Dudley Brown

Because the Second Amendment is part of our nation’s supreme law, attacking gun rights means attacking the very foundation of the country.

The gun grabbers know they have to deal with this supreme law at some point if they’re going to push their radical agenda through.

And so they’ve decided to rewrite the Bill of Rights to best suit their plans.

That’s right. In an attempt to circumvent our nation’s fundamental law, Barack Obama has rewritten his own version of the Bill of Rights and posted it on the White House website.
According to Obama, “The Second Amendment gives citizens the right to bear arms.”

I don’t know about you, but my right to defend myself comes from my Creator — not from government, not from some bureaucrat or politician, but from my very nature as a human being.

I’m sure I don’t have to tell you that redefining a fundamental right as a privilege is a very dangerous path to start down.

A right is inherent in our humanity and can never be taken away.

A privilege can be removed at the whim of one’s rulers.

But the President’s redefinition of our nation’s fundamental law isn’t enough for some anti-freedom zealots.

Gun grabbers in our government-run education system are now seeking to brainwash your children into accepting their anti-gun agenda — also by rewriting the Bill of Rights.

Lesson plans in Garland, Texas, (Texas?! Really?!) now teach the Second Amendment by summarizing as follows, “Amendment 2: We can get permission to own weapons to protect ourselves.”

This couldn’t be any further from what the Second Amendment clearly states!

“The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

Our top law enforcement officer Eric Holder has pledged more than once to work toward the goal of disarming law-abiding citizens. This is the same Eric Holder whose law firm works for the release of Islamic terrorists held at Guantanamo. The Constitution means nothing to Bozo or to anyone in this ultra-crooked administration. And they're not the only ones. In Sacramento we have Assemblyman Deleon, proud member of The Race, drafting legislation to keep ammunition out of the hands of citizens, while his gang buddies run amok. Our state and federal governments are not only being mismanaged but are being run by anti-American radicals who despise everything our nation stands for.

An honest lesson plan would state that:

"The Second Amendment prohibits government from interfering with the Right of The People to own, carry and train with military arms."

Driving in California is "Privilege".
And the DMV is used by many burocratic orifices to enforce, track down, and enslave the populace.
Several examples of this is it's use to hunt down "deadbeat fathers". Two of my Brothers-in law have had to pay child support (back Support) for children later found to not be theirs through DNA testing.
Did the State return the monies? Hell no!

Point being, if our Right to Keep and Bear Arms is infringed by this psychopathic ruler, then in the very near future our 2nd Amendment Right will be suspended.
Just like your driving "Privilege" can be today.
With a privilege, your are guilty until you prove yourself innocent. Automatically.

Them consarn gun grabbers, let's blast em one...That'll learn em!
Tryin' ta take away my precious guns, why I outa....
Well you know what the Bill of Rights says it says that we should all bear arms at all times, every last man man jack of us!
I might not o' neva went to no school er got no book learnin but aint no fancy pants law talkin revinewer gonna tell me what to do, no siree Bob! Hey, What er you lookin at?

I did check the white house website Res and he did change it. It says, "The second amendment gives citizens the right to arm bears!" I see why you're upset.

Now scrutinize the wording of Obama's meaning of the other 9 amendments. Are there any other subtle rewordings which don't exactly fit the original intent or have double entendres?

I'm sorry, but I didn't see the word "privilege" in the online definition, but I did see the word "right".

Not sure what the heck yer whining about now. Is it the stink from the Red Herring hanging around yer neck?

S2T or subjoe,

Could you spend a moment teaching our friend basic natural law and the constitution?

I don't have the time or energy at the moment.

fist, sup? reread the original post.

quote:

Originally posted by pie:
Just like your driving "Privilege" can be today.
With a privilege, your are guilty until you prove yourself innocent. Automatically.

That's pretty much the operating presumption of the BATF. They come take all your stuff, often on made-up charges, then leave you struggling to prove your innocence. Good luck getting your stuff back.

Let's not forget Democrat Ray Nagin's round-up of guns from those poor schmucks under his power after Hurricane Katrina broke down social order and left the good folks vulnerable to roving bands of looters. Nagin disarmed the good folks who wanted to defend their homes. Typical Leftist move.

I say again, Democrats ARE YOUR ENEMIES.

Hanover - the Second Amendment does not "give" a Right to anybody. An alleged Constitutional Scholar would know that and, as a lawyer, would pick his words to reflect that reality. However, the Left like to say that it "gives" a Right because that puts the Right within the power and grasp of government manipulations.

You have a Natural Right to defend yourself and your interests with whatever weapons are most effective for the job. It is your Natural state of being to make or buy weapons to fight off criminal aggressors or oppressors.

What is NOT natural is for someone else to put restrictions on that Right, to threaten you with harm merely for being armed to defend yourself.

