# Ok...time to open up the McDonald decision



## On a call (Mar 3, 2010)

Who benefits from the McDonald decision? Also, I unload on a Fudd. First the firearms, then the liberty. 
Why Democrats, of course.

Here's the first few paragraphs of the Politico story:

When the Supreme Court extended the individual right to own a gun Monday, it handed Second Amendment advocates - many of whom are at home in the GOP - one of their most significant legal victories ever.

But who won the day in politics? The Democrats.

For them, the court's groundbreaking decision could't have been more beneficial to the cause in November. Now, Democratic candidates across the map figure they have one less issue to worry about on the campaign trail. And they won't have to defend Republican attacks over gun rights and an angry, energized base of gun owners.

"It removes guns as a political issue because everyone now agrees that the Second Amendment is an individual right, and everybody agrees that it's subject to regulation," said Lanae Erickson, deputy director of the culture program at centrist think tank Third Way.

A House Democratic aide agreed that the court's decision removed a potentially combustible element from the mix.

"The Supreme Court ruled here that you have a fundamental right to own and bear arms, and that means at the national level it's harder - whether it's Republicans or whether it's the [National Rifle Association] - to throw that claim out: If Democrats are in charge. they're going to come get your guns," said the aide. "It pretty much took that off the table."

"Everybody agrees that it's subject to regulation," huh? Well, not everybody.

Yesterday I had a bit of verbal tussle with a guy in a gun shop who was enthused over McDonald. He was waxing eloquent about how "the NRA" had saved "our Second Amendment rights." After I set him straight about the odious nature of the NRA's real actions in this case versus the Second Amendment Foundation, he admitted he hadn't known that. He just assumed that the NRA MUST have been behind the legal challenge, because, well, they were the NRA and wasn't that what they did?

Then he screwed up and offered this gem: "Well, at least the Supreme Court has guaranteed our Second Amendment rights."

I unloaded on him in words to this effect:

"Look, your right to self-defense, your right to arms, is natural and God-given. The most that any scrap of paper can do is codify that fact. The Second Amendment doesn't "guarantee" anything. The Supreme Court doesn't "guarantee" anything. Do you know what does?"

"God?" he offered.

"No, not God. The rights come from God but they're not guaranteed by Him."

I snatched a rifle off the display rack in the middle of the shop and held it at port arms.

"This. This, and millions like it in the hands of citizens willing to use them to defend their liberty and property against free-lance criminals or tyrannical governments. It is those millions of rifles and the will to use them that secures our liberties in this country. First comes the military fact of the firearms in the hands of citizens, then follows the legal niceties of the liberty recognized after the fact by politicians. Without the one, tyrants don't respect the other. Remember that."

And without another word, I replaced the rifle in the rack, picked up my cane and gimped out of the store.

The McDonald decision, like the Heller decision before it, means exactly squat in the grand scheme of things. Liberty is secured by free men who are willing to kill for it and who hold the means to accomplish that in their own hands.

Everything else is eyewash.

What are your thoughts ??


----------



## wilded (Feb 10, 2010)

Amen. JMHO


----------



## youngdon (Mar 10, 2010)

There you go! The real threat will come after this election once we let them stay in power they'll GIVE it to us (sorry for the graphic reference).


----------



## On a call (Mar 3, 2010)

I am sorry to say...I agree.

However when the Consitution is threatened with new world order, I will be standing with my God given right.


----------



## youngdon (Mar 10, 2010)

That'll be me at your back.


----------



## El Gato Loco (Jan 15, 2010)

On a call said:


> I am sorry to say...I agree.
> 
> However when the Consitution is threatened with new world order, I will be standing with my God given right.


It's been threatened, and started with Bush's little Patriot Act. We continue to SURRENDER our rights to them. In the name of national security, personal protection, etc.

