Replies

This guy and his ilk do a lot to set back the cause of Second Amendment rights.

No one guy or group of guys or any type of "ilk" can do a damn thing to "set back" the cause of Second Amendment rights. The Second Amendment is written in stone any cannot be violated, period. It doesn't matter what anyone else does. This guy didn't even break any laws.

Menacing someone who has identified himself as a peace officer is a crime in the state of New Jersey.

And the Second Amendment, in case you hadn't noticed, is under incredible pressure from judicial and political activism. You and I may both know that our God-given right to self-defense is not only unalterably guaranteed by the Constitution but also by the unalterable natural law on which that Constitution is based.

These truths mean nothing to the powerful forces that want to take our rights away.

This moron waving a gun in the face of someone who is trying to save his life and property is counterproductive. It makes those who insist on the right to self-defense look like blithering, volatile idiots.

If he wanted to die of smoke inhalation without calling the fire department, more power to him. However, once the fire department got there, he had no right to point a rifle or any other firearm at a firefighter or at any other person without suffering the attendant criminal charges.

No one guy or group of guys or any type of "ilk" can do a damn thing to "set back" the cause of Second Amendment rights. The Second Amendment is written in stone any cannot be violated, period . . .

Brian-dead idiots such as your hero in this story are doing much to set back the cause of the Second Amendment. Activist supreme courts are more than willing and able to interpret the Second Amendment narrowly to restrict and regulate the right to keep and bear arms. Fools such as this give them opportunity reason to ratchet it down more tightly each time.

Go ahead and rage all your want. Praise stupidity. Make it an artform. Irresponsible jackasses such as the kadiddlehopper showcased in this story have nothing to worry from about from me (although if I were all powerful I would exile them to their own island where they could set fire to and burn down as many grass huts as their little pea brains desire). They have plenty to worry about from other citizens and activist justices who aren't nearly as warm and fuzzy about the Second Amendment.

I agree that no law was broken until the lad allegedly pointed a weapon at the fireman. Here the story gets sketchy.

The folks on this thread who are jbarking about the gun owner being a bad Second Amendment example, unsafe in gun storage, etc. are full of crap and themselves examples of what is wrong in this country. kWhat is safe on one situiation is not necessarily so in another. This man's rights are not limited by quantity. He has rights under the BOR to posesses. There is no BOR restriction on quantity any more ther is a restriction on the number of press articles you may write.