Tell you audience to share with msnbc and cnn viewers. They're totally brainwashed. 8 years of hearing regurgitated shat is bound to affect many to try an be an "hero" Read behold a pale horse. "Silent weapons" for quiet wars. Please don't delete my comment.
The 2nd Amendment is about the citizens--"state of the nature" by John Locke--having the power--Mao Zedong said that "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun": sounds like a paraphrased of the 2nd Amendment. Logically any arms--knives, howitzers, etc. if a person can afford it, he has the rights, since it can be used to check the government.
If you cannot see the irony of having a gun ban enforced by men with guns, then you fail to understand why the second amendment was written in the first place.
You're right, except it's not even ironic. When you think about it from their perspective, it makes perfect sense. "They can't protect themselves; we can do what we like with them."
Yeah but our Founding Fathers didn't expect that our castrated society would do nothing but yell, "shall not be infringed! while scrolling to the next post. Don't say, "this is what the second was intended for", unless you plan on taking action.
@@RolandtheThompsonGunner and what "action" would that be? Any resistance will be met with complete revokation of your rights, and a healthy prison sentence.
@@atg1338You keep saying this all over the comment section. Are you saying she’s ignorant or the person posting the above comment is ignorant? Because if you’re saying Cackling Kamala is ignorant that isn’t true, she is wilfully coming after guns she deems “scary weapons of war” which goes against the 2nd Amendment. If you’re saying the commenter is ignorant then you’re also wrong because they are literally calling her out for what she’s said from her own mouth so how is that ignorant?!
No she doesn't. She would have shot herself or someone else by negligent discharge a long time ago if she owned a firearm... unless she just bought one or LIED...
@@billoswaltHer lack of intelligence, enforcement of the Constitution, and poor work ethic should keep her out of the White House without a "ban", yet here we are.
I never understood that argument....like are we banning revolvers, Beretta m9's, and 1911's? Because they are weapons of war. However no standing army past or present has ever used an AR-15 in war. It really makes no sense when you think about it
Well we all need to in our respective states make sure every law abiding gun owner is registered to vote and it ain't for Cackling Kamala. In Texas over 600,000 gun owners arent registered to vote. Elections are decided on less
What makes it so frustrating is how many people watched that crap debate and made their decision. Then don't pay attention when kamala admits the truth a week later about everything.
The running out of Time watch what the UN is doing now. They know they can't get away with what Canada did in 2020 with martial law when the US has so many armed citizens ready to defend themselves
Bill Gates recently commented "The notion of the first amendment..." All these self proclaimed elites feel the same way about the entire constitution. It is just a notion.
@atg1338 she doesn't have a conscious. You can hear it in how she talks that she's a sociopath attempting to sound like what she thinks normal people sound like.
@@nilov71 "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed" Technically speaking, prohibiting citizens from owning any kind of firearm would be infringing. If the 2nd amendment wasn't blatantly disregarded by our politicians, we'd be allowed to own any firearm we so choose, military grade or not, including M61 or M134 Gatling/miniguns.
Not a single gun control law now in existence is consistent with the 2nd Amendment. The phrase "...shall not be infringed" is a command, not a suggestion.
The 2nd Amendment is about the citizens--"state of the nature" by John Locke--having the power--Mao Zedong said that "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun": sounds like a paraphrased of the 2nd Amendment. Logically any arms--knives, howitzers, etc. if a person can afford it, he has the rights, since it can be used to check the government.
@@DjentZilla not to mention it’s the only amendment that contains that type of language. It can only speak to how important they thought it was , as well the 2nd added amendment only behind freedom of speech. Only tyrants wish to see the people disarmed. Those that would force their will on the people wish to remove any form of means to resist.
@@ArmorofGod07He can’t carry because he is a high level politician. Same reasons that ambassadors, Senators accepting foreign dignitaries, and others that represent our country can’t carry. His rights will be restored once all the court cases are over…(and he retires from politics).
@@atg1338 speaking of yourself? Tyrannical governments always hide their schemes of power behind safety and control. You would sacrifice freedom for the illusion of safety, you deserve neither.
