Random thought of the day Posted on February 3, 2018 by Joe Have you ever noticed that “progressives”, with their claims the 2nd Amendment only protects muzzle loaders, are less than tolerant about progress in firearm technology? Like this:Like Loading... Related Share
When confronted with that argument I always ask then if I have the right to carry the weapons of the day [the 2nd Amendment was ratified] – including a muzzle loader with bayonet, long bow, puckle gun, halberd, battle axe, cavalry sabre, or spear – anywhere I want including into a courthouse, school, post office, federal office, hospital, or into any private business which may not choose to discriminate based on other constitutionally protected rights. Their logic quickly breaks down.
I’m not sure why this argument even exists. Like our founding fathers were too fsking stupid to realize science, invention, and engineering would take place in the future. In that case I’m fairly certain they didn’t anticipate how fake and stupid network news has become. Clearly they never imagined any more powerful news medium than the town crier and a newspaper press.
But it has been held in Supreme Court decisions that the founding fathers were smart enough to foresee advances in communications so the First Amendment protected radio, television and modern news media, which makes the assertion of a 1790 limitation on the Second Amendment even more amazingly stupid.
And let’s not mention that the search and seizure laws have incorporated the consideration of modern technologies into the reasonableness of a search.
Perhaps the question should be asked of them if the 1st Amendment only covers the use of manual paper and ink printing presses. It would be entertaining to watch progressives debate that one within their own community if they were honest in their claim that the Constitution and Bill of Rights are truly remnants of a bygone white male centric past. When a movement is blinded by hate and fear, there never is any logic and the blindness is astoundingly comprehensive.
Certainly that’s a cute/coy question. “Progressive”, however, as applied to the political movement, is spelled with an upper case “P” and has a very specific, very targeted meaning. “Progressive” in that sense is used in contrast to “precipitous”.
The Marxist/communist/authoritarian mindset naturally had to rule the world, but there were differing opinions about how best to achieve that end. One method was violent revolution, and other was a patient, slow, incremental (“progressive”) corruption of the laws of liberty. Thus was born the Progressive Movement.
And so your joke, though very cute and and all, ignores the difference between “progressive” as the ignorant sheep see it (advocating progress toward new and better things and systems), and “Progressive” in its political meaning which is “slow, incremental corruption paving a long road to totalitarianism, Eugenics, mass destruction, slavery and mass death”.
Well, I’m pretty sure the Founders never imagined electronically coded, personalized “smart guns.”
Of course, they leave out the Giradoni air rifle with its 20 round magazine and replaceable air tanks. President Thomas Jefferson even sent one with Lewis & Clark.
or the “Pepperbox” repeating “assault” pistol.
“Progressives” have no interest in progress, and “liberals” are not concerned with liberty.
Progressives are consistent only in their inconsistency. If they didn’t have double standards, they’d have no standards at all.