PJ Media » Immigration What? Senate Steers Back to Gun Control
http://pjmedia.com/blog/immigration-what-senate-steers-back-to-gun-control/?singlepage=true
.... “Mr. LaPierre, that’s the point. The criminals won’t go to purchase the guns because there will be a background check. We’ll stop them from the original purchase. You miss that point completely,” snapped Durbin, sparking a smattering of applause in the hearing room, gavel-banging from Leahy, and an argument with LaPierre. “The biggest problem in Chicago… we are awash in guns,” Durbin argued. “The confiscation of guns per capita in Chicago is six times the number of New York City. We have guns everywhere. And some believe the solution to this is more guns. I disagree.”
RRD: If Durbin believes that the problem is that Chicago is ”awash with guns” then maybe he should propose disarming the police? After all do the police really ”need” semi-automatic pistols; (”weapons of war” to use Obama's pet alliterative) .
I'm being facetious?
So is he, though he will not admit it.
Note Durbin's cute little equivocation about ”more guns” or ”less guns” when no one suggests that criminals should have guns at all, the only proposal is that innocent,law-abiding teachers should be permitted to carry their properly secured guns into the school with the consent of the school's management. In Israel that is exactly what is permitted. (see photo)
Durbin seeks to imply that there is no difference between guns in the hands of murderers & guns in the hands of innocent people.
”Gun free” school zones are a absurdity. They do not protect students or teachers,quite the opposite, they have caused deaths by disarming the victim. The school board itself should set its own policy. But Durbin has yet more straw men to marshal to his cause:
Durbin interrogating LaPierre : "creepy" to fear gov could become a dictatorship - YouTube Partial transcript:
...”Durbin asked LaPierre if he felt Americans needed guns to protect themselves from the government. “Senator, I think without any doubt, if you look at why our founding fathers put it there, they had lived under the tyranny of King George and they wanted to make sure that these free people in this new country would never be subjugated again and have to live under tyranny,” LaPierre said. “I also think, though, that what people all over the country fear today is being abandoned by their government,” he continued. “If a tornado hits, if a hurricane hits, if a riot occurs that they’re gonna be out there alone. And the only way they’re gonna protect themselves in the cold and the dark, when they’re vulnerable, is with a firearm. And I think that indicates how relevant and essential the Second Amendment is in today’s society to fundamental human survival.” Baltimore County Police Chief James Johnson, who chairs the National Law Enforcement Partnership to Prevent Gun Violence, called that view “scary, creepy.” “And it’s simply just not based on logic,” he added. “Certainly, law enforcement across this nation is well-prepared to deal with any natural or man -made disaster that will occur.” RRD: Note than Durbin does not address Lapierre's point about the Founder's belief in the Second Amendment as a safeguard against tyranny,and note that in the video he distorts Lapierre's position to make it appear that he is advocating violence against the police in circumstances that fall short of resistance to a full-fledged dictatorship. As to whether it is ”creepy” to fear the U.S. Government or to believe that it may one day be at war with its citizens Durbin himself seems to have forgotten that our government has carried out ”Nazi-like” interrogations of prisoners: Durbin U.S. government actions in interrogating prisoners akin to that carried out by : "... - YouTube
Durbin Apologizes for Nazi, Gulag, Pol Pot Remarks | Fox News
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,160275,00.html
.......” Durbin said in the course of his remarks on June 14, he raised "legitimate concerns" about U.S. policy toward prisoners and whether their treatment makes America safer. Durbin read from an FBI report that included descriptions of one case at Gitmo in which a detainee was held in such cold temperatures that he shivered, another in which a prisoner was held in heat passing 100 degrees, one in which prisoners were left in isolation so long they fouled themselves and one where a prisoner was chained to the floor and forced to listen to loud rap music. "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags or some mad regime — Pol Pot or others — that had no concern for human beings," Durbin said last week. After the uproar that followed those remarks, Durbin said he was not comparing U.S. soldiers to Pol Pot (search ), Nazis or Soviet guards, but was "attributing this form of interrogation to repressive regimes such as those that I note." Durbin attempted to clarify his remarks last Thursday evening and then again Friday, saying that he regretted if people did not understand his historic analogies, and he suggested that he could not verify the accuracy of the FBI document. "If this indeed occurred, it does not represent American values. It does not represent what our country stands for, it is not the sort of conduct we would ever condone ... and that is the point I was making. Now, sadly, we have a situation here where some in the right-wing media have said that I have been insulting men and women in uniform. Nothing could be further from truth," Durbin said. According to his spokesman, Joe Shoemaker, one reason the senator apologized was "this loud, continuous drumbeat of misinformation that was being broadcast and printed."....... RRD: So as recently as seven years ago our government was committing Nazi-like atrocities & yet now we are told that Lapierre's argument that the government may one day become a dictatorship is ”creepy”. That view--that our country may one day descend into dictatorship-- is also shared by the pro-gun control ACLU ,which is constantly warning us about abuses of governmental power. I have noted the hypocrisy of many gun control supporters on this issue here:
Second Amendment FAQS : Gun Control argument : ” Why do you fear our troops?” - fightingstatism
http://fightingstatism.posterous.com/second-amendment-faqs-gun-control-argument-wh Of course gun control advocates are not the only ones contradicting themselves, as many conservatives seemed indifferent to the threat posed to Fourth & Fifth Amendment rights by Bush's policies. But two wrongs don't make a right. This view of the Police & Military as being potential enemies of the people was widely shared by the Founders.