The 2nd Amendment is about the citizens--"state of the nature" by John Locke--having the power--Mao Zedong said that "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun": sounds like a paraphrased of the 2nd Amendment. Logically any arms--knives, howitzers, etc. if a person can afford it, he has the rights, since it can be used to check the government.
Now it's OK when Trump tells his VP in 2016 that he will take the guns because Trump is a God? Is that it? (And I was alerted to that meeting from an article in "Shooting Times Magazine." I definitely was opposed to Trump when he said that in a Senate Committee Meeting. This rationalizing saying that, "he never means what he says." doesn't fly with me. Now I'm not into guns that much and I think we have too much of a gun culture in this country, but for sport I will take a couple of my little revolvers out to my private gun range in a few minutes and practice at 25 yards with a couple Ruger Blackhawks.
But it is infringed and none of us complain about it. The shall not be infringed argument is stupid unless we are willing to allow inmates to be armed. Come up with an intelligent response.
This type of shit just pisses me off, she’s bringing up the “gun show loophole” that doesn’t exist. It’s harder to get guns at gun shows if anything, I had to do an FBI background check 10 years ago at a gun show?! She’s so ridiculous it actually hurts my brain.
Muskets were "tools of war" back in the day. The fact something is useful in war does not mean citizens should not have it, it infact means the very opposite. The entire point of the 2nd A is a check and balance against a tyrannical government (It literally says that). Whatever weapons the gov has and can use against it's citizens are fair game for citizens to have and use against its government when faced with tyranny.
At this point, law abiding means nothing. Stop saying that. It sets an exception to the 2nd amendment. I read an article in a legal magazine, it quoted a Harvard law professor : " modern America has become so over legislated and regulated, the average American over 25, commits multiple felonies a month, completely unaware they had violated a law ... In a country where the top law professors are saying that. Then there ain't no pride in beings a law abiding citizen . Much love,
“On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation… Every constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19. years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force and not of right.” - Thomas Jefferson
The constitution was to protect us from the government, other governments, and oir own population, you should probably go buy a gun bro. I got my first one like 2 years ago. I now own like 5 @atg1338
Weed should be legal to smoke and should go by the same laws as alcohol. No driving or being out in public while high, or smoking weed in public places.
“Even if you’re not part of a militia.” What? A militia won’t issue you a rifle, you bring your own. Hence why the populace must maintain arms…to create a militia at a minutes notice. Shoutout to the minutemen.
@@LundRebel Because militias are necessary, I must have a gun to fight the militia. The original states were worried about being invaded by other States.
No they said the Second Amendment is for that purpose. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a Right( and a Right that pre-existed the entire Constitution. 2A is not a Right it's rather a law that protects that preexisting Right they are actually two different things. The reason that's an important concept to understand is that 2A as a law can absolutely be repealed( let's hope not) but it can be. We have in fact changed the Constitution 27 times. Doing so however does not take away the Right to Keep and Bear Arms it only removes an extra layer of that rights protection. 2A waa written so that states could have militias that could both protect them from Invasion when like now in Texas the Federal Government fails to do so and also to enable us to protect ourselves from a Tyranical Government. It's not that the framers actually wanted us to fight our own government it's that they understood that by giving the people the power and ability to do so along with the protection of 2A and the rest of the Constitution that would give any future government pause and make them think long and hard before even attempting tyrany. That's what 2A is for. The Right to keep and bear arms however is simply the embodiment of the right to general self defense against the tyrannical government or the average degenerate criminal intent on doing harm to you and your family and neighbors.
Weapons of war in civilian hands are literally the entire point of the second amendment. Our forefathers saw the need for this based on the history of world governments.
You know that the first amendment gives Congress the right to regulate the arms given to the millita and thanks to a 70s supreme Court ruling every citizen is a member of the millita, so your bitching about something you really don't understand huh?
@@Lord_Victis The first amendment is literally: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Where exactly does it give Congress the power you indicated?
The 2nd Amendment is about the citizens--"state of the nature" by John Locke--having the power--Mao Zedong said that "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun": sounds like a paraphrased of the 2nd Amendment. Logically any arms--knives, howitzers, etc. if a person can afford it, he has the rights, since it can be used to check the government.
