Sell us your guns, or else!
Democratic “presidential contender,” Robert “Beto” O’Rourke thinks police agencies will partner in his plan to take away legal weapons from gun-owning Americans
Somehow he has figured it all out. Americans are eagerly waiting for his weapons control plan to become a law, and then will meekly hand over their weapons, no questions asked.
In the case of encountering, someone who won’t subscribe to Beto’s interpretation of the U.S. Constitution, he has plan B ready. He’s going to enlist the help of the law enforcement agencies, which, in his opinion, will happily jump in and (using their firepower) help him disarm resistant gun owners.
Yeah, I think just as in any law that is not followed or flagrantly abused, there have to be consequences, or else there is no respect for the law. So you know, in that case, I think there would be a visit by law enforcement to recover that firearm and to make sure that it is purchased, bought back so that it cannot be potentially used against somebody else.Robert “Beto” O’Rourke
(Explaining what is going to happen if someone will tell him to pound the sand.)
In short, if his ambitious plan encounters any resistance, he will grab a phone and call 9 1 1.
Not so fast, Beto.
There’s a minor problem — The Second Amendment.
Luckily for us, over 200 years ago, our Founding Fathers were able to foresee the future and saw some guy named Beto, and a bunch of his friends, trying to disregard the will of the people, and after disarming them, govern as they see fit.
The reason for the addition of the second amendment to the U.S. Constitution was to make sure that citizens have the means to defend themselves against an oppressive government, otherwise known as Guys like Beto.
Fortunately, it looks like all those founders, a long time ago, were a bunch of quite brilliant men, and threw a monkey wrench into Beto’s plans before he even started planning. The name of the wrench — you guess — is, the Second Amendment.
Beto’s wet dream.
There’s another minor problem — Men and women of the law enforcement.
Members of police forces are not thrilled by the idea of being used as the government enforcers. Taking away citizen’s rights by force isn’t exactly a popular concept among the men and women who ware sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution.
The thought of anyone utilizing my sheriff’s office or any other law enforcement agency in this country as their personal Gestapo to go door to door violating citizen’s rights is disgusting, unrealistic and downright un-American.Eddy County Sheriff Mark Cage
(When talking to Townhall.)
Mr. O’Rourke believes that whoever came up with a motto seen on police cars: “To Serve And Protect”, had him and his friends in mind. He thinks that the men and women of law enforcement are there to protect politicians and to enforce their ridiculous ideas.
I think that you have to be concerned for the safety of the citizen [too] because, at that point, they don’t know if law enforcement is coming to protect them or disarm them and that creates a very tense situation.Weld County Sheriff Steve Reams
(When talking to Townhall.)
Because of his support for police, President Donald Trump enjoys a high level of popularity among members of law enforcement agencies. Maybe O’Rourke thinks that his insane idea of elevating our cops above the U.S. Constitution will cause them to switch their support from Trump to him — the one and only — Beto O’Rourke. The problem is, police officers don’t want to be elevated by O’Rourke.
Mr. O’Rourke is delusional in regards to his gun control ideas. The biggest fear of any free society is the government at your door, wanting to take away your rights by force. I do not see the men and women of law enforcement sworn to uphold the U.S. Constitution doing this. In an act of desperation, Mr. O’Rourke is shamefully using tragedies our country has experienced and fear for his political gain. The very foundation of law enforcement is public trust. Frankly, no one should trust a man who talks out of both sides of his mouth.San Juan County Sheriff Shane Ferrari
(When talking to Townhall.)
Science is the king.
From the laboratory of rational thinking.
The Second Amendment of the United States Constitution reads:
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.
Anti-gun lobby points to the “well-regulated Militia” clause in the Second Amendment. They argue that the right to bear arms should be given only to organized groups, like the National Guard.
I’ve grown tired of all those constitutional scholars explaining the meaning of the Second Amendment and decided to go thoroughly scientific and with the help of Google Translate once and for all decipher what precisely James Madison had in mind when he proposed The Second Amendment.
First, I’ve used Google to Translate the Second Amendment from English to Polish (it works well with other languages too).
Then I’ve taken Polish translation and repeated the process in the opposite direction — from Polish back to English.
Finally! Thanks to my superior intellect and algorithms behind Google Translate, the meaning of the Second Amendment is clear and can not be questioned.
The last (very important) thought.
Mr. James Madison believed that:
We need a well-regulated militia for the security of the state, but at the same time, the people, have a right to own and carry firearms for personal protection.
For personal protection means — in case the state will decide to use the well-regulated militia to kick our personal ass.
NOTE: To the law-makers on Capitol and all Justices on the U.S. Supreme Court. Enjoy the fruits of my hard work, and…
Thank You For Reading