To cite only one ”Creepy” quote by Madison in Federalist 41 ( in which he was defending the Congresses power to raise standing armies)
.....”How could a readiness for war in time of peace be safely prohibited, unless we could prohibit, in like manner, the preparations and establishments of every hostile nation? The means of security can only be regulated by the means and the danger of attack. They will, in fact, be ever determined by these rules, and by no others. It is in vain to oppose constitutional barriers to the impulse of self-preservation. It is worse than in vain; because it plants in the Constitution itself necessary usurpations of power, every precedent of which is a germ of unnecessary and multiplied repetitions. If one nation maintains constantly a disciplined army, ready for the service of ambition or revenge, it obliges the most pacific nations who may be within the reach of its enterprises to take corresponding precautions. The fifteenth century was the unhappy epoch of military establishments in the time of peace. They were introduced by Charles VII. of France. All Europe has followed, or been forced into, the example. Had the example not been followed by other nations, all Europe must long ago have worn the chains of a universal monarch. Were every nation except France now to disband its peace establishments, the same event might follow. The veteran legions of Rome were an overmatch for the undisciplined valor of all other nations and rendered her the mistress of the world. Not the less true is it, that the liberties of Rome proved the final victim to her military triumphs; and that the liberties of Europe, as far as they ever existed, have, with few exceptions, been the price of her military establishments. A standing force, therefore, is a dangerous, at the same time that it may be a necessary, provision. On the smallest scale it has its inconveniences. On an extensive scale its consequences may be fatal. On any scale it is an object of laudable circumspection and precaution. A wise nation will combine all these considerations; and, whilst it does not rashly preclude itself from any resource which may become essential to its safety, will exert all its prudence in diminishing both the necessity and the danger of resorting to one which may be inauspicious to its liberties.”..... Madison Federalist 41
For other quotes see also here: Madison on Europe ”the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” #tcot #tlot #secondamendment - fightingstatism
http://fightingstatism.posterous.com/madison-on-europe-the-governments-are-afraid And here: Madison,Mason,Adams,Coxe,Webster,Patrick Henry etc on the supposedly non-existent right to own guns #tcot #tlot #secondamendment - fightingstatism
http://fightingstatism.posterous.com/madisonmasonadamscoxewebsterpatrick-henry-etc RRD: But what of the second part of Lapierre's argument ,the part about needing a gun in emergencies?
Police chief Johnson said:
“And it’s simply just not based on logic,” he added. “Certainly, law enforcement across this nation is well-prepared to deal with any natural or man -made disaster that will occur.” Really? Like the LA police department which left Reginald Denny & Korean shop keepers to fend for themselves while they fled? ( See the attached photo,those store owners were armed with AR-15s which they supposedly did not ”need”. ) The Filming of Reginald Denny's Beating - YouTube Koreatown during the 1992 riots - Rough Cuts - YouTube Legally the police are not even obligated to protect us. Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone - New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html?_r=0
Keep that in mind the next time Obama prattles about the legal right not to be a victim in a school shooting.
