Obama Appointee: You Have The Right To Keep Arms But Not Bear Them
(The Daily Caller) When Wayne LaPierre, executive vice president of the National Rifle Association (NRA), spoke at CPAC on February 10th, he predicted that if Barack Obama wins a second term it will usher in an all-out attack on the Second Amendment. In so many words, he said the same people who brought us Fast and Furious, “a criminal enterprise” for which there has yet to be prosecutions, will use four more years to gut constitutional protections on the right to keep and bear arms. And anyone who wonders what this assault on the Second Amendment might look like need look no further than Illinois, where a judge that President Obama appointed has just ruled that we have the right to keep arms, but not to bear them.
That’s not a typo. Rather, it’s an unbelievable decision recently delivered by U.S. Judge Sue Myerscough, in a challenge which the Second Amendment Foundation filed against Illinois’s ongoing prohibition against carrying concealed weapons in that state. Said Myerscough, in rendering her decision: “[Although the] plaintiffs argue that the Second Amendment protects a general right to carry guns that include a right to carry operable guns in public … [the] Supreme Court has not recognized a right to bear firearms outside the home.”
Read The Rest Of The Story
That’s not a typo. Rather, it’s an unbelievable decision recently delivered by U.S. Judge Sue Myerscough, in a challenge which the Second Amendment Foundation filed against Illinois’s ongoing prohibition against carrying concealed weapons in that state. Said Myerscough, in rendering her decision: “[Although the] plaintiffs argue that the Second Amendment protects a general right to carry guns that include a right to carry operable guns in public … [the] Supreme Court has not recognized a right to bear firearms outside the home.”
Read The Rest Of The Story
Until these judges are brought up on charges of perjury, of violating their constitutional oath, they will continue to defy superior court decisions.
ReplyDeleteLocal district attorneys must be encouraged to bring charges against liberal, out of control judges.
We can not allow judges to hide behind idiotic, childish, childish excuses for breaking the laws defined by higher courts. Guns are meant to be used for personal protection, no matter where. They are NOT exhibition pieces in ones home.
"the right of the people to keep and BEAR Arms, shall not be infringed."
ReplyDeleteThis is to protect us FROM government.
Some think Laws deter criminals. Hello? Criminals are Law Breakers. They will ALWAYS have guns, even when the citizens do not. They will always Ignore Laws. That's why they are called Criminals.
Liberalism, and these judges must be thrown out, evicted.
Education of our fellow citizens, and a call to getting active in politics will be required to stop this.
It was enacted so that we COULD use them against these very people who would deny US the right to control Government, self protection when at large, OUR LOVED ONE'S, and Enemy invasion. It is the fundamental right to Liberty and Our Security therein!
ReplyDeleteGeorge Washington recognised this, thats why it's there, A well ARMED CITIZENRY is our best deterent from TYRANNY!!!
Perhaps someone ahould remind this Judge of what that Judge in Georgia was told By D.O.J. in a Veiled thread, "Judges are not afforded personal security teams" Bet this Bitch Pack's concealed Herself!
ReplyDeleteWhy do Judges and Politicians think they are abouve the Supreme Law of the Land???
When criminals occupy the White House, head up the DOJ, and are building community organizations to police citizens, we'd better not give up our constitutional right to keep and bear arms. This must be a key issue in Nov 2012, when we get to remove the obamanation from office and put a conservative in there who cares about appointing judges who read, understand and defend the constitution.
ReplyDelete