Posted on 05/27/2014 9:51:41 AM PDT by PoloSec
The Second Amendment right to own firearms is one of the most important rights protected under the Constitution, and it’s also one of the most hotly debated issues in modern America.
Progressives have been doing their best to not only enact strict gun control laws, but to outright ban these kinds of weapons for decades, making use of the latest school shootings or mass murder tragedies to make their case.
While liberals have been gleefully leading the charge to deny Americans their Constitutional right to protect themselves with firearms, police officers have started a rebellion, deciding not to enforce bans that are a violation of the Second Amendment.
Citizens in New York are also standing up against big government by refusing to play along with legislation requiring them to register their guns with the state.
The push back against oppressive gun control laws has now achieved a major victory in the state of Louisiana, where Gov. Bobby Jindal recently signed two new pro-gun bills into law.
via TeaParty.Org:
The more sweeping of the two gun rights measures will allow people with concealed handgun permits to carry their weapons into restaurants that serve alcohol, but make most of their money from food sales.
Present law does not allow citizens to carry guns into establishments that serve alcohol. And while people with concealed handgun permits will be able to go into a restaurant serving alcohol soon, they still wouldn’t be able to drink alcohol while packing heat.
The soon-to-be law also gives current and retired law enforcement officers as well as district attorneys and judges even more flexibility than the general public when it comes to concealed weapons. Those in law enforcement would be allowed to carry guns into bars, though they also couldn’t drink while carrying a weapon.
The second of the two pro-gun bills focuses on expanding “stand your ground” laws concerning self-defense.
The second bill signed by Jindal will expand the “stand your ground” law in Louisiana. Under current law, a person who kills an intruder coming into his car or house is given the benefit of the doubt and can use self-defense as a lawful reason for the killing. But the same self-defense argument could not be legally applied to situations where a person hurt, but didn’t kill, the intruder.
This is a huge victory for gun rights activists in Louisiana and around the country, as the movement to protect our right to own a firearm continues to pick up momentum. Being able to own a gun was one of the most important natural rights that our Founding Fathers wanted to protect, as it gives the people a means to defend themselves against criminals, whether those evildoers are thieves or government goons.
Throughout history, whenever a dictator sought to get absolute power over a country and its people, one of the first steps taken was to ban weapons so that citizens could not put up any resistance. This must not be allowed to happen in America.
The author does not know how to write a news report.
How deep do they expect us to read to find out the information promised by the headline?
It’s not a real newspaper. It’s a blog. It has been cut and pasted from Teaparty.org
I wish these outfits would quit letting the liberals label themselves. They are LIBERALS or LEFT WINGERS, not "Progessives". These people keep rebranding themselves whenever their previous self-appointed title is exposed as Communism-Lite. Stick with the old epithets.
Giving a whole new meaning to the phrase "shoot to kill".
I do think “progressive” stands alone, but for an odd reason. Unlike liberal radicalism and socialism, which are of the socialist-communist origins, progressivism also integrates some national socialist and fascist ideas and ideals.
For example, Teddy Roosevelt, the first prominent Republican progressive, unabashedly stole speeches from basic translations of the writings of Frederick Nietzsche, which were not yet widely available as books published in English.
His contemporary, Woodrow Wilson, was clearly of the more traditional socialist internationalist bent.
And while the hard core socialist-communists in the US were not in any way dissuaded by the disastrous implementation of socialism and all its trappings in Soviet Russia, the progressives such as FDR much preferred the National Socialism of Germany and the fascism of Italy as models on which to base their economic redesign of the US economy.
Of course, in turn, that came up wanting as well. But the blend of philosophies patched many of the holes found in pure socialism, even if the patches were of inferior quality.
I know.
People who expect others to read and be persuaded need to learn how to write.
Absolutely.
I refer to “Progressives” as “regressives”.
It is a good description. The United States was founded on the idea of limiting government power; “progressives” want to regress to the idea of unlimited government power.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.