Fairfax, VA -(AmmoLand.com)-
At a time when it’s more important than ever to maintain the right of
the American people to keep and bear arms for self-defense, law
professor David S. Cohen is calling for repeal of the Second Amendment.
“Americans’
rights are in mortal danger,” he says, unless Hillary Clinton is
elected president and stacks the Supreme Court with progressive judges.
In the repeatedly discredited rag, Rolling Stone, Cohen writes,
“sometimes we just have to acknowledge that the Founders and the
Constitution are wrong. This is one of those times. . . . The Second
Amendment needs to be repealed because it is outdated, a threat to
liberty and a suicide pact.”
By “outdated,” Cohen means that the Framers of the Bill of Rights were unable to conceive of 19th
century semi-automatic firearm technology. “When the Second Amendment
was adopted in 1791, there were no weapons remotely like the
AR-15 assault rifle (sic),” he said.
However, as the late, great
Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in the Supreme Court’s decision in District
of Columbia v. Heller, “Just as the First Amendment protects modern
forms of communications and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms
of search, the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all
instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in
existence at the time of the founding.”
And in any case, there is
nothing outdated about the underlying principle of the Second Amendment:
to prohibit the government from interfering with the ability of people
to acquire, possess and develop proficiency with arms they might one day
need to defend themselves and their loved ones.
Cohen’s rant is
just one example of an astonishing amount of sheer nonsense that has
filled the Internet since the terrorist attack in Orlando. Anti-gun
politicians, and so-called opinion columnists and TV talking heads – who
pretend to be “experts” on every topic under the sun, but who in
reality know virtually nothing about even one topic – are confidently
calling the AR-15 an “automatic” weapon, a “military” weapon,” and a
“weapon of war,” and telling everyone that the most popular rifle in
America should be banned.
Of course, the First Amendment protects
the right of pundits to demonstrate that the size of their egos are only
matched by the depth of their ignorance on firearms and the Second
Amendment. And so it should be.
If history repeats itself, the
recent slew of half-baked, culture-war-based, ideologically-motivated,
attention-seeking statements against guns will only increase support for
the right to arms, and additional support may develop as people
increasingly realize that President Obama and Hillary Clinton, who are
urging gun bans, are the very politicians most responsible for the rise
of overseas terrorist groups who inspire and possibly direct evildoers
within our midst.
All the more reason for the American people to protect their right to protect themselves.
No comments:
Post a Comment