Posted on 07/02/2009 4:29:52 AM PDT by marktwain
If Arizona's state Legislature, now in session, fulfills its blood-oath bond with the National Rifle Association, the state will become the 41st to legalize carrying concealed handguns into restaurants that serve alcohol. Arizona restaurants oppose the legislation. However, restaurateurs discovered their rights have scant standing when the NRA yelps that gun owners deserve their "rights" and obliging politicians jump.
Long ago when the NRA was founded as an educational rifle owners' and sportsmen's organization, handguns and militant overkill about the Second Amendment had no discernible roles. Then an ultra-conservative element took over and transformed the NRA into a political juggernaut with a war chest of millions of dollars to threaten politicians with defeat if they didn't dance to the NRA tune.
The NRA has rewritten the Second Amendment to be anything it pleases. Where does the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution—"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"—grant unrestricted "rights" to gun owners?
Now the "rights" have been expanded to include concealed guns in restaurants, guns on campus, guns on hips in public and battlefield semi-automatic guns in the family armory, among others. The pastor of the New Bethel Church in Louisville, Ky., asked his congregation to bring guns to the Sunday service, presumably some sort of religious consecration of tools for killing
Is this the "well regulated militia" the Second Amendment calls for?
Most professional law enforcement organizations oppose the growing list of gun "rights" that have made the streets dangerous for police.
The NRA has been shamefully mute in campaigning to debunk the nonsense of wacko rumormongers that President Obama plans to take away their weapons. The wild talk recently touched off a spree of gun purchases across the nation.
Many, many sensible gun owners don't cotton to all these "rights" promoted by the NRA or its political scare tactics. Include me. I'm no anti-gun crusader. I own handguns and while in the service qualified on every infantry bullet weapon through .50 caliber machine gun and since then have fired Gulf War-era weapons.
There's something peculiar about people who're obsessed with packing a concealed handgun for fear they may need to defend themselves in a gunfight in such places as a restaurant. NRA argues it's a matter of self-defense.
If more and more Americans are packing guns, who're the ones that can be trusted and who're the nuts ready to open fire?
How are "restaurateurs" rights violated when they have complete authority to allow or disallow people with guns from coming into their restaurant, where before, they had no choice in the matter?
There are so many fallacies in this article, I will leave it to others to point out more of them.
I agree, the article is Libtard drivel. But obfuscation is the currency of trade for these anti-american creeps, isn’t it?
(Typical liberal M.O.)
“If more and more Americans are packing guns, who’re the ones that can be trusted and who’re the nuts ready to open fire?”
Which of the criminals carrying guns or knives does this moron trust?
-Molon labe.
Yet another Leftist slave Wanna-be, who drools over the idea of a leftist government here, that could do Tianaman Squares and crush dissent of their leftist policies tyhe way that Chavez and the Hardliners in Iran do to thier slave populations.
The author is merely someone who does not trust his fellow citizens.
This is the identifier of a liberal....they do not trust their fellow citizens to carry firearms, to choose what goes in their bodies, to choose the right school, to manage their own health care, or to drive the right cars.
The change from rugged individuals to dependent subjects is well underway in our nation, fostered by people who do not trust others to be as ‘enlightened’ as they are.
Yo, Pat Murphy. What does “shall not be infringed” actually mean?
Compare that to the First Ammendment you so casually abuse.
This rag is from the Sun Valley area ski winter ski.......... a place where tree huggers, animal rights, and all other types of liberals hang out year round. As with all the choice area of any state, it seems to be a magnet for liberals.
did the author even read the amendment... shall not be infringed is pretty obvious...
i stopped reading there, but wanted to stop at the first sentence about the nra being an educational entity.
keep the powder and the power dry...
t
Once again, I screwed it ..... should be “Sun Valley winter ski area” thought It was right. Here come the fruit inspectors!! :O)
Gee, that wouldn't be because of Obama's history of supporting draconian anti-gun laws, and his appointment of blatantly anti-gun sycophants like Eric Holder et all.
Mark
Drunk cowboys are going to shoot your children while they eat their chicken tender meals!
You know, this guy is right... Why would ANYONE ever need a gun to defend themselves in a restaurant?
I know, let's ask Suzzanah Hupp, a survivor of the Luby's massacre in Kileen, TX. I'm sure that she'd have something to say to this booger eating moron, about watching her parents murdered while she realized that by following the law, she was unarmed and unable to defend herself, nor anyone else.
Mark
I see a need for IIT (Idiot Intervention Teams) Go to this guys house, kick in his door and watch him gravel on his knees, begging for his life. Then tell him the truth.
“We’re here to save your life”
That's as far as I cared to go....
Nowhere. God is the one who grants those unrestricted rights to gun owners. The Second Amendment protects those God-given rights. Back to Constitution 101 for you, libtard.
Wonder if they’ve ever published an article entitled First Amendment rights run wild, or Fourth Amendment rights run wild.
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.