FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
Posted on 06/07/2022 5:49:54 AM PDT by SJackson
Nope.
Now if she only understood the phrase natural born citizen was included to exclude foreigners (including those born here to foreign parents) from being President.......
Sun Tsu has a famous quote that stated the ultimate warrior is the one who gets their enemy to choose not to fight.
This is what the criminal democrats are trying to be by having us give up our weapons.
NO, but we can have a police state.
I don’t agree with everything she says, which is hardly surprising.
I DEFINITELY agree with her main thesis, though, and I’m glad to see her come over to the right side of things.
Welcome to the right side, Dr. Wolf.
“She should be encouraged”
Then she needs to take the next step.....a step that will make most lib heads explode.....and if hers doesn’t then she is truly headed in the right direction.
The answer isn’t less guns....it’s MORE. In properly trained hands in the right places a lot of this mass shooting crap stops.
There’s a reason you rarely hear of robberies at pawn shops and gun stores....the employees usually open carry inside the business.
What a concept right?
She’s been red pilled over the last couple years. Amazing to see her transformation, when at the same time spineless republicans rush to compromise with democrats on gun control.
She is improving, but still has a ways to go. She thinks it’s ok that she is required to take a class, get a permit, and provide four references, just to buy a handgun.
I’ve always considered myself to be a classical liberal.
“The fact that this book was originally written with only the British public in mind does not appear to have seriously affected its intelligibility for the American reader. But there is one point of phraseology which I ought to explain here to forestall any misunderstanding. I use throughout the term “liberal” in the original, nineteenth-century sense in which it is still current in Britain. In current American usage it often means very nearly the opposite of this. It has been part of the camouflage of leftish movements in this country, helped by the muddleheadedness of many who really believe in liberty, that “liberal” has come to mean the advocacy of almost every kind of government control. I am still puzzled why those in the United States who truly believe in liberty should not only have allowed the left to appropriate this almost indispensable term but should even have assisted by beginning to use it themselves as a term of opprobrium. This seems to be particularly regrettable because of the consequent tendency of many true liberals to describe themselves as conservatives.
It is true, of course, that in the struggle against the believers in the all-powerful state the true liberal must sometimes make common cause with the conservative, and in some circumstances, as in contemporary Britain, he has hardly any other way of actively working for his ideals. But true liberalism is still distinct from conservatism, and there is danger in the two being confused. Conservatism, though a necessary element in any stable society, is not a social program; in its paternalistic, nationalistic, and power-adorning tendencies it is often closer to socialism than true liberalism; and with its traditionalistic, anti-intellectual, and often mystical propensities it will never, except in short periods of disillusionment, appeal to the young and all those others who believe that some changes are desirable if this world is to become a better place. A conservative movement, by its very nature, is bound to be a defender of established privilege and to lean on the power of government for the protection of privilege. The essence of the liberal position, however, is the denial of all privilege, if privilege is understood in its proper and original meaning of the state granting and protecting rights to some which are not available on equal terms to others.”(1)
“I use the term “liberal” in the nineteenth-century sense of limited government and free markets, not in the corrupted sense it has acquired in the United States, in which it means almost the opposite.” (2)
(1) Entire passage from The Road to Serfdom, F. A. Hayek, 1956 preface.
(2) this quote from the 1994 introduction by Milton Friedman.
Everything after the “but” is “get a gun, know how to use it, be willing to use it, against the government.”
It’s not a call for revolution. It is a call that the public should be able to assert itself with force of violence. Otherwise the government will harm the people more than it already has and does.
FReepmail me if you want to be added to or deleted from the list.
More 2nd Amendment related articles on FR's Bang List.
She’s a rare exception - maye one that proves the rule that loiberals are tyrants witing to impose their way by force of violence. For your own good.
Liberals and government view the people as chattel to be cared for, managed, expolited, and harvested.
When people with guns want to tyrannize you, muzzle you, imprison you, or line you on the edge of a ditch and machine gun you, not having guns yourself is not an option.
Period. End of discussion.
"...Without the brilliantly-conceived and clearly-worded Second Amendment, without the deterrent to state and transnational violence of responsible, lawful, careful and defensive firearms ownership in the United States of America, it is clear that nothing at all will save our citizens from the current fates of the people of China, Australia and Canada; including the children; who are facing — unarmed, defenseless as their parents sadly are — even worse fates, perhaps, still ahead..."
She sees this. She sounds like she understands.
LOL! Yeah, she’s evolved a bit over the past several years. I saw her on Tucker not too long ago and was also WTAF? 🤣
If you watch Steve Bannon’s War Room, she’s a frequent guest and you could see the beginnings of her getting red pilled, during the pandemic she was making predictions about all kind of government overreach that mostly turned out to be true.
She’s been a really vocal critic of Fauci and all the lies and deceptions of the Government.
Nope.
Reading that last paragraph, I do believe she understands the root of the issue.
I am perfectly willing to accept (from a 2nd Amendment perspective) with open arms anyone on the Left who understands that the 2nd Amendment isn’t for hunting, target shooting, or anything else along those lines.
On one level, it is for people to be able to protect themselves from criminal citizens but at the most fundamental level, it is to allow citizens to protect themselves from a tyrannical government.
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.