Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens has launched a broadside attack against gun ownership, the NRA, and even the Second Amendment itself in a recent op-ed piece in The New York Times.
It’s an incredible assault on our rights that is partially based on his argument that since weapons have evolved from the time the Bill of Rights was written, that the Second Amendment is out of date and should be repealed.
Here are Stevens’ words. Read them and be appalled.
Rarely in my lifetime have I seen the type of civic engagement schoolchildren and their supporters demonstrated in Washington and other major cities throughout the country this past Saturday. These demonstrations demand our respect. They reveal the broad public support for legislation to minimize the risk of mass killings of schoolchildren and others in our society.
That support is a clear sign to lawmakers to enact legislation prohibiting civilian ownership of semiautomatic weapons, increasing the minimum age to buy a gun from 18 to 21 years old, and establishing more comprehensive background checks on all purchasers of firearms. But the demonstrators should seek more effective and more lasting reform. They should demand a repeal of the Second Amendment.
Concern that a national standing army might pose a threat to the security of the separate states led to the adoption of that amendment, which provides that “a well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.” Today that concern is a relic of the 18th century.
Breitbart offers commentary on these revolting remarks.
Shortly after the publication of an op-ed written by former Associate Justice of the Supreme Court John Paul Stevens for the New York Times titled “Repeal The Second Amendment,” the same phrase began to trend on Twitter. Many Twitter users began retweeting Stevens’ article and commenting on the issue of firearms and the second amendment. The hashtag has begun trending just days after the March For Our Lives protest in Washington D.C.
The Top News section of the trending topic featured a link to Stevens’ article which displayed an image comparing an 18th-century rifle to a modern semi-automatic rifle. The tagline for the article reads “This weekend’s marches make it clear: To enact real gun control, we need to change the constitution.”
And then there are some responses on Twitter to this outrage. Interestingly, even at least one liberal is opposed to repealing the Second Amendment.
We cannot, should not, and will never repeal the Second Amendment. The only Amendment that was ever repealed was the 18th which prohibited alcohol. Amendments serve to expand our rights—not limit them. We can have commonsense gun control while still defending our Constitution.
— Eugene Gu, MD (@eugenegu) March 27, 2018
It is very disappointing to see Repeal the Second Amendment trending today. There is no First Amendment without the second!
— Van Hipp (@VanHipp) March 27, 2018
We also have those who have a more “in your face” response to Stevens’ disgusting suggestion.
https://twitter.com/PoliticalShort/status/978624563851403264
Repeal The Second Amendment
Do you understand some people's spare bedroom looks like this? We are not your liberal mommy and daddy. We do not take kindly to people who threaten to take away our RIGHT to bear arms. pic.twitter.com/HxQKUb90LN
— VICA♔POTA (@LadyInfidels) March 27, 2018
Fortunately, Stevens’ retired from the Supreme Court. Hence, he has no vote on any cases coming before the high court. Given the relatively short memory spans of many Americans, a large part of the Times’ audience probably doesn’t know who he was, let alone what positions he stood for and against.
Nevertheless, this broadside on our rights demands an aggressive reply. Repealing the Second Amendment would only make criminals and politicians (did I repeat myself?) safer. Its repeal would turn millions of Americans into criminals on the spot as they simply would not obey. And given this would be an attempt to usurp one of our natural rights, their refusal to obey would be justified.
Of course, repealing part of our Constitution is an incredibly difficult and time-consuming project. So Stevens’ dream isn’t going anywhere.
As pointed out here before, the problem is not that there are too many nasty-looking guns in the U.S. The problem is that the citizenry is not properly armed and trained in their use. Do that and watch the incidents of gun violence drop like a rock.
Source: Breitbart
Source: New York Times