I'm not a big fan of the Arizona law either because it can and will come back on us. No doubt, SOMETHING needs to be done, but giving cops the authority to shout "Show me your papers!" to everyone they see is NOT the answer. Not unless we want the US to become Nazi Germany.

We continue to transfer power back to the government, and then complain that our rights are being stripped from us. I don't get it! They aren't being stripped, we're surrendering them!


----------



## On a call (Mar 3, 2010)

Chris Miller said:


> It's been threatened, and started with Bush's little Patriot Act. We continue to SURRENDER our rights to them. In the name of national security, personal protection, etc.
> 
> I'm not a big fan of the Arizona law either because it can and will come back on us. No doubt, SOMETHING needs to be done, but giving cops the authority to shout "Show me your papers!" to everyone they see is NOT the answer. Not unless we want the US to become Nazi Germany.
> 
> We continue to transfer power back to the government, and then complain that our rights are being stripped from us. I don't get it! They aren't being stripped, we're surrendering them!


Honestly, It has been writen.

We will have to suffer maybe not now but soon. I beleive we are living in end times and as I see things happening and unfolding I know there is fuel being added to the fire.

And then we have to deal with foreign threat...we are very close to war with Iran.

We are however still very blessed. Count them and know where they came.


----------



## tunered (Feb 5, 2010)

Chris Miller said:


> It's been threatened, and started with Bush's little Patriot Act. We continue to SURRENDER our rights to them. In the name of national security, personal protection, etc.
> 
> I'm not a big fan of the Arizona law either because it can and will come back on us. No doubt, SOMETHING needs to be done, but giving cops the authority to shout "Show me your papers!" to everyone they see is NOT the answer. Not unless we want the US to become Nazi Germany.
> 
> We continue to transfer power back to the government, and then complain that our rights are being stripped from us. I don't get it! They aren't being stripped, we're surrendering them!


Criss, You and lots of others dont understand the AZ law, it dont work the way you say, their law and the federal law is real close word for word, except the feds dont care, thats why this will go nowhere, just Obamas way of taking up for them, praying for their support, Illegal is just that, no different than 20 years ago. ed


----------



## 525fittertct (Mar 7, 2010)

Taking my guns not happening. But the arizona thing i have a different opinion on this, when we are in mexico you just might not make it back because either the federalies and the criminals(cartele) are really the only ones that have guns. Iv'e had to give up a chunk of change one time when the police(federallies) stopped me and including a pair of custom made boots about 1800 dollars total. My wife is latina(and she let me know when i met here she's a natural born american citizen) and when we go to arizona she has to carry her birth certificate drivers licence and social security card with her if we get stopped and asked for her papers. Now building a longer fence isn't going to do any more good than the one thats there now. And the cost of that fence is heck alot more than a bullet. We can't go down there and take it over like the illegals have here and there all costing us tax payers money. So who's going to something about it? The politicians ya right alls thats happening there is keeping or getting a job that pays way to much for sitting on there buts talking about what needs to be done, and not getting it done. Yes they are human beings and from a different country. But the real illegals was or ansesters who took from the indians and look how that turnened out not good for them. We also took most of the mexican ground that we live in here in the west from mexico. So who's in the wrong. If your born here fight to keep this country ours because if we don't the forces that have the power is gonna take everything whether we like it or not. And i'm not going to give up that easy. I recently purchased a poster out on the reservation north of vegas that has geronimo and decsendants in the photo and it reads and i quote "fighting illegal imigration since 1492" and it is so true. But another question i have whos going to pick the fruits and vegetables that we grow in the west. I've chopped weeds in the cotton fields, pitched watermelons, and worked in the packing plants at one time or another in my life and i don't know about you all but if need be i'd do it again to support my 3 kids and my wife, so my question is would the rest of the country thats on food stamps and goverment support are they gonna do the job heck no they won't i see it every day on the corners with a sign in hand and now the illegals are playing the game also, i'm not picking on them but we need to take back the work and step up no matter how hard the work is. Jobs are scarce right now but if you want to work you'll get it done to support who depends on you. So america there are no excuses we just need to do the jobs we turn our noses up at. And arizona unemployement is only like 250 a week and i cant live on what i make here in vegas being unemployed i drive 375 miles one way to az to do side jobs to make ends meat. You take there jobs away from them and they will move out. Arkansas has chicken plants out there and i've seen the raids on the plants and the bus loads going back toward mexico but the money they make they are back in a couple of weeks if not days so if they can survive like that we have to play one step ahead of them. And a bullet being put in the air on the border is cheaper than what this contry spends on sending them back than not just getting the job done at the border. And it's not just mexicans it's all races of other countries because they know that the border is week and they keep coming. So america put a stop to it know and if you dont then you have nothing to say about what goes on. And god bless the troops who have died in battle, and are at battle so i can keep my freedom just as you do. I'll probably get shut down on this site but you know what, i'm an american and thats a constitutional right (like the gun issue) it's called freedom of speech. Think long and hard america it's only gonna get worse if you don't act instead of just talk!


