Pages

Wednesday, February 5, 2014

DOMESTIC ENEMY of the Constitution #23,233

In the Muslim-communist newspaper al Jazeera, apparent domestic enemy of the Constitution
Marda Dunsky (Urinalism Teacher at the "Medill School of Journalism" at Northwestern University) writes the following poppycock, annotated by yours truly:
Dunsky, commie-lib and
Domestic Enemy
of the Constitution
Americans cannot continue framing gun control laws in terms of infringement on their freedom.
THE HELL WE CAN'T!  Just what are you going to do about it?  Write another scary article in a Muslim newpaper?

She continues, trying to weasel her way into an argument:
Yes, we have constitutional rights that allow us to bear arms...
STOP!  Before your BUT or YET or whatever weasel word you're going to use.  Remember, the Constitution says "SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED", and that does not bend to your aspirations to a government monopoly of violence shrouded in fake concerns for 'public safety'.
 ...and to produce and consume violent entertainment.
This is not an enumerated right in the Federal or any state Constitution.  Not equivalent.  We may have such a right, but this is not at issue here.  But you chose to conflate that with an ENUMERATED Constitutional right, didn't you?  Just had to muddy the issue with a female-scaring drive-by spray of feeeeeeelings, didn't you.
 Yet these freedoms have proven to have dangerous, if not fatal, impacts on public safety.
WRONG.  Since the enumerated Constitutional right to bear arms has begun to be restored via the proliferation of concealed-carry licenses in the 50 states, crime, and especially firearms-involved crime, has gone DOWN precipitously.  LOOK at your beloved governments own data, lady (via Dean Weingarten of GunWatch):


 But Marda the Commie plods on, sticking to her Alinsky-derived talking points:
Moreover, these freedoms are derived from a document written by human beings - and what people have created, people can change, for their own good.
WRONG. Rights come from God, you tyrant.   Even if the right to keep and bear arms was not written into the Constitution, we STILL would have the right to self-defense.  So, go ahead and try to change the Constitution.  I still will be able to vote, by Rule .308.

And you know what?  If you complete the transformation of my beloved country into a 'gun-free' hellhole, then screw it, I won't want to live anymore, anyway and we who would be free are going to come for you and your tyrant kind.  You don't want to fool with people who have nothing left to lose.

Molon Labe.

2 comments:

  1. She suffers from a normalcy bias. One that whispers to her that she can unilaterally change the social contract between people and their government without somehow disturbing the balance of power, the validity of that contract, and the subsequent behavior of everyone.

    She's free to change it vis a vis herself, but when she purports to change it for me, she oversteps herself. She shifts her allegiance from just another one of the deluded people ... to prey. Her opinion becomes devalued, worthless. Her rights become subservient to mine. Her wishes become irrelevant. And it doesn't matter how many like-minded prey she has with her. If she knows what is good for her, she'll steer clear and stay clear of my path.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. It seems like all these "ruling class" elites are arrogant in that way: that they can "unilaterally change the social contract between people and their government without somehow disturbing the balance of power, the validity of that contract, and the subsequent behavior of everyone".

      Well stated, and thanks for commenting.

      Delete