We’re done arguing about gun safety – and we’re going to fight for the common-sense reforms the overwhelming majority of Americans want.
August 12, 2017
Read the massive speech Elizabeth Warren gave ripping moderate Democrats at Netroots Nation
[We’ve been done arguing for years. I’ve been voting, training new shooters, buying guns and ammo, getting training, practicing, and competing. Your move Senator.—Joe]
She’s definitely from Massachusetts — a state that until recently had large signs at the state line welcoming visitors with the words “Massachusetts gun law — mandatory 1 year prison sentence” (or something along those lines).
How far Massachusetts has fallen from the days when attempts to disarm the people triggered an armed rebellion — or the days when the proposed 2nd Amendment was received with the (correct) observation that it was redundant.
I think Leftists view “common-sense gun laws” the way alcoholics view “social drinking”. Some people only take a drink on social occasions, and others never go through a day without quite a bit of social drinking. Conservatives look to apply common sense to laws, and Leftists haven’t met a restriction yet that isn’t a common-sense gun law.
“Common sense gun laws” is a code word for “total confiscation”.
I recently found out that there’s a well known organization that also by its official policy supports “common sense gun laws” — the ACLU. This explains why the ACLU only defends 10% of the Bill of Rights.
I am not sure that it is even 10% these days. There is always the 3A which no one objects to but it doesn’t get litigated much.
I read the transcript of the entire speech.
It never ceases to amaze me how delusional leftists can be and how many lies they can fit into relatively few words.
It takes real political skill to weave multiple lies ito a speech like that in such a way that the useful idiots will buy them all and cheer you on.
Not really. All it requires is learning the half dozen required buzzwords. Beyond that, neither skill nor intelligence are needed (or for that matter, particularly desirable).
So is she for the common sense removal of suppresors from the NFA? Most people want that.
My thought exactly.
So she is for removing onerous, confusing, and often contradictory regulations and making everyone’s lives a little easier and less legally risky?
I mean, that WOULD be “common-sense”!
Bring it, biotch!
That ship sailed on 1791 with the ratification of the BOR.
So, what your telling us, Elizabeth Warren, is that you are willing to break your oath of office and pledge to support the Constitution, all of it, including the 2A.
P.S. The BOR is not subject to your fake “overwhelming majority” and is instead only accessible via the Amendment Process. So, unless you are going about it via the right channels, you need to STFU.
And even IF she’s going about it via the “right channels”, she STILL needs to STFU.
2A, per SCOTUS, codifies and protects a pre-existing right, which is not in any way dependent on its inclusion in the BoR, or even on the Constitution itself.
That it was included just means the Founders held it in high-enough regard to specifically enumerate it and exempt it from government authority; it does not imply that the Constitution or BoR is meant to grant the right.
True, and the Supreme Court agrees with you (at least in part) because five of the current members are honest enough and just sufficiently obedient to their oath to do so. But four do not have even that minimal level of honesty and integrity, and there are lots more waiting in the wings, ready to spring in to action as soon as the wrong politicians get the power to nominate and confirm them. Relying on the courts to enforce the Constitution is a fool’s game. Once in a blue moon it works, but for the most part the courts have no more respect for the plain English words of the Constitution than any other politician, and haven’t since the ink on it dried.