That's why the 2nd Amendment PROHIBITS ANY AND ALL GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE WITH YOUR NATURAL RIGHT TO OWN AND CARRY COMBAT WEAPONRY TO DEFEND YOURSELF AND YOUR FREEDOM.

It doesn't "give" a right - because you naturally possess that ability and Right as a human being.

Leftists like to pretend that Government "gives" Rights.

Americans (if you bother to read our founding documents) know your Natural Rights came from God, your Creator.

So basic natural law has been codified in the Bill of Rights and that is okay. But to paraphrase this natural law on a website is somehow an attack on this right by somehow construing it as a privilege? I've heard about reading between the lines, but this is ridiculous.

Can you please explain to me how this summary of a codified right on a website does this?

Just for argument sake, what if someone who didn't believe in god wanted to posess arms? Not having the god-given right you claim, they may not feel like they had the right to do so.

However, with it being codified in the Bill of Rights even a "godless heathen" can rest easy knowing that he/she has the ultimate right to defend themselves within the borders of our great nation.

quote:

Originally posted by Speak2Truth:
Hanover - the Second Amendment does not "give" a Right to anybody. An alleged Constitutional Scholar would know that and, as a lawyer, would pick his words to reflect that reality. However, the Left like to say that it "gives" a Right because that puts the Right within the power and grasp of government manipulations.

You have a Natural Right to defend yourself and your interests with whatever weapons are most effective for the job. It is your Natural state of being to make or buy weapons to fight off criminal aggressors or oppressors.

What is NOT natural is for someone else to put restrictions on that Right, to threaten you with harm merely for being armed to defend yourself.

That's why the 2nd Amendment PROHIBITS ANY AND ALL GOVERNMENT INTERFERENCE WITH YOUR NATURAL RIGHT TO OWN AND CARRY COMBAT WEAPONRY TO DEFEND YOURSELF AND YOUR FREEDOM.

It doesn't "give" a right - because you naturally possess that ability and Right as a human being.

Leftists like to pretend that Government "gives" Rights.

Americans (if you bother to read our founding documents) know your Natural Rights came from God, your Creator.

Yes, I understand all that. However, being that this is not a legal brief we are discussing, but merely an informational website that sumamrizes our BoR and Cosntitution, I wouldn't get too worked up about it. That is the point I am trying to make. The summary doesn't even include half the words in this right. Maybe, since it is so short, they should put the entire text up.

Here is why it is important.

Remember the occasional Democrat Presidential Candidate posing in a hunting outfit and saying something like, "I believe in the Second Amendment. I'm a duck hunter too!"

Leftists carefully pick their words and imagery to manipulate the PERCEPTION of a thing to their advantage. We all know the 2nd has absolutely nothing to do with ducks and bunnies - but an awful lot of Democrat minions now buy into the notion that it's okay to ban a gun that is not suitable for "sporting" purposes. The manipulation works.

In this case, the word "gives", repeated on a website, in schools and so on, creates the perception that the Government has authority over this Right. So, when a Democrat says they can create "reasonable" laws to violate this Right, the programmed minions will not rise up against them because, heck, this is something Government "gives" anyway.

That's also why they repeat that small phrase, "separation of church and state". It is not in our Constitution but they PROGRAM the minds of the populace, through endless repetition, then the populace mentally is disarmed and will not retaliate against acts based on that FALSE premise.

So, I've heard repeatedly, from young people, that through the 2nd Amendment the government "gives" a right to have arms. They therefore believe, since Government is the author of that Right, that Government can "manage" it with all sorts of restrictive laws.

That is the damage that one word, "gives", can do. It is far more damaging than a legal brief.

Socialists manage perceptions with great care. They know full well that a lie, repeated often enough, becomes perceived truth.

That really is how Leftists work. It's a process called "de-moralization", or reprogramming the mind so that the mind cannot grasp the truth. They work very, very hard at it, as this KGB agent will reiterate for you...

Yuri Bezmenov - KGB explains psychological warfare inside US, demoralization
Link

quote:

Originally posted by HanoverFist:
But to paraphrase this natural law on a website is somehow an attack on this right by somehow construing it as a privilege? I've heard about reading between the lines, but this is ridiculous.

One word is all it takes to change the whole meaning about any number of concepts. It's not reading between the lines at all. whitehouse. gov is obamas website. He authorizes every jot and tittle. He is a "constitutional scholar". Anyone in his position knows our bill of rights lists God given and inalienable rights. To refer to it any other way is pure deception. And like nearly all deception it is subtle.

Try this test for yourself. Ask random high school kids from where our rights come. See if they say they are God given and inalienable or if they say the Bill of Rights and the Constitution gives us those Rights.