The 2nd Amendment is about the citizens--"state of the nature" by John Locke--having the power--Mao Zedong said that "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun": sounds like a paraphrased of the 2nd Amendment. Logically any arms--knives, howitzers, etc. if a person can afford it, he has the rights, since it can be used to check the government.
Look. I am in my upper 60s, and I am a white caucasian single female. I want to say that I am so impressed by the knowledge, insight, and research, especially by African American folks, mostly you guys out there, who are putting yourselves in the spotlight. I appreciate your efforts, your style, your commentaries, your insights, and the time you take to provide a closer look at things that sometimes escape review or are blatantly ignored by most of the media. Your intellect and discussions provide essential information that is critical to informing so many Americans through your political breakdowns and assessments. Especially those efforts and dialogue that expose Harris for her continued steps to quietly craft scary policies that will move our great country towards a socialist mindset and way of life that will destroy the democracy upon which this country was built. She has repeatedly made statements that clearly show she has little to no respect for the US Constitution. If she is elected, I am truly afraid of what is to come. What I see are her efforts, fully supported by the Democratic Party, to clearly construct a path for real and unfolding potential tragedies our great country could face if she is elected. Thank you for what you do, and please continue.
She can own whatever, it doesn't matter. If someone told me they have hamburgers at home while working to write a bill banning red meat from the market, I'm going to disagree with her just as much.
Nobody is pointing out that she says, " We're not taking anybody's guns" , Then says she's taking away so called assault weapons. Which are in fact just guns. Sounds like she can't keep her lies straight.
Get this Canadian citizen out of American politics and affairs. She and all these anti American politicians, are clueless about our American heritage and history, let alone our Constitution.
As a Canadian I also agree she will never be a president. Majority of Canadians don't agree with what turdboy is doing in Ottawa either. He will be long gone very soon.
The 2nd Amendment is about the citizens--"state of the nature" by John Locke--having the power--Mao Zedong said that "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun": sounds like a paraphrased of the 2nd Amendment. Logically any arms--knives, howitzers, etc. if a person can afford it, he has the rights, since it can be used to check the government.
@@pemburuhutan2918 "That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." - George Orwell
@@mikeytee6821The difference is that Biden still understood there’s a constitution. He even stated such in a debate. He while annoying using that stupid executive action crap knew the limits. She on the other hand, thinks she can just do whatever she wants. So when she’s installed, expect war on our soil. She’s definitely stupid enough to try to force it.
The 2nd Amendment is about the citizens--"state of the nature" by John Locke--having the power--Mao Zedong said that "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun": sounds like a paraphrased of the 2nd Amendment. Logically any arms--knives, howitzers, etc. if a person can afford it, he has the rights, since it can be used to check the government.
I can hear her cackling behind closed doors, putting people behind bars for smoking, getting her W in the courtroom, all while knowing full well that she's smoked before and thought it was cool. THIS is why I don't like her. "Rules for thee, but not for me. Oh, and I'll ruin your life with these rules too!"
Ask anyone who says this "what guns are constiutionally protected and which are not" then ask them why some are and some aren't. it will destroy their argument
@@anonymous.anonymity. We are until the government makes laws that go directly against our innate right. Then we will no longer comply to rules and laws that defy the Constitution.
An AR-15 is not assault weapon I don't know why these people keep calling them that they're semi-automatic rifle and I'd like to see if she owns a gun I don't believe she does she's got security guards
The secret service has fully automatics maybe not the ones that they're carrying on their person but you look in that car it's got them several but none for you
I read the 2nd this way; if they have a certain weapon we should also have access to it. The 2nd was put there to give the citizenry the possibility to confront a tyrannical government. Throwing rock just won't do it.
Joe already said all of our guns wouldn't do anything because he has f-16s and nuclear missiles Of course all of Joe's weapons have been purchased using our money so
Exactly right. The fundamental purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure that the average man remains free to arm himself for war, with weapons on par with (if not superior to) what he might reasonably expect to face in battle in the hands of professional soldiers. In light of this fact, all firearms are protected under the Second Amendment.