----------



## tunered (Feb 5, 2010)

Here in my state [Ohio] A game warden is allowed to trespass if they believe a hunting crime is being commited somewhere past your property and ask the hunters for their licence, but we cant ask people for their id and see if they are here legally, Obama hates America, he wants the US tax payers to pay their way too. ed


----------



## 525fittertct (Mar 7, 2010)

i agree they promise the world and get what they need for themselves and not for the people because everyone of them is only looking out for themselves and not the good of the nation. just like oboma said i didnt come here and discurage others from spending the tax payers money here in vegas and did you know when he flies in here he lands at the mccarren airport then airforce one starts back up leaves the airport and as soon as they get in the air the plane lands just a few miles away at nellis airforce base. now im no rocket scientist but how much of a waste is the fuel that plane uses just to drop him off then relocate? so i feel he's a liar on blowing the tax payers money' now you know if he was footing the bill on the fuel airforce one would only be used in serious situations when need. i read some where there was a service man (military) said he would not deploye until obama could show proof of his citizenship. they said he would be court marshalled if he didn't deploye and he said well in the best interest of this country so be it. now that man is a true, solid, 100% american in my book. haven't heard anything else since and ive been serching for more imformation. and the spy thing hey its one for one on trade not four for ten! come on now. unless thats all they had incarsarated and then they get off scott free in the united states and who to say there families that get to stay here dont know anything!







if you can't stand for this flag and all who have been lost then get the heck out and if you won't leave then let me help you!


----------



## 525fittertct (Mar 7, 2010)

tunered, i feel he's an illegal and its been a contraversy since the ? been asked about his citizenship. and he feels all the illegals will stand behind him when it comes down too it but there out for themselve just as he is and when the time comes he'll be all alone.


----------



## 525fittertct (Mar 7, 2010)

if he hates it so bad then he needs to leave! but since he's been in office he sure has gotton gray hairs up on the old head so the health thing could come into play or we just can't afford to pay for the hair dye(the usa ). lol


----------



## tunered (Feb 5, 2010)

525fittertct said:


> tunered, i feel he's an illegal and its been a contraversy since the ? been asked about his citizenship. and he feels all the illegals will stand behind him when it comes down too it but there out for themselve just as he is and when the time comes he'll be all alone.


I think you are on to something, none too soon to suit me. One more rant, where in the h ll are all the war protesters, every day when Bush was pres thats all you heard and seen, you dont reckon them two face Dems had anything to do with that do you???? ed


----------



## MudEngineer (Jul 12, 2010)

When a guy will spend what is now approaching $2 million in legal fees to avoid having to produce a document that would cost him $18, then you know *[Excuse my language.... I have a limited vocabulary]* well he most likely can't produce that document or he would have done it long ago. Why those people in Congress and the Senate don't demand that a real birth certificate be produced is beyond me. They have no balls, but at least the females have an excuse!


----------