And what of Hurricane Katrina?
In many respects Katrina was even more disturbing & uglier than the breakdown of law after the Rodney King riots.
One Katrina survivor described the aftermath as follows: .... “There was no electricity, no police, no nothing,” ..... “We were like sitting ducks. I slept with a butcher knife and a hatchet under my pillow.” (fn1).... In the aftermath of Katrina five police officers killed two unarmed men, James Brisette, 17, & Ronald Madison 40. Madison a mentally disabled man was shot in the back. The five police officers have been convicted.(fn2)
Nor were they alone,one ex-police officer: David Warren, shot & killed another unarmed man Henry Glover . Warren's associates Officer Greg McRae & Lt. Travis McCabe helped cover up his crime by burning the body & filing a false police report respectively. (fn3)
Reports also surfaced of police officers themselves taking part in the looting. (fn4)
Other police-- who were neither killing unarmed civilians or burning their corpses-- were occupied with disarming everyone, guilty & innocent alike of their firearms:this included tackling one elderly woman --Patricia Konie-- to the ground for her refusal to be disarmed. She refused to evacuate so that she could remain with her cats. Hurricane Katrina Firearms Confiscation - YouTube
However not all of the alleged wrongdoing was carried out by the police. In the aftermath of Katrina many Louisianans understandably armed themselves to protect themselves in the charnel house that Louisiana had become. One case in point, the neighborhood of Algiers Point, which became a literal cause celebre among defenders of the Second Amendment. But since then disturbing reports have emerged of racial bullying & intimidation by various self-appointed ”militias” & at least one person has been charged in a racially motivated shooting. ( He awaits trial). (fn5)
These accusations have been cited as a justification for gun control. (fn6) But whether those individuals committed crimes or not ,the fact remains that the state was permitted to descend into anarchy & people had no choice but to rely upon themselves or to be defenseless. In a natural disaster you may not even be able to call the police. This is not a survivalist fantasy,it is a fact which anyone who has survived a severe hurricane can attest to.
That some may have committed crimes as members of a militia no more invalidates the need for lawful gun ownership or for militias that are in the support of the law (fn7) than the killings of innocent men by the police prove that the police should be abolished.
The right to keep & bear arms applies to self-defense,hunting & rebellion against a dictatorship,
a dictatorship which would,by definition, be in violation of the law,it does not protect lynch mobs anymore than the Constitution protects police who commit murders.
Yet today, in the aftermath of the bloodiest atrocities in human history,Stalin's purges,the Holocaust,the Cultural Revolution & the Killing Fields of Pol Pot all committed by governments against disarmed victims we are told that only the police can be entrusted with weapons. Yet these same people are the ones who urge that we ”forgive” violent offenders rather than ”just locking people up”. Footnotes:
fn1. Tales of Post-Katrina Violence Go From Rumor to Fact - NYTimes.com http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/27/us/27racial.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 fn2.
Officers Found Guilty in Hurricane Katrina Bridge Shootings - NYTimes.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/06/us/06danziger.html?pagewanted=all fn3.
Jury Convicts Three, Acquits Two in Post-Katrina Police Shooting | The Nation http://www.thenation.com/article/157029/jury-convicts-three-acquits-two-post-katrina-police-shooting fn4.
CNN.com - Witnesses: New Orleans cops took Rolex watches, jewelry - Sep 30, 2005 http://edition.cnn.com/2005/US/09/30/nopd.looting/index.html fn5. Katrina's Hidden Race War | The Nation
http://www.thenation.com/article/katrinas-hidden-race-war
Man can stand trial for Katrina shooting, judge says | NOLA.com http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2012/07/man_can_stand_trial_for_katrin.html fn6. Josh Horwitz: The Lessons of Algiers Point
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-horwitz/the-lessons-of-algiers-po_b_166083.html fn7.
.....” Adams wrote there that "[T]he rule in general is excellent". To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self -defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws.”.....
A Defence of the Constitutions of the United States 3:475 (1787 -1788).
http://pjmedia.com/blog/immigration-what-senate-steers-back-to-gun-control/?singlepage=true
.... “Mr. LaPierre, that’s the point. The criminals won’t go to purchase the guns because there will be a background check. We’ll stop them from the original purchase. You miss that point completely,” snapped Durbin, sparking a smattering of applause in the hearing room, gavel-banging from Leahy, and an argument with LaPierre. “The biggest problem in Chicago… we are awash in guns,” Durbin argued. “The confiscation of guns per capita in Chicago is six times the number of New York City. We have guns everywhere. And some believe the solution to this is more guns. I disagree.”