Absolutely correct. If the big one starts, it won’t be pretty. Fortunately armed US citizens outnumber everyone. No army has enough supplies, air support, drones, missiles or tanks. Not even our our government. They have to get the guns first. The bad guys will be starve out long before they made a dent on American soil
Democraps routinely violate 7 Amendments of the Constitution without consequences. The Constitution is TP along with any other laws they don't like. Unless those laws are upheld, this country will fall.
@@JasonRector-nd4liexcept the 2nd amendment was written right after a bloody revolution. Written to give citizens the right to own weapons to fight a war with should it happen again.
If so, we can charge her with Treason and Sedition for deliberately trying to undermine the COTUS, to include the MANDATED Bill Of Rights. She has a right to a trial by a jury. Or DOES she? Govt authorities who don't respect/obey the SUPREME law of the land have no authority.
Lol dude it doesn't matter what you have loaded. They are showing up to your door with 6 heavily armed men with body armor...you aren't going to contest them.
@@briankapnick5414 You and I may be ready but not enough of America is ready. Most of them want these infringements thinking they can be kept safe by them. They are the very definition of trading essential liberty for farts worth of temporary safety.
@@briankapnick5414 that's never going to happen, you think the feds will let you undo all their hard work they've put in over the years to strip you of your rights?
Go to ground.news/colion to stay fully informed on 2A news and get all sides of every story. Subscribe for 40% off unlimited access through my link.
Hitler, Pol Pott, Stalin or Mao... What makes them think it'll be any different now
Thank you very much for the information
Channel Matthew Harris Law, PLLC, "Are you in a Secret Militia"?
Tell you audience to share with msnbc and cnn viewers. They're totally brainwashed. 8 years of hearing regurgitated shat is bound to affect many to try an be an "hero"
Read behold a pale horse.
"Silent weapons" for quiet wars. Please don't delete my comment.
The 2nd Amendment is about the citizens--"state of the nature" by John Locke--having the power--Mao Zedong said that "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun": sounds like a paraphrased of the 2nd Amendment. Logically any arms--knives, howitzers, etc. if a person can afford it, he has the rights, since it can be used to check the government.
If you cannot see the irony of having a gun ban enforced by men with guns, then you fail to understand why the second amendment was written in the first place.
@@allengose5438 rules for thee, not for me!
You're right, except it's not even ironic. When you think about it from their perspective, it makes perfect sense. "They can't protect themselves; we can do what we like with them."
They failed History too.
Well said, if they try to take AR’s by force they will come to you with AR’s. How ironic !
This.
She’s one of the reasons our founding fathers gave us 2A for.
Those rights weren’t given they were fought and sacrificed for.
Yeah but our Founding Fathers didn't expect that our castrated society would do nothing but yell, "shall not be infringed! while scrolling to the next post.
Don't say, "this is what the second was intended for", unless you plan on taking action.
@jonvon2044 the 2A WAS given to protect our rights.
Whats up Dead Orbit!
@@RolandtheThompsonGunner and what "action" would that be? Any resistance will be met with complete revokation of your rights, and a healthy prison sentence.
Of course she owns a gun, she's not against guns, she's against us having guns
Or “guns for me and not for thee”
How ignorant
It's funny (and sad) how she doesn't see the hypocrisy in her own statements.
@@atg1338You keep saying this all over the comment section. Are you saying she’s ignorant or the person posting the above comment is ignorant? Because if you’re saying Cackling Kamala is ignorant that isn’t true, she is wilfully coming after guns she deems “scary weapons of war” which goes against the 2nd Amendment. If you’re saying the commenter is ignorant then you’re also wrong because they are literally calling her out for what she’s said from her own mouth so how is that ignorant?!
No she doesn't. She would have shot herself or someone else by negligent discharge a long time ago if she owned a firearm... unless she just bought one or LIED...
She is unfit and unqualified.
How about banning her from running for President.
@@billoswaltHer lack of intelligence, enforcement of the Constitution, and poor work ethic should keep her out of the White House without a "ban", yet here we are.
When Patriotism becomes illegal, I’ll live as an Outlaw.
Hell yea brother!
Amen
And I'll die if I have to.
Hell yeah
In that case, you already are.
Owning “tools of war” is literally consistent with the second amendment .
