During the December 19 Democratic Debate, Clinton said that encouraging more Americans to carry guns will not make the country safer. Okay, then what will? Allowing those who get them through dishonest methods to shoot unarmed citizens? There’s some logic missing from that statement.
The question came in response to the earlier questioning about the San Bernardino attacks. The exact wording was “Are Americans wrong to want more guns after the San Bernardino attack?”
Hillary responded by blabbering her opinion and saying that 33,000 people a year die from gun violence, and that arming people isn’t the right response to terrorism.
Read what Clinton is adding on the next page.
They make themselves safer!!
The hell it don’t.
Idiot!
There she goes LYING AGAN!
Your lying$#%&!@*does not make America!
Paul Burroughs , Oh c**p on her !!!————————————>The 2nd Amendment: **A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State
The 2nd Amendment: **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.**
Translated for dummies: **In order to remain in a state of freedom it may be necessary to form, supply and train a militia (thus making it regulated) from an already armed populace since being armed is the most practical way to utilize the natural (born with) right of self-preservation and for the protection of one’s family and community. Since this natural right was not given by the government it cannot take it back nor restrict it (infringe). It can only be surrendered willingly by the foolish.**
Also when “people” are mentioned in the Constitution does it only mean “some” people or “certain” people or does it mean “all” people (citizens)? If it then means “all” people then notice what the last part of the 2nd A says: the right of the **PEOPLE** TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS, SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED. It does not say only the people that are in the militia can bear arms but just people as in all people. Of course the fact that all people are also the militia should come into to play too.
“I ask, sir, what is the militia? It is the whole people, except for a few public officials.”
— George Mason
“The militia, when properly formed, are in fact the people themselves, … all men capable of bearing arms;…”
— “Letters from the Federal Farmer to the Republic”, 1788 (either Richard Henry Lee or Melancton Smith
Paul Burroughs , Second Amendment to the United States Constitution
The Second Amendment (Amendment II) to the United States Constitution protects the right of the people to keep and bear arms and was adopted on December 15, 1791, as part of the first ten amendments contained in the Bill of Rights.[1][2][3][4] The Supreme Court of the United States has ruled that the right belongs to individuals,[5][6] while also ruling that the right is not unlimited and does not prohibit all regulation of either firearms or similar devices.[7] State andlocal governments are limited to the same extent as the federal government from infringing this right per theincorporation of the Bill of Rights.
The Second Amendment was based partially on the right to keep and bear arms in English common law and was influenced by the English Bill of Rights of 1689. Sir William Blackstone described this right as an auxiliary right, supporting the natural rights of self-defense, resistance to oppression, and the civic duty to act in concert in defense of the state.[8]
In United States v. Cruikshank (1876), the Supreme Court of the United States ruled that, “The right to bear arms is not granted by the Constitution; neither is it in any manner dependent upon that instrument for its existence” and limited the applicability of the Second Amendment to the federal government.[9] In United States v. Miller (1939), the Supreme Court ruled that the federal government and the states could limit any weapon types not having a “reasonable relationship to the preservation or efficiency of a well regulated militia.”[10][11]
In the twenty-first century, the amendment has been subjected to renewed academic inquiry and judicial interest.[11] InDistrict of Columbia v. Heller (2008), the Supreme Court handed down a landmark decision that held the amendment protects an individual right to possess and carry firearms.[12][13] In McDonald v. Chicago (2010), the Court clarified its earlier decisions that limited the amendment’s impact to a restriction on the federal government, expressly holding that the Fourteenth Amendment applies the Second Amendment to state and local governments to the same extent that the Second Amendment applies to the federal government.[14] In Caetano v. Massachusetts (2016), the Supreme Court reiterated its earlier rulings that “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 that its protection is not limited to “only those weapons useful in warfare”.[15]
Despite these decisions, the debate between various organizations regarding gun control and gun rights continues.[1
Experience in America prior to the U.S. Constitution
Ideals that helped to inspire the Second Amendment in part are symbolized by the minutemen.[50]
Early English settlers in America viewed the right to arms and/or the right to bear arms and/or state militias as important for one or more of these purposes (in no particular order):[51][52][53][54][55][56][57][58 ]
enabling the people to organize a militia system.
participating in law enforcement;
deterring tyrannical government;[59]
repelling invasion;
suppressing insurrection, allegedly including slave revolts;[60][61][62]
facilitating a natural right of self-defense.
Which of these considerations were thought of as most important and ultimately found expression in the Second Amendment is disputed. Some of these purposes were explicitly mentioned in early state constitutions; for example, thePennsylvania Constitution of 1776 asserted that, “the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state”.[63]
Lame brain imbecile….something I would expect to hear from a six year old…And that would be an insult to most six year olds…this hag has brain damage…its called liberalism…
Paul Burroughs , When all else fails , we have this !!——————>The$#%&!@*Act of 1902 – Gun Control FORBIDDEN! Were you aware of this law?$#%&!@*ACT of 1902 – CAN’T BE REPEALED (GUN CONTROL FORBIDDEN) – Protection Against Tyrannical Government It would appear that the administration is counting on the fact that the American Citizens don’t know this, their rights and the constitution. Don’t prove them right. The$#%&!@*Act of 1902 also known as the Efficiency of Militia Bill H.R. 11654, of June 28, 1902 invalidates all so-called gun-control laws. It also divides the militia into three distinct and separate entities. **SPREAD THIS TO EVERYONE ** The three classes H.R. 11654 provides for are the organized militia, henceforth known as the National Guard of the State, Territory and District of Columbia, the unorganized militia and the regular army. The militia encompasses every able-bodied male between the ages of 18 and 45. All members of the unorganized militia have the absolute personal right and 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms of any type, and as many as they can afford to buy. The$#%&!@*Act of 1902 cannot be repealed; to do so would violate bills of attainder and ex post facto laws which would be yet another gross violation of the U.S. Constitution and the Bill of Rights. The President of the United States has zero authority without violating the Constitution to call the National Guard to serve outside of their State borders. The National Guard Militia can only be required by the National Government for limited purposes specified in the Constitution (to uphold the laws of the Union; to suppress insurrection and repel invasion). These are the only purposes for which the General Government can call upon the National Guard. Sources: http://www.civilrightstaskforce.info/gun_control_forbidden.htm http://rosieontheright.com/what-is-the-militia-bill-h-r-11654/ Get this message out to all your email contacts. It’s time to learn about your rights. Our current President and the Democrats don’t seem to worry about breaking laws or the U.S. Constitution. They do things regardless even if it goes against the Constitution which they swore to abide by when each one of them took office. That itself is an impeachable offense!!!
Her body guard is an Isis undercover disguised as secret service