RRD: If Durbin believes that the problem is that Chicago is ”awash with guns” then maybe he should propose disarming the police? After all do the police really ”need” semi-automatic pistols; (”weapons of war” to use Obama's pet alliterative) .
I'm being facetious?
So is he, though he will not admit it.
Note Durbin's cute little equivocation about ”more guns” or ”less guns” when no one suggests that criminals should have guns at all, the only proposal is that innocent,law-abiding teachers should be permitted to carry their properly secured guns into the school with the consent of the school's management. In Israel that is exactly what is permitted. (see photo)
Durbin seeks to imply that there is no difference between guns in the hands of murderers & guns in the hands of innocent people.
”Gun free” school zones are a absurdity. They do not protect students or teachers,quite the opposite, they have caused deaths by disarming the victim. The school board itself should set its own policy. But Durbin has yet more straw men to marshal to his cause:
Durbin interrogating LaPierre : "creepy" to fear gov could become a dictatorship - YouTube Partial transcript:
...”Durbin asked LaPierre if he felt Americans needed guns to protect themselves from the government. “Senator, I think without any doubt, if you look at why our founding fathers put it there, they had lived under the tyranny of King George and they wanted to make sure that these free people in this new country would never be subjugated again and have to live under tyranny,” LaPierre said. “I also think, though, that what people all over the country fear today is being abandoned by their government,” he continued. “If a tornado hits, if a hurricane hits, if a riot occurs that they’re gonna be out there alone. And the only way they’re gonna protect themselves in the cold and the dark, when they’re vulnerable, is with a firearm. And I think that indicates how relevant and essential the Second Amendment is in today’s society to fundamental human survival.” Baltimore County Police Chief James Johnson, who chairs the National Law Enforcement Partnership to Prevent Gun Violence, called that view “scary, creepy.” “And it’s simply just not based on logic,” he added. “Certainly, law enforcement across this nation is well-prepared to deal with any natural or man -made disaster that will occur.” RRD: Note than Durbin does not address Lapierre's point about the Founder's belief in the Second Amendment as a safeguard against tyranny,and note that in the video he distorts Lapierre's position to make it appear that he is advocating violence against the police in circumstances that fall short of resistance to a full-fledged dictatorship. As to whether it is ”creepy” to fear the U.S. Government or to believe that it may one day be at war with its citizens Durbin himself seems to have forgotten that our government has carried out ”Nazi-like” interrogations of prisoners: Durbin U.S. government actions in interrogating prisoners akin to that carried out by : "... - YouTube
Durbin Apologizes for Nazi, Gulag, Pol Pot Remarks | Fox News
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,160275,00.html
.......” Durbin said in the course of his remarks on June 14, he raised "legitimate concerns" about U.S. policy toward prisoners and whether their treatment makes America safer. Durbin read from an FBI report that included descriptions of one case at Gitmo in which a detainee was held in such cold temperatures that he shivered, another in which a prisoner was held in heat passing 100 degrees, one in which prisoners were left in isolation so long they fouled themselves and one where a prisoner was chained to the floor and forced to listen to loud rap music. "If I read this to you and did not tell you that it was an FBI agent describing what Americans had done to prisoners in their control, you would most certainly believe this must have been done by Nazis, Soviets in their gulags or some mad regime — Pol Pot or others — that had no concern for human beings," Durbin said last week. After the uproar that followed those remarks, Durbin said he was not comparing U.S. soldiers to Pol Pot (search ), Nazis or Soviet guards, but was "attributing this form of interrogation to repressive regimes such as those that I note." Durbin attempted to clarify his remarks last Thursday evening and then again Friday, saying that he regretted if people did not understand his historic analogies, and he suggested that he could not verify the accuracy of the FBI document. "If this indeed occurred, it does not represent American values. It does not represent what our country stands for, it is not the sort of conduct we would ever condone ... and that is the point I was making. Now, sadly, we have a situation here where some in the right-wing media have said that I have been insulting men and women in uniform. Nothing could be further from truth," Durbin said. According to his spokesman, Joe Shoemaker, one reason the senator apologized was "this loud, continuous drumbeat of misinformation that was being broadcast and printed."....... RRD: So as recently as seven years ago our government was committing Nazi-like atrocities & yet now we are told that Lapierre's argument that the government may one day become a dictatorship is ”creepy”. That view--that our country may one day descend into dictatorship-- is also shared by the pro-gun control ACLU ,which is constantly warning us about abuses of governmental power. I have noted the hypocrisy of many gun control supporters on this issue here:
Second Amendment FAQS : Gun Control argument : ” Why do you fear our troops?” - fightingstatism
http://fightingstatism.posterous.com/second-amendment-faqs-gun-control-argument-wh Of course gun control advocates are not the only ones contradicting themselves, as many conservatives seemed indifferent to the threat posed to Fourth & Fifth Amendment rights by Bush's policies. But two wrongs don't make a right. This view of the Police & Military as being potential enemies of the people was widely shared by the Founders.
