9thcourt

The right to bear arms, enshrined in the Second Amendment of the Constitution has been under attack from Liberals for decades, in spite of the fact that their fight directly conflicts with the will of the vast majority of Americans. In waging a continuing war on liberty, progressives and liberals have directly and intentionally opposed the freedoms that have existed since the founding of the Republic.

These fights culminated in 2008, when the Supreme Court affirmed in District of Columbia v. Heller in ruling that the Second Amendment not only guarantees an individual’s right to possess a firearm completely unconnected with service in a militia, but to also have the right to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, most especially self-defense within the home. “[W]e find they guarantee the individual right to possess and carry weapons in case of confrontation (i.e., self-defense). The inherent right of self-defense has been central to the Second Amendment right,” they concluded.

President Obama and the congressional Democrats, led by Senator Harry Reid have made numerous attempts to capitalize on the tragic deaths of children and other innocents killed in shooting incidents in an ongoing effort to restrict or curtail gun rights, but their endeavors have met with failure because the overwhelming majority of Americans recognize that these attempts are inappropriately misguided and disproportionate responses to such incidents.

In poll after poll from 1990 to 2013, support for strict gun control laws and regulations fell from nearly 80% in 1990 to below 50% today. Americans have come to realize that unnecessary attempts to infringe on the rights of gun ownership for law-abiding citizens is the wrong solution to a problem with the mental health of deranged liberals.

Now, even the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals – the most liberal Circuit Court in America – recognizes the irrefutable fact that the Second Amendment is a sacred right which has ensured the freedoms and liberties that all Americans enjoy.

From the Los Angeles Daily News:

SAN FRANCISCO — A divided federal appeals court has struck down California’s concealed weapons rules, saying they violate the Second Amendment right to bear arms. The 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals said Thursday that California is wrong to require applicants to show good cause to receive a permit to carry a concealed weapon. The court ruled that all law-abiding citizens are entitled to carry concealed weapons outside the home for self-defense purposes.

The ruling left no doubt as to where the court stood, as it upheld the constitutionally protected right to gun ownership, and struck down the attacks on freedom governmental infringement and attempted bans, masquerading as “reasonable regulation.”

From the Los Angeles Times:

SAN FRANCISCO — A federal appeals court decided Thursday that a San Diego restriction on carrying concealed guns in public for self defense infringes on citizens’ 2nd Amendment rights.
In a 2-1 ruling, a panel of the U.S. 9th Circuit Court of Appeals overturned San Diego County permit requirements because the court said they denied responsible, law-abiding citizens the right to carry concealed handguns in public for self-defense.
California generally prohibits carrying guns, whether loaded or not, in public locations.
But residents may apply for a license to carry a concealed weapon in the city or county where they live or work. To obtain licenses in San Diego County, residents must show “good moral character,” complete a training course and establish they have valid reasons for needing the gun.
The court said San Diego’s policy was too restrictive under the 2nd Amendment because it required applicants to show a specific concern for personal safety.

Liberals like to claim that their arguments against gun ownership – especially against concealed carry – are “common-sense proposals” that are accepted by the vast majority of Americans. These claims are revealed as false every time they are put to a vote; the real test of acceptance. When the most liberal judges on the most liberal court, in the most liberal circuit agree with citizens that gun rights are paramount, the end of the war on the Second Amendment is near.

UPDATE: 02/22/14

Former Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens recently questioned the legitimacy of the Second Amendment,and wondered whether it should be effectively amended out of existence. From his “Gun Control and the Constitution: Should We Amend the Second Amendment?” article in Bloomberg Businessweek, Paul M. Barrett outlines Stevens’ main argument:

Since Stevens believes that the authors of the Second Amendment were primarily concerned about the threat that a national standing army posed to the sovereignty of the states—as opposed to homeowners’ anxiety about violent felons—he thinks the best way to fix the situation is to amend the Second Amendment. He’d do that by adding five words as follows:

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms when serving in the militia shall not be infringed.

To support the change, he argues: “Emotional claims that the right to possess deadly weapons is so important that it is protected by the federal Constitution distort intelligent debate about the wisdom of particular aspects of proposed legislation designed to minimize the slaughter caused by the prevalence of guns in private hands.”

Keep in mind that Stevens served on the Supreme Court for 35 years, from 1975 until his retirement in June 2010. This jurist, whose view on the Second Amendment would necessarily have led to its demise was prevent from doing so only because the conservative wing of the court, led by Scalia, Rehnquist and later Thomas and Roberts acted as a bulwark for freedom against tyranny, bolstered by conservatives on both sides of the aisle and groups like the NRA and Gun Owners of America – groups which have been under attack by the Obama regime.

UPDATE: 02/23/14

In the storm and violence of the protests against the autocratic government of  Viktor Yanukovych, Ukrainian citizens, led by the Ukrainian Gun Owners Association have published a statement demanding an “unconditional right for Ukrainian citizens to bear arms”:

Today every citizen of Ukraine understands why our country has hundreds of thousands of policemen. Last illusions were crushed when riot police used rubber batons and boots at the Independence Square on peaceful citizens.

After such actions we realize that it is not enough to only adopt the Gun Law.

As of today Ukrainian Gun Owners Association will start to work on the preparation of amendments to the Constitution, which will provide an unconditional right for Ukrainian citizens to bear arms.
People should have the right to bear arms, which will be put in written into the Constitution.

Authorities should not and will not be stronger than its people!

Armed people are treated with respect!

In the midst of the government’s reign of fire, blood and terror and the street battles meant to restore freedom to Ukraine, the recognition that an armed people are a free people has been proven once again. For Americans to turn their back on this irrefutable truth would be to deny the reality and willingly yield to deception and tyranny.

3 thoughts on “Freedom Is Owning A Gun

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s