America, baby😊
I never understood that argument....like are we banning revolvers, Beretta m9's, and 1911's? Because they are weapons of war. However no standing army past or present has ever used an AR-15 in war. It really makes no sense when you think about it
@@edwardjmayer87🎯
@@edwardjmayer87the hunting rifle is a weapon of war🧐
@@edwardjmayer87they don't wanna think about it
She has ZERO business being a president of anything.
Amen
Vice president, please don't hesitate to keep her in place for the moment 😮
Agreed
Zero votes Harris for a reason!
Well we all need to in our respective states make sure every law abiding gun owner is registered to vote and it ain't for Cackling Kamala. In Texas over 600,000 gun owners arent registered to vote. Elections are decided on less
Any defensive use of weapons shouldn't even reach the trial stage. FAFO
"We are not coming for your guns"
Next sentence: "We are basically coming for your guns"
Obviously that's the gist
What makes it so frustrating is how many people watched that crap debate and made their decision. Then don't pay attention when kamala admits the truth a week later about everything.
The running out of Time watch what the UN is doing now. They know they can't get away with what Canada did in 2020 with martial law when the US has so many armed citizens ready to defend themselves
She just said she'd use an executive order for Mandatory buy backs of our guns.
Also, freedom of speech 😢
That's like saying Censorship is consistent with the first amendment.
What an absolute embarrassment.
Brilliant, exactly 💯
Bill Gates recently commented "The notion of the first amendment..." All these self proclaimed elites feel the same way about the entire constitution. It is just a notion.
Walz believes that censoring misinformation is consistent with the 1A.
Yep.....THEY have to censor your speech because some wetaud got offended and feelings hurt!!!
@@spencerm5913They're calling for criminal charges for spreading "disinformation" censorship is key to the DNC platform.
She's a puppet.
They all are
Just like Sniffy the Clown
@@Zippadeedoodaa-nt8omTrump must not be listening to his “puppeteer” if they’ve tried to kill him twice. 🤡
She is specificallly Rockefeller's puppet just like Biden and Obama
@@Zippadeedoodaa-nt8om That's pretty funny coming from you, little guy.
Love this guy! What a realist, who calls out false claims and promotes truth.
Thank you Colion!
There is no line they wouldn't cross to gain more power and control
But hey that's politicians, that said she probably hasn't been to the range or shot in quite some time methinks.
And we just keep waiting.
Why do you think they rig elections, they cant win without cheating!
@@RolandtheThompsonGunner Yes, unfortunately people will wait until the the last straw breaks the camels back.
Proven daily
She is so out of touch with reality.
Mirrors politicians like Newsom in California. And you think She's bad...
That her eyes are brown 😂😂😂
How exactly?
@@atg1338did you even watch the video? lol
@atg1338 she doesn't have a conscious. You can hear it in how she talks that she's a sociopath attempting to sound like what she thinks normal people sound like.
Any ban is absolutely inconsistent with the 2nd amendment
Just shows how little thought they’re putting into their lame claims
No, actually not...
The 2A doesn't say that you can own and ANY firearm.
They could say that you can own this specific firearm. Am I wrong?
@@nilov71yes it’s rights to bear arms an ar is a type of arm so I should be able to own
@@nilov71 "...the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed"
Technically speaking, prohibiting citizens from owning any kind of firearm would be infringing. If the 2nd amendment wasn't blatantly disregarded by our politicians, we'd be allowed to own any firearm we so choose, military grade or not, including M61 or M134 Gatling/miniguns.
@@nilov71ok so what does shall not be infringed mean?
We’re not taking your guns, then she immediately starts into a gun ban rant. Sounds like they’re planning on taking your guns.
They don't want the common man and the common woman to defend themselves
Fair is not in there IQ
Or they want you to pay thousands and thousands for that right and then only be able to use antiques they don't make parts for anymore
They would rather that you become a dead victim than possess the capability to challenge their authority.
@@JohnShea-d2xexactly brother!
Or they just want it to be not affordable for enough people that it would threaten them
Not a single gun control law now in existence is consistent with the 2nd Amendment. The phrase "...shall not be infringed" is a command, not a suggestion.
The 2nd Amendment is about the citizens--"state of the nature" by John Locke--having the power--Mao Zedong said that "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun": sounds like a paraphrased of the 2nd Amendment. Logically any arms--knives, howitzers, etc. if a person can afford it, he has the rights, since it can be used to check the government.