To cite only one ”Creepy” quote by Madison in Federalist 41 ( in which he was defending the Congresses power to raise standing armies)
.....”How could a readiness for war in time of peace be safely prohibited, unless we could prohibit, in like manner, the preparations and establishments of every hostile nation? The means of security can only be regulated by the means and the danger of attack. They will, in fact, be ever determined by these rules, and by no others. It is in vain to oppose constitutional barriers to the impulse of self-preservation. It is worse than in vain; because it plants in the Constitution itself necessary usurpations of power, every precedent of which is a germ of unnecessary and multiplied repetitions. If one nation maintains constantly a disciplined army, ready for the service of ambition or revenge, it obliges the most pacific nations who may be within the reach of its enterprises to take corresponding precautions. The fifteenth century was the unhappy epoch of military establishments in the time of peace. They were introduced by Charles VII. of France. All Europe has followed, or been forced into, the example. Had the example not been followed by other nations, all Europe must long ago have worn the chains of a universal monarch. Were every nation except France now to disband its peace establishments, the same event might follow. The veteran legions of Rome were an overmatch for the undisciplined valor of all other nations and rendered her the mistress of the world. Not the less true is it, that the liberties of Rome proved the final victim to her military triumphs; and that the liberties of Europe, as far as they ever existed, have, with few exceptions, been the price of her military establishments. A standing force, therefore, is a dangerous, at the same time that it may be a necessary, provision. On the smallest scale it has its inconveniences. On an extensive scale its consequences may be fatal. On any scale it is an object of laudable circumspection and precaution. A wise nation will combine all these considerations; and, whilst it does not rashly preclude itself from any resource which may become essential to its safety, will exert all its prudence in diminishing both the necessity and the danger of resorting to one which may be inauspicious to its liberties.”..... Madison Federalist 41
For other quotes see also here: Madison on Europe ”the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.” #tcot #tlot #secondamendment - fightingstatism
http://fightingstatism.posterous.com/madison-on-europe-the-governments-are-afraid And here: Madison,Mason,Adams,Coxe,Webster,Patrick Henry etc on the supposedly non-existent right to own guns #tcot #tlot #secondamendment - fightingstatism
http://fightingstatism.posterous.com/madisonmasonadamscoxewebsterpatrick-henry-etc RRD: But what of the second part of Lapierre's argument ,the part about needing a gun in emergencies?
Police chief Johnson said:
“And it’s simply just not based on logic,” he added. “Certainly, law enforcement across this nation is well-prepared to deal with any natural or man -made disaster that will occur.” Really? Like the LA police department which left Reginald Denny & Korean shop keepers to fend for themselves while they fled? ( See the attached photo,those store owners were armed with AR-15s which they supposedly did not ”need”. ) The Filming of Reginald Denny's Beating - YouTube Koreatown during the 1992 riots - Rough Cuts - YouTube Legally the police are not even obligated to protect us. Justices Rule Police Do Not Have a Constitutional Duty to Protect Someone - New York Times
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/28/politics/28scotus.html?_r=0
Keep that in mind the next time Obama prattles about the legal right not to be a victim in a school shooting.
And what of Hurricane Katrina?
In many respects Katrina was even more disturbing & uglier than the breakdown of law after the Rodney King riots.
