Repeal Second Amendment, Analyst Advises

CNS News ^

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

The rule of law is gone altogether. The Congress and the president have refused their Constitutional duty to protect us from invasion.

We have open gang warfare in the streets. We might has well have a civil war over the Second Amendment and open borders...

[Oberon]

This is refreshing. At least they’re being honest about what the Second Amendment really means, for a change.

[Sir Francis Dashwood]

Repeal of the 2nd invalidates the Government. Period.

The rule of law is gone altogether. The Congress and the president have refused their Constitutional duty to protect us from invasion.

We have open gang warfare in the streets. We might has well have a civil war over the Second Amendment and open borders... I'm ready...

[azhenfud]

"Rather than debating the meaning of the Second Amendment, I think the appropriate debate is whether we want a Second Amendment,"

The Constitutional exercise is the right to own or not to own a weapon. I believe Wittes' debate is a waste of time and breath as I believe the American majority still consider the Constitutional right to bear arms fundamental in their defense of liberty. I do.

[HEY4QDEMS]

Wittes said the Second Amendment guarantee of the right to bear arms meant more when it was crafted more than 200 years ago than it does today. Modern society is "much more ambivalent than they [the founders] were about whether gun ownership really is fundamental to liberty," he said.

I disagree, big time!
The 2nd Amendment is more important today than it ever was.

[SJSAMPLE]

I always find it amazing that some people want to repeal The Second Amendment because some individuals refuse to exercise that right. Meanwhile, the rest of us who exercise that right daily are at risk of having that right infringed into oblivion. I know a number of people who don't vote, don't monitor politics and who refuse to contact their representatives. Should we repeal The First Amendment because some individuals refuse to exercise it? And, for the record, The Second Amendment requires no participation in any organized or unorganized militia. That first, independent and subordinate clause, "A well regulated militia ..", imposes no restrictions nor any requirements upon "the people" in the bearing of arms.

[Wolfie]

Actually, it’s refreshing to hear a leftist just come out and say they just don’t believe in the Constitution and the America of the Founding Fathers.

On the contrary, this guy actually believes in the Constitution. He proposes amending it, rather than pretending that proposed legislation doesn't violate it. Most people just wink at the Constitution, and merrily go on supporting whatever legislation suits their fancy.

[subterfuge]

What is this guy smoking?

I'm guessing he smokes those Clove fags.

[AFPhys]

Actually, instead of the myriad laws attempting to circumvent and restrict our 2nd Amendment rights, he’s accurate in his thinking - this is the correct way to change our Constitution. If there IS sufficient political force and will to repeal the 2nd Amendment, that is exactly what should be done.

I applaud his correct understanding of our Constitution.

I will ALWAYS be on the other side of the issue as to whether it should be repealed.

[tcostell]

I disagree. I think everything he says is absolutely true. Like it or not, decades of anti-gun training from universities has made us much more ambivalent on the issue. And if you believe as many liberals do, that it's no longer essential, then changing the constituion is the way to go.

As statement of fact, what he says is really indisputable IMHO. The only issue is that he's wrong about it not being essential to the protection of liberty.

[Beagle8U]

“I think this should be the Dem platform, “Repeal the 2nd Amendment””

It is, along with the Ghouliani and Romney platform. They just refuse to write in down in print.

The left can’t get what they want until they control both parties and that is why the Three Stooges are being hoisted up as leading our party.

[shekkian]

This guy is more than welcome to come try to take my guns away from me.

[olezip]

Wittes said the Second Amendment guarantee of the right to bear arms meant more when it was crafted more than 200 years ago than it does today. Modern society is "much more ambivalent than they [the founders] were about whether gun ownership really is fundamental to liberty," he said.

This ignoramus does not understand the context or purpose of the Second Amendment. It is just as valid today as it was 200 years ago!

[SCHROLL]

this goes lockstep with the left’s wanting to do away with the electoral college also. Their goal is mob rule with no way to fight it.

[Noumenon]

"opponents of gun ownership should set their sights on repealing the amendment altogether."

Gun owners will set their sights on treasonous politicians and academics should this come to pass.

[eyedigress]

At least he knows what the 2nd amendment means. Of course the spin doctors will say he’s crazy and only the National Guard can have guns. He has just picked a fight with his own anti-gun weinies.

[383rr]

“The Second Amendment guarantees the right of an individual to own guns and for that reason should be repealed, according to a legal affairs analyst who opposes gun ownership.”

Ping!

[grey_whiskers]

Anti-gun-nut SARCASM TORPEDO^TM ARMED. FIRE!!

Like shooting fish in a barrel...!

[hoosierham]

He is constitutionaly speaking,correct.Enshrined in our COnstitution is the means of changing it and the government.If the process was followed correctly and the 2nd repealed ,gun confiscation would follow quickly.

I hold little faith in the view of large numbers of armed resisters since so very few could afford to lose their weekly paychecks .And I fear that if the Democrats actually said "elect us and we will repeal the 2nd admendment,so that government can take those dangerous guns off the street and make it safe for the children" most women would vote for them.

[Pharmboy]

Great plan! Let ‘em try...