Shall not be infringed sounds pretty clear to me 🇺🇸
@@DjentZilla not to mention it’s the only amendment that contains that type of language. It can only speak to how important they thought it was , as well the 2nd added amendment only behind freedom of speech. Only tyrants wish to see the people disarmed. Those that would force their will on the people wish to remove any form of means to resist.
It says right to bear arms. It lists no exceptions. It also says it is tge supreme law of the land.
The founding father made it clear and easy to understand so we wouldn’t have debates over it. They essentially drew a line in the sand
Is that why Trump can’t carry a gun?
@@ArmorofGod07He can’t carry because he is a high level politician. Same reasons that ambassadors, Senators accepting foreign dignitaries, and others that represent our country can’t carry. His rights will be restored once all the court cases are over…(and he retires from politics).
She is for coming in your home and take it, if you don't give it up.
Spoken like a true dictator.
Ignorance
@@atg1338 speaking of yourself? Tyrannical governments always hide their schemes of power behind safety and control. You would sacrifice freedom for the illusion of safety, you deserve neither.
No, a dictator would say,"We're taking your guns, rites, and we own you and yours."
@@atg1338what do you call it then?
Like kamala? @@atg1338
It is engraved on the Bill of Rights, 2A shall not be Infringed.
The 2nd Amendment is about the citizens--"state of the nature" by John Locke--having the power--Mao Zedong said that "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun": sounds like a paraphrased of the 2nd Amendment. Logically any arms--knives, howitzers, etc. if a person can afford it, he has the rights, since it can be used to check the government.
@@pemburuhutan2918 correct they used the argument that you couldnt have canons back then but you could own one without a doubt
Shall not be infringed!
I guarantee she has never read the Constitution. Forget being capable of understanding any part of it.
I’m not going to take anyone’s guns away. And then immediately started talking about taking your guns away.
Now it's OK when Trump tells his VP in 2016 that he will take the guns because Trump is a God? Is that it? (And I was alerted to that meeting from an article in "Shooting Times Magazine." I definitely was opposed to Trump when he said that in a Senate Committee Meeting. This rationalizing saying that, "he never means what he says." doesn't fly with me. Now I'm not into guns that much and I think we have too much of a gun culture in this country, but for sport I will take a couple of my little revolvers out to my private gun range in a few minutes and practice at 25 yards with a couple Ruger Blackhawks.
This should be too comment!!
@@tobycan9150 Trump talked about taking guns away and nobody cares. Is that because he is a god?
SHAL NOT BE INFRINGED!!!
you would think. yet there's restrictions up the wazzoo and the only big win we've had is in 2004 when tge awb from Clinton ended
That statement is now out the door, last time checked 1776 wasn't EARNED in a court room.
But it is infringed and none of us complain about it. The shall not be infringed argument is stupid unless we are willing to allow inmates to be armed. Come up with an intelligent response.
From my cold dead fingers
@@jonathonschott It shouldn't get to that point.
She doesn’t want to take anyone’s guns away.
She wants to take everyone’s guns away.
Her website literally says forced buy back program within first 100 days and ar15 ban
Exactly ❗️
Except her own.
@@Tetrahfy Good. Guns are out of control in the US. Why do you need an AK47 for your kids to play with.
@@amracewaykids are not allowed to own guns. Try again.
This type of shit just pisses me off, she’s bringing up the “gun show loophole” that doesn’t exist. It’s harder to get guns at gun shows if anything, I had to do an FBI background check 10 years ago at a gun show?! She’s so ridiculous it actually hurts my brain.
What she just said is the very REASON for the Second.
Tools of protection not war!
Weapons of war is the whole point of the 2A.
Tyrant repellant
The w@r may be the instrument of protection
Muskets were "tools of war" back in the day. The fact something is useful in war does not mean citizens should not have it, it infact means the very opposite. The entire point of the 2nd A is a check and balance against a tyrannical government (It literally says that). Whatever weapons the gov has and can use against it's citizens are fair game for citizens to have and use against its government when faced with tyranny.
The founding fathers warned us about this.