One Katrina survivor described the aftermath as follows: .... “There was no electricity, no police, no nothing,” ..... “We were like sitting ducks. I slept with a butcher knife and a hatchet under my pillow.” (fn1).... In the aftermath of Katrina five police officers killed two unarmed men, James Brisette, 17, & Ronald Madison 40. Madison a mentally disabled man was shot in the back. The five police officers have been convicted.(fn2)
Nor were they alone,one ex-police officer: David Warren, shot & killed another unarmed man Henry Glover . Warren's associates Officer Greg McRae & Lt. Travis McCabe helped cover up his crime by burning the body & filing a false police report respectively. (fn3)
Reports also surfaced of police officers themselves taking part in the looting. (fn4)
Other police-- who were neither killing unarmed civilians or burning their corpses-- were occupied with disarming everyone, guilty & innocent alike of their firearms:this included tackling one elderly woman --Patricia Konie-- to the ground for her refusal to be disarmed. She refused to evacuate so that she could remain with her cats. Hurricane Katrina Firearms Confiscation - YouTube
However not all of the alleged wrongdoing was carried out by the police. In the aftermath of Katrina many Louisianans understandably armed themselves to protect themselves in the charnel house that Louisiana had become. One case in point, the neighborhood of Algiers Point, which became a literal cause celebre among defenders of the Second Amendment. But since then disturbing reports have emerged of racial bullying & intimidation by various self-appointed ”militias” & at least one person has been charged in a racially motivated shooting. ( He awaits trial). (fn5)
These accusations have been cited as a justification for gun control. (fn6) But whether those individuals committed crimes or not ,the fact remains that the state was permitted to descend into anarchy & people had no choice but to rely upon themselves or to be defenseless. In a natural disaster you may not even be able to call the police. This is not a survivalist fantasy,it is a fact which anyone who has survived a severe hurricane can attest to.
That some may have committed crimes as members of a militia no more invalidates the need for lawful gun ownership or for militias that are in the support of the law (fn7) than the killings of innocent men by the police prove that the police should be abolished.
The right to keep & bear arms applies to self-defense,hunting & rebellion against a dictatorship,
a dictatorship which would,by definition, be in violation of the law,it does not protect lynch mobs anymore than the Constitution protects police who commit murders.
Yet today, in the aftermath of the bloodiest atrocities in human history,Stalin's purges,the Holocaust,the Cultural Revolution & the Killing Fields of Pol Pot all committed by governments against disarmed victims we are told that only the police can be entrusted with weapons. Yet these same people are the ones who urge that we ”forgive” violent offenders rather than ”just locking people up”. Footnotes:
fn1. Tales of Post-Katrina Violence Go From Rumor to Fact - NYTimes.com http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/27/us/27racial.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0 fn2.
Officers Found Guilty in Hurricane Katrina Bridge Shootings - NYTimes.com
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/06/us/06danziger.html?pagewanted=all fn3.
Jury Convicts Three, Acquits Two in Post-Katrina Police Shooting | The Nation http://www.thenation.com/article/157029/jury-convicts-three-acquits-two-post-katrina-police-shooting fn4.
CNN.com - Witnesses: New Orleans cops took Rolex watches, jewelry - Sep 30, 2005 http://edition.cnn.com/2005/US/09/30/nopd.looting/index.html fn5. Katrina's Hidden Race War | The Nation
http://www.thenation.com/article/katrinas-hidden-race-war
Man can stand trial for Katrina shooting, judge says | NOLA.com http://www.nola.com/crime/index.ssf/2012/07/man_can_stand_trial_for_katrin.html fn6. Josh Horwitz: The Lessons of Algiers Point
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/josh-horwitz/the-lessons-of-algiers-po_b_166083.html fn7.
.....” Adams wrote there that "[T]he rule in general is excellent". To suppose arms in the hands of citizens, to be used at individual discretion, except in private self -defense, or by partial orders of towns, countries or districts of a state, is to demolish every constitution, and lay the laws prostrate, so that liberty can be enjoyed by no man; it is a dissolution of the government. The fundamental law of the militia is, that it be created, directed and commanded by the laws, and ever for the support of the laws.”.....
A Defence of the Constitutions of the United States 3:475 (1787 -1788).
No comments:
Post a Comment