That hasn't always been the case. After the Oklahoma City bombing the NRA tried to distance itself from its insurrectionist rhetoric and reinvent itself as an organization that supported some kind of civil rights movement for white Christian men. That's why they hired Charlton Heston with all his talk of culture wars.
that's completely wrong. the bill of rights reiterated negative restrictions on the federal government.
another incorrect claim. the NRA has always supported the rights of all lawful citizens to KBA. Indeed the NRA advocated freed slaves being armed. Gun control started as a racist attack on freed blacks "Papists" and others that Democrats wanted disarmed. I have been an NRA member for 50 years now and your claims are specious
His incorrect argument is that the constitution would not have been adopted without the bill of rights and since the constitution gave the federal government more power than it would have had with just the articles of confederation, the bill of rights empowered the federal government. It's circular thinking with no merit. it's like saying seat belts make a race car go faster because with a seat belt the driver is less worried about crashing and will drive faster.
hmmm how many off those arrested in association with the June 6 incident were armed? armed insurrection? this is such a flood of BS, inaccuracies, a demonstration of ignorance that it woud a long point by point shredding.Nothing like an idiot impressed with own ignorance; it makes him dangerous.fill Congress with his sort and I’d arm to rebell.
in this country-one you complain about constantly concerning the access to firearms-if people were serious about being violent or "overthrowing" a government protected by armed police, they would have been packing serious heat. It's like charging someone for stealing lumber because they snuck into a forest with a pocket knife rather than a chain saw
Raskin isn't stupid, he's just terminally dishonest. He puts his socialist control freak political agenda over what he knows the law is and what the constitution says.
From "How the NRA Rewrote the Second Amendment": "From 1888, when law review articles first were indexed, through 1959, every single one on the Second Amendment concluded it did not guarantee an individual right to a gun. The first to argue otherwise, written by a William and Mary law student named Stuart R. Hays, appeared in 1960. He began by citing an article in the NRA’s American Rifleman magazine and argued that the amendment enforced a 'right of revolution,' of which the Southern states availed themselves during what the author called 'The War Between the States.' "At first, only a few articles echoed that view. Then, starting in the late 1970s, a squad of attorneys and professors began to churn out law review submissions, dozens of them, at a prodigious rate. Funds—much of them from the NRA—flowed freely. An essay contest, grants to write book reviews, the creation of 'Academics for the Second Amendment,' all followed. In 2003, the NRA Foundation provided $1 million to endow the Patrick Henry professorship in constitutional law and the Second Amendment at George Mason University Law School. "This fusillade of scholarship and pseudo-scholarship insisted that the traditional view—shared by courts and historians—was wrong. There had been a colossal constitutional mistake. Two centuries of legal consensus, they argued, must be overturned." https://www.politico.com/magazine/story/2014/05/nra-guns-second-amendment-106856/
yeah the racist left wanted the second amendment to not prevent racist gun laws designed to disarm the freed blacks. there was no scholarship before the FDR nonsense that claimed the second was something other than a negative restriction on a federal government that was never given any proper power to regulate or restrict what arms private citizens could own. This TWO CENTURIES OF LEGAL PRECEDENT IS A COMPLETE BALD FACED BIT OF BULLSHIT. all one has to do is read the writings of St George Tucker, Rawls Justice Story and the CRUIKSHANK opinion in the 1870s to know that the collective "rights" garbage didn't appear until decades later. the guy who wrote the crap-Waldman is a hard left propagandist who worked as a speech writer for Clinton and a well known political hack
And they knew there would be “mags” to detect firearms and had a store of firearms ready for if those were inactivated
you are correct of course. The dishonesty and blatant blind bias is dripping. But, mo matter, neigh there he no the Dems despite their attempt at subverting the Constitution will get much traction despite decades of trying. And in more recent years where they have had some impact, look at the result in places like Chicago, LA, SanFrancisco or Portland; places you wasn’t to live? Really?
Well, you had one sentenced the other day for firing off a gun in that crowd https://www.justice.gov/usao-dc/pr/...onths since,The investigation remains ongoing. https://www.thefederalcriminalattorneys.com/assault-on-a-federal-0fficer
So is this guy raskin willing to put his money where his mouth is and make sure that he or none of the people around him have a gun? Of course not, he's so very important his protection warrants a gun but us little peons are not nearly as important as he is so we don't need a gun.
Smart folks can present idiotic things and make them consumable by folks who are looking for conformance. The first question I'd ask is why he relies on armed guards for his safety...
some assume that because the guy went to Harvard law school, he is infallible yet the same people who champion Raskin as a legal scholar pretend Scalia didn't know what he was talking about even though Scalia was first in his class at Harvard, and Raskin was no where near that
he has so much conviction in his ignorance that he must Make up facts to support it; very typical of the anti 2A click and he advocates infringing on other Constitutionally protected rights to achieve his goal
Well Scalia was on the SCOTUS and Heller stands, he Is not on SCOTUS and is pissing publicly into the wind…..game, set, match.
