Dammit!
A gun is the LEAST of my worries!!!
Posted on 04/11/2019 8:20:41 PM PDT by Olog-hai
Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris says she owns a gun and called it a “false choice” that the only two gun control options are complete, unrestricted access or a desire to seize everyone’s guns.
The senator from California told reporters after a campaign event in Iowa that she is a gun owner.
She says, “I own a gun for probably the reason that a lot of people do: for personal safety.” …
(Excerpt) Read more at apnews.com ...
Hopefully, not in Tennessee either. But, if things start going sideways, Alabama seems to be doing things that make sense.
Well; that would, statically; help with her 'safety'; right?
A gun is the LEAST of my worries!!!
...protecting others who HAVE no gun.
I love that GIF.
L
So Ms Willie Brown is okay for everyone to own a gun, or just the Elites? I know the answer...
Next she will claim she was listening to Tupac and Snoop when she bought it.
Nice clip. So at least Kamala knows that WE know she is a whore. That makes me smile haha.
Raid her house with a SWAT Team and make sure she doesn’t have any illegal magazines or “cop killer” bullets.
She was the AG of CA so she had a CA CC even after she was in office. My friend was a CA judge retired and he had one.
She follows the Hollywood/Bloomberg line on this. “Guns for me but not for Thee”.
After that, we might have to swat her house with a Raid team to get rid of the cooties.
“...and shooting anyone that wears a red coat, tall hat, and has a British accent...”
Redcoats haven’t been a problem here for quite some time. It’s Antifas, muzzies, and entitled ones that make necessary the bearing of arms at all times.
As for militia duties, all I can come up with is range time with a few trusted friends. We patriots don’t have a big picture organization just yet.
The last king of Thailand was born in Cambridge MA, was he a natural born citizen eligible to be President?
As we found out during the Kenyanesian Usurpation, there is no mechanism to keep the ineligible from running.
The secretaries of state of the states is who should be requiring proof of eligibility.
Possibly.
I was stationed in Bangkok 61-63 and had been near the king during a few public activities.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bhumibol_Adulyadej
Yeah, I’m sure the founders meant to include foreign royalty......./s
I find it hard to discern what they meant; when I only have what they wrote to go by.
When developing a new U.S. Constitution for the United States of America, Alexander Hamilton submitted a suggested draft on June 18, 1787. In addition, he also submitted to the framers a proposal for the qualification requirements in Article II as to the necessary Citizenship status for the office of President and Commander in Chief of the Military.
Alexander Hamilton’s suggested presidential eligibility clause:
No person shall be eligible to the office of President of the United States unless he be now a Citizen of one of the States, or hereafter be born a Citizen of the United States.
Many of the founders and framers expressed fear of foreign influence on the person who would in the future serve as President of the United States since this particular office was singularly and uniquely powerful under the proposed new Constitution. This question of foreign influence was elevated when John Jay considered the additional power granted to the Presidency during times of war, that is when he serves as Commander in Chief of the military. Jay felt strongly that whoever served as President and Commander In Chief during times of war must owe their sole allegiance to and only to the United States.
Because this fear of foreign influence on a future President and Commander in Chief was strongly felt, Jay took it upon himself to draft a letter to General George Washington, the presiding officer of the Constitutional Convention, recommending/hinting that the framers should strengthen the Citizenship requirements for the office of the President.
John Jay was an avid reader and proponent of natural law and particularly Vattel’s codification of natural law and the Law of Nations. In his letter to Washington he said that the Citizenship requirement for the office of the commander of our armies should contain a “strong check” against foreign influence and he recommended to Washington that the command of the military be open only to a “natural born Citizen”. Thus Jay did not agree that simply being a “born Citizen” was sufficient enough protection from foreign influence in the singular most powerful office in the new form of government. Rather, Jay wanted to make sure the President and Commander In Chief owed his allegiance solely to the United States of America. He wanted another adjective added to the eligibility clause, i.e., ‘natural’. And that word ‘natural’ goes to the Citizenship status of one’s parents via natural law.
Below is the relevant change to Hamilton’s proposed language detailed in Jay’s letter written to George Washington dated 25 July 1787:
Permit me to hint, whether it would be wise and seasonable to provide a strong check to the admission of Foreigners into the administration of our national Government; and to declare expressly that the Command in Chief of the American army shall not be given to nor devolve on, any but a natural born Citizen.
See a transcription of Jay’s letter to Washington at this link.
Upon receiving Jay’s letter, General Washington passed on the recommendation to the convention where it was adopted in the final draft. Thus Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of the U.S. Constitution, the fundamental law of our nation reads:
Article II, Section 1, Clause 5 of U.S. Constitution as adopted 17 September 1787:
No Person except a natural born Citizen, or a Citizen of the United States, at the time of the Adoption of this Constitution, shall be eligible to the Office of President; neither shall any person be eligible to that Office who shall not have attained to the Age of thirty five Years, and been fourteen Years a Resident within the United States.
There you have the crux of the issue now before the nation and the answer.
Hamilton’s suggested presidential citizenship eligibility requirement was that a Citizen simply had to be ‘born a Citizen’ of the USA, i.e., a Citizen by Birth. But that citizenship status was overwhelmingly rejected by the framers as insufficient. Instead of allowing any person “born a citizen” to be President and Commander of the military, the framers chose to adopt the more stringent requirement recommended by John Jay, i.e., requiring the Citizen to be a “natural born Citizen“, to block any chance of future Presidents owing allegiance to other foreign nations or claims on their allegiance at birth from becoming President and Commander of the Military.. Therefore, the President of the United States must be a “natural born citizen” with unity of citizenship and sole allegiance to the United States at birth
http://www.art2superpac.com/issues.html
Of course I was just mimicking some of the crap that leftists like her spout all the time...
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.