- This topic has 7 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated 2 years, 8 months ago by
.
-
Topic
-
There he was on Sunday’s “Meet the Press,” his dental work complete and ear hair properly trimmed, to claim his plan to confiscate from law-abiding citizens by force and under penalty of law their AR-15s was in fact constitutional under the Constitution’s Commerce clause. As the Washington Free Beacon reported:
“This is something that we’re able to do through the Commerce Clause, and this is something that is not prevented from, wouldn’t prevent the United States from doing by the Second Amendment,” O’Rourke told host Chuck Todd. “So this is constitutionally sound.”
No it is not. It is not even common-sense sound. The writers of the Constitution, fresh from a war using guns to overthrow British tyranny and oppressive government, put the Second Amendment in the Bill of Rights to protect the other nine. There is no asterisk after the words “shall notbe infringed.” The power to regulate interstate commerce, of which guns may be a part, is not the power to neuter the right to keep and bear arms.
Gun grabbers such as O’Rourke insist the AR-15 is a weapon of war, not intended to be protected by the Second Amendment for personal protection.
When the Constitution was written, both the government and the people had the same weapon — the musket — which could be called the semi-automatic weapon, the AR-15, of its day, capable of being used both in war and for personal protection. The Second Amendment did not come with an asterisk nor is any of our rights enshrined in the Constitution in any way dependent on technology. The argument that the Second Amendment does not protect the right to bear an M-1 Abrams tank is valid. But tanks are designed to be used against other tanks. Guns that fire bullets one at a time such as the AR-15 are useful both in war and peace and are in fact in “common use” by the civilian population of the United States.
Former Navy SEAL Dean Raso is quoted in the Federalist as describing the AR-15 as the ideal defensive weapon against heavily armed predators:
In the wake of the Orlando terrorist attack, the deadliest strike on U.S. soil since 9/11, Democratic lawmakers and progressive activists have responded by attempting to limit access to firearms — particularly the AR-15, which was incorrectly reported as the weapon the terrorist used to kill at least 49 people and injure another 53.
In a new video, former Navy SEAL Dom Raso explains why the AR-15, the most popular rifle in the country, gives Americans the best chance of surviving in an age of terror.
Choosing to defend one’s home with an AR-15 is a commonsense choice, as it is powerful, accurate, and easy to shoot, Raso said.
Gun control legislation doesn’t stop terror attacks,
Read more: https://www.americanthinker.com/articles/2019/09/betos_gun_grab_and_constitution_day.html#ixzz5zmb31L8l
Follow us: @AmericanThinker on Twitter | AmericanThinker on Facebook
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.