She doesn’t know anything about guns but everything about laying on her back!
The government shouldn’t get to decide which arms law-abiding citizens are "allowed" to own.
At this point, law abiding means nothing. Stop saying that. It sets an exception to the 2nd amendment.
I read an article in a legal magazine, it quoted a Harvard law professor : " modern America has become so over legislated and regulated, the average American over 25, commits multiple felonies a month, completely unaware they had violated a law ...
In a country where the top law professors are saying that. Then there ain't no pride in beings a law abiding citizen . Much love,
"SHALL! NOT! BE! INFRINGED!"
Ignorance
“On similar ground it may be proved that no society can make a perpetual constitution, or even a perpetual law. The earth belongs always to the living generation…
Every constitution, then, and every law, naturally expires at the end of 19. years. If it be enforced longer, it is an act of force and not of right.” - Thomas Jefferson
What don't they understand about this???
@@atg1338looking in the mirror a lot lately?
The constitution was to protect us from the government, other governments, and oir own population, you should probably go buy a gun bro. I got my first one like 2 years ago. I now own like 5 @atg1338
Admits to smoking weed and then prosecutes a bunch of people for possession.
She is still smoking weed 😂
Typical democrat and rino
Weed should be legal to smoke and should go by the same laws as alcohol. No driving or being out in public while high, or smoking weed in public places.
@odinsbeard4775 makes a lot of sense democrats think they are above the law
@@odinsbeard4775 Trump 2024
You are right! Thanks for posting this.
“Even if you’re not part of a militia.”
What? A militia won’t issue you a rifle, you bring your own. Hence why the populace must maintain arms…to create a militia at a minutes notice. Shoutout to the minutemen.
That's exactly what a militia is. Citizens ready to fight at moments notice with their own firearms. Thanks for your comment.
The Minutrmen. Protecting the Commonwealth since 2180.
@@WhiteIkiryo-yt2it😂 you fool
@Gardenstategreat1225 it's a Fallout 4 reference, dude...
@@LundRebel Because militias are necessary, I must have a gun to fight the militia.
The original states were worried about being invaded by other States.
Every dictator owned their own guns while they took guns away from the public.
She is on the Team of: "You'll Own Nothing, And you'll be Happy".
And she is NOT ALONE
The founding father are virtually all documented as saying the main reason for the right to bear arms is for protection against our own government.
Exactly, it doesn't say, "Right to bear Arms... Except for this list that they'll arbitrary come up with later on."
No they said the Second Amendment is for that purpose. The Right to Keep and Bear Arms is a Right( and a Right that pre-existed the entire Constitution. 2A is not a Right it's rather a law that protects that preexisting Right they are actually two different things. The reason that's an important concept to understand is that 2A as a law can absolutely be repealed( let's hope not) but it can be. We have in fact changed the Constitution 27 times. Doing so however does not take away the Right to Keep and Bear Arms it only removes an extra layer of that rights protection. 2A waa written so that states could have militias that could both protect them from Invasion when like now in Texas the Federal Government fails to do so and also to enable us to protect ourselves from a Tyranical Government. It's not that the framers actually wanted us to fight our own government it's that they understood that by giving the people the power and ability to do so along with the protection of 2A and the rest of the Constitution that would give any future government pause and make them think long and hard before even attempting tyrany. That's what 2A is for. The Right to keep and bear arms however is simply the embodiment of the right to general self defense against the tyrannical government or the average degenerate criminal intent on doing harm to you and your family and neighbors.
"Shall not be infringed" IS consistent with the US constitution! Period.
Remember she mumbles unburdened by what has been done; that’s a reference to said constitution.....
@@anonymouslegion4928 She wouldn't know. She's repeating what she's told.
Only four words and it is so simple and easy to understand.
@@anonymouslegion4928 GOOD CATCH !!!
Well regulated militia
How in the world did she pass the bar? How?
From her knees.
extra credit with the professor in his office.😘
@@zachery8841 bar exams in Cali don’t need to be strict because nothing is illegal over there
Lawyers pass the bar all the time while internally planning to practice law by their feelings rather than the letter of the law.
She didn't. Like everything else she does, she cheated.
