Attack on New Zealand Mosque
This is another attempt at taking our 2nd Amendment to the dumpster via some proxy event, conspirator controlled, act of human slaughter. The concept of gun ownership is now galvanized into the soft putty of the minds of the impressionable as perpetuating tools of killing, not defense for the family.
NZ farmer John Hart is today's face of globalism albeit possibly unwittingly, making ridiculous comments like this as he surrenders his gun to NZ police on March 17th- "What we've thought of as a useful tool for farming and outdoor life, the semi-automatic rifle, it's not essential. And I realized at that point that the tradeoff for me of having this sometimes useful tool for my convenience really didn't stack up against the danger of it being used to hurt people in the future."
Commie Bernie Sanders on March 20th said "This is what real action to stop gun violence looks like. We must follow New Zealand's lead, take on the NRA and ban the sale and distribution of assault weapons in the United States."
Crooked Commie AOC also on March 20th said "Christchurch happened, and within days New Zealand acted to get weapons of war out of the consumer market."
As long as the Patriarchal system of governance is in control, WE ALL NEED GUNS to defend ourselves from crooks and government. Only a person of ignorance will suggest otherwise. Be intelligent about this.
The world is shrinking and this idea of a global family is entrenched into the minds of those who have succumbed to the last 100 years of brainwashing. Thank goodness not all of us have given in.
However, today, school children, the UN and the Vatican are calling for the abolition of firearms. Some elements of federal government want to abolish all semi-automatic firearms.
2nd Amendment states: A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.
What is the definition of "arms"?
One founding-era thesaurus limited “arms” (as opposed to “weapons”) to “instruments of offence generally made use of in war”- it simply states that all firearms constitute “arms.”
Some have made the argument that only those arms in existence in the 18th century are protected by #2.
We do not interpret constitutional rights that way. Just as #1 protects modern forms of communication, #2 extends prima facie to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.
Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia claims the right to bear arms as a pre-political, natural right. He describes a lawful weapon in Heller vs District of Columbia in 2008; "it is the right to own, carry and use a weapon of the same technological proficiency as those owned by the bad guys and government officials".
Also, there is no limit to the quantity of arms one can own.
Until the current political structure is 180'd-
Until the Constitution of the USA is reinstated-
Until the rule of law replaces the color of law-
Until this destructive Patriarchal system is vacated-
Until all wars have ended-
Until our Republic is restored to it's Original intent, there will be no discussion about the 2nd Amendment.
Believe nothing, believe everything
Stay vigilant!
:Baron- T3