signs (and are upheld), whatever laws Congress passes, whatever decisions the Supreme Court hands down, whatever U.N. treaties are signed and ratified, our Constitutionally guaranteed, fundamental human right of the individual to keep and bear arms will remain.

Granted, the "Constitutionally guaranteed" part isn't necessarily forever (although I don't see it going anywhere anytime soon)--any Constitutional amendment, even one that is part of the Bill of Rights, can be repealed. As I said, I don't find that very likely, but in terms of what rights we have, even the repeal of the Second Amendment wouldn't matter. As the Supreme Court said in the United States v. Cruikshank decision:

The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence.
Many refer to the right to keep and bear arms as "God given," although those of a less religious persuasion might prefer to call it a "natural" right. In practical terms, the distinction doesn't really matter--the upshot is that the right is not the government's to either grant or rescind.

Obama and his minions can perhaps turn us into "criminals" (or even "homegrown terrorists"), but they cannot take our rights, and if we are to be worthy of those rights, nor can they take our guns--not, at any rate, while our hands are warm and living.

III

7 comments:

TexasFred said...

Obama and Company may very well impose the most draconian restrictions imaginable, but they KNOW that to actually come after the guns, to physically attempt to seize the ones that are already out there, will result in a blood bath...

And I don't mean that as a threat or a call to insurrection in ANY way, it is quite simply, a statement of fact...

Great post Kurt, very well thought out and well stated...

Jaded Judas said...

From past experience, I believe that the NRA "cold dead hands" poseurs will roll over and hand in their guns when the JBTs come around to confiscate them....

45superman said...

Well JJ, I don't know who you're referring to as "the NRA 'cold dead hands poseurs,'" and I don't know what your "experience" is--but I know I won't "roll over," and I'm confident I'm not alone.

TexasFred said...

Jaded Judas, here's an idea, why don't YOU come and try to take em away, YOU personally, you know, in the name of *research* and all...

45superman said...

Thanks, Texas.

I hope you aren't holding your breath waiting for old JJ to come to prove his thesis--my guess is that he's the one here who is all talk.

straightarrow said...

gotta take JJ's side on this. He didn't condemn the cold dead hands type. He only condemned the poseurs. And let's admit the truth here, A hell of a lot of the NRA is nothing but that. Hell the Executive Vice President (for life?) is certainly one.

Otherwise, no one can explain their constant campaign of surrender of 2nd amendment rights that they conveniently mislabel as "reasonable compromise" of that with "shall not be infringed".

No one can either explain just what the Hell the NRA is doing writing many of the proposals which became bills in the legislatures for which they ultimately lobbied, which served no purpose except to extend the infringements on the right to keep and bear arms.

He didn't say Texas or you or I were poseurs, but he rightfully pointed out the NRA is rife with them.

I quit the NRA because they kept writing and lobbying against the rights of Americans guaranteed under the second amendment.

So, no, I don't have any trouble with JJ, pointing out that LaPierre and company keep calling for enforcement of the restrictive gun laws that already exist, some of which they wrote and got their favorite legislators to introduce, instead of working on repeal of the 20,000+ illegal laws on the books. Is it really that hard to imagine that ilk turning their arms in like good little boys if it becomes law? I don't think so.

45superman said...

SA,if that's his point, I have no problem with it, and if he comes back and clarifies that, he'll have my apologies.

Something about his wording convinces me that he's being a great deal less discriminating than that in his reference to "poseurs."

I'm also curious about this "past experience" he claims, of gun owners meekly submitting to confiscation.