Tell 'em Colin!! Thank ya for your service, and sacrifices Brother. God Bless ya for it.
Weapons of war in civilian hands are literally the entire point of the second amendment. Our forefathers saw the need for this based on the history of world governments.
THIS 💯
1,000%
Yes.....nothing says "I want to uphold the 2nd amendment" like "I shall infringe upon you".
She is such a liar. 2A shall not be infringed!!
It already is.
Where were you when the Black Panthers marched on California State Capitol?
You know that the first amendment gives Congress the right to regulate the arms given to the millita and thanks to a 70s supreme Court ruling every citizen is a member of the millita, so your bitching about something you really don't understand huh?
@@Lord_Victis The first amendment is literally: "Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press; or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." Where exactly does it give Congress the power you indicated?
@@randylennon8204
Article 1 section 8 clause 16.
You really think that what you stated was the ENTIRE 1st amendment?
Not let her teach my child in kindergarten.
So will she give up her security detail carrying modern firearms?
The 2nd Amendment is about the citizens--"state of the nature" by John Locke--having the power--Mao Zedong said that "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun": sounds like a paraphrased of the 2nd Amendment. Logically any arms--knives, howitzers, etc. if a person can afford it, he has the rights, since it can be used to check the government.
Preach the gospel my brother
Soooo frustrating to hear them repeat the same lie over and over again.
But that's how it become true
She should be prosecuted as traitor by citizens.
"it's your 2A right to have me disarm you" tyrant Harris.
We've given up too much lads. We need to dig our feet in.
Yup
TRAITOR!
The 2nd Amendment is about the citizens--"state of the nature" by John Locke--having the power--Mao Zedong said that "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun": sounds like a paraphrased of the 2nd Amendment. Logically any arms--knives, howitzers, etc. if a person can afford it, he has the rights, since it can be used to check the government.
It’s also treason!
Absolutely
Nothing could b more clear
Look. I am in my upper 60s, and I am a white caucasian single female. I want to say that I am so impressed by the knowledge, insight, and research, especially by African American folks, mostly you guys out there, who are putting yourselves in the spotlight. I appreciate your efforts, your style, your commentaries, your insights, and the time you take to provide a closer look at things that sometimes escape review or are blatantly ignored by most of the media. Your intellect and discussions provide essential information that is critical to informing so many Americans through your political breakdowns and assessments. Especially those efforts and dialogue that expose Harris for her continued steps to quietly craft scary policies that will move our great country towards a socialist mindset and way of life that will destroy the democracy upon which this country was built. She has repeatedly made statements that clearly show she has little to no respect for the US Constitution. If she is elected, I am truly afraid of what is to come. What I see are her efforts, fully supported by the Democratic Party, to clearly construct a path for real and unfolding potential tragedies our great country could face if she is elected. Thank you for what you do, and please continue.
Never turn em in. Never
If Harris told me she's a gun owner, I'd immediately ask her what guns she owns.
She owns a toy water gun from Mc Donalds Kids meal
Yeah I just cant imagine what kind of gun she would own. Tim Walz strikes me as a double barrel shotgun guy.
For her it’s nerf or nothing
She can own whatever, it doesn't matter. If someone told me they have hamburgers at home while working to write a bill banning red meat from the market, I'm going to disagree with her just as much.
@@stevegee7623 exactly
Thanks for keeping it real man !!! I appreciate you !
The banning of ANY firearm is unconstitutional. Period
Thanks for being you! America needs you my brother
Really?
She's not qualified to make a cheeseburger....
Ham sandwich.
Any sandwich🤣🤣🤣🤦🏾♂️
We have a "doctor" by me that when her name comes up, I say "She isn't qualified to ask me if I want french fries with that."
Or check her tire pressure ffs
Why doesn't she insist her Secret Service detail gives up all of its weapons of war, especially ARs? Oh, right. Rules for THEE, not for ME!
Nobody is pointing out that she says, " We're not taking anybody's guns" , Then says she's taking away so called assault weapons. Which are in fact just guns. Sounds like she can't keep her lies straight.
Get this Canadian citizen out of American politics and affairs. She and all these anti American politicians, are clueless about our American heritage and history, let alone our Constitution.
AS a Canadian i agree 1000