HJS COMMENTS: The Daily Caller’s opinion, unlike some of the opinions in the New York Times, The Washington Post, LA Times, or other Leftist Propaganda Centers, is not using “scare tactics” to drive us one way or the other so that we “get in line like everyone else” behind those whose plans for us are but sick and green and none but fools do harbor them or accept them. The Daily Caller insists our Constitution and Bill of Rights, are much more important to us than some hack of a newspaper columnist, and much more relevant than some sham of a president.
The right of self-defense was not given to us by the Second Amendment (by the way, senators, the Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting). The Second Amendment simply recognizes that self-defense is a God-given right, which means that along with the natural right of self-preservation, nothing should ever prevent one individual from protecting himself and his family from other individuals or groups meaning to do harm. As the final words of the Lord’s Prayer implores, “And deliver us from evil”.
If you grew up in the United States, you met many, many wonderful people and have lots of great friends. However, you have also met a few people whose existence is a mystery to you because they seem bent on doing harm to anyone they can, wherever they can, whenever they can. You always were aware that evil exists. You have also read newspaper articles or other material about what some call monsters who have committed despicable horrors against other men or on women and children. Do those predators have a right to exist among a population such as ours? Our laws say they do, even though we sometimes recognize that something deep inside us has questions about that. Our laws also say that we may not retaliate no matter what the gravity of the harm done against us. If someone murders our children, we have no right to go after the murderer and slay him just as he or she did to the kids. So, the only chance we have of punishing the murderer—and murderers must be punished-- is to trust our slow justice system that only works sometimes--unless we happen to be with the kids at the time they are in danger and we have the means and the sand to squeeze a tiny metal or plastic trigger, stopping the predator in its tracks.
Liberals/Leftists do not like the idea of individuals having the means or even the inclination to defend themselves. They believe that Americans should not even WANT such responsibility, that only committees should make those decisions, that we are not equipped to make a life-or-death decision on the spur of the moment, even when we are facing the ultimate danger. Doesn’t that make their constituents victims?
The individual to them is not very important; so like the Wildebeest whenever a predator selects one or more victims from the herd, the rest simply go back to their grazing; hoping that the predators are satisfied with the victims they already pounced on. The Leftists hope that justice somehow might prevail. However, if justice does not prevail, not to worry—they will soon forget about it; after all, they believe that public order is more important than individual lives or ridding ourselves of monsters. As far as future victims are concerned, the Leftists simply hope to educate the rest of us just to accept our fate and die quietly like good little victims, without being messy about it or wasting anyone’s time. One could justly say that is an un-American imitation of life without a Second Amendment. It is not very promising or pretty. One could say it’s disgusting!
If you believe as we do that life is more important to us than being orderly victims, and that America is the greatest country in the world because it is NOT an orderly-victim country, then you have a duty to perform: vote the bastards out! You know who they are!
And now, perhaps the following article by Chris Cox will give you an idea why I am so concerned (headlining mine). HJS
THE DAILY CALLER OPINION
Nearly three years into President Obama’s first term in office, Michelle Obama finally said something with which I can agree.
At a recent fundraiser for President Obama’s re-election campaign in Providence, Rhode Island, the first lady told her audience:
“We stand at a fundamental crossroads for our country. You’re here
because you know that in just 13 months, we’re going to make a choice that will impact our lives for decades to come … let’s not forget what it meant when my husband appointed those two brilliant Supreme Court justices … let’s not forget the impact that their decisions will have on our lives for decades to come.”
This was music to the ears of the small, affluent crowd of admirers who cheered and applauded. But to gun owners, Michelle Obama’s remarks should sound like a warning bell, alerting us to the danger ahead should Barack Obama win re-election and get the opportunity to alter the current make-up of the Supreme Court.
When Americans flock to the polls in 13 months, we will not simply decide which direction our country should take over the next four years. Rather, we will decide whether or not our fundamental, individual right to keep and bear arms will survive over the next several decades.
Currently, the Second Amendment clings to a 5-4 pro-freedom majority on the Supreme Court.
Just one vote is all that stands between the America our Founding
Fathers established and a radically different America that Barack Obama and his supporters envision.
If you want to read something scary, take another look at the minority opinions in the Supreme Court’s landmark Heller and McDonald decisions that struck down Washington, D.C.’s and Chicago’s unconstitutional gun bans. In the Heller dissent, four justices concluded that the Second Amendment does not guarantee an individual right to own a firearm, nor does it protect our right to defend ourselves, our families, or our property. In McDonald, the same four justices argued that the 5-4 Heller decision should be reversed.
If these four justices had just one more vote on their side, their opinion — that the Second Amendment should not exist in today’s modern society — would be the law of the land today. And assuredly, the anti-gun activist wing of the court knows how close they are to gaining the upper hand. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg told a Harvard Club audience in 2009, she looks forward to the day when a “future, wiser court” overturns 5-4 decisions like Heller.
Praying for the health of five justices is not a sound legal strategy for ensuring that our Second Amendment freedoms survive the relentless legal assault that gun-ban groups are waging in courtrooms across America. We need a president who will nominate sound, originalist nominees to the high court — nominees who will preserve the freedoms our Founding Fathers enshrined in our Constitution.
If President Obama gets the opportunity to tilt the balance of the Supreme Court in his favor, we’re unlikely to see another pro-gun victory at the Court in our lifetime. Even worse, the 5-4 majorities in Heller and McDonald will be in serious jeopardy of being reversed, effectively eliminating the Second Amendment.
NRA members, gun owners and all freedom-loving Americans should heed Michelle Obama’s warning. We must spend the next 13 months working to make sure her husband doesn’t get four more years to destroy American freedom for generations to come.
Chris W. Cox is the Executive Director of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action (NRA-ILA) and serves as the organization’s chief lobbyist.
Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2011/10/11/michelle-obamas-warning-to-gun-owners/#ixzz1lFIqxren