Quote of the day—Jayjaybe

It’s an individual hazard derived from an obsolete premise.

Jayjaybe
February 11, 2018
Referring to the 2nd Amendment in a comment to The showdown over the Concealed Carry Reciprocity Act
[I’m pretty sure they lack any SCOTUS rulings to back up that assertion.

This is what they think of the specific enumerated right to keep and bear arms.—Joe]

3 thoughts on “Quote of the day—Jayjaybe

  1. That’s what they think of the American founding principles, which in turn are in accord with the Ten Commandments.

    It is insane to believe that there is some middle ground, some compromise position, upon which we can all agree, all have some part of what we want, and all live in peace. That idea of “coming together in peace and common interest” (with those who seek only to destroy you) (ecumenism in essence) is one of the more insidious and deadly lies of all time. It is also extremely popular, upheld as the highest of goals.

    Once the truth is compromised however, it is no longer true– Its total defeat is at hand because we’re now only arguing between varying degrees of falsity. We are indeed now all on the same side. “Tradition” can then be upheld at the same time “obsolete premises” are put down, and no one will recognize the hypocrisy.

    America’s failure then has its seed in her compromise from the beginning. America’s Promise has never been fulfilled, and the only way to go while under the guidance of the Spirit of Compromise is down the drain into the sewer. Our compromise, in fact, is the one and only leverage point against us. It gives evil its only authority over us.

    • I was going to say that this is what they think about the First Amendment and the Fourth Amendment as well, but Lyle is much more thorough. The concept of Hate Speech, if actually enshrined into case law will completely swallow any free speech rights that are left, and as the expectation of privacy is eroded with the spread of data all over the internet and the “cloud”, soon any expectation of privacy in one’s home or papers or person will be considered unreasonable and therefore unprotected.

      • The unconstitutional concept of “hate speech” [sic] is, unfortunately, quite thoroughly enshrined in case law already. So it’s not a hypothetical any longer. It’s also part of statute law in a number of states, I’m not sure how many.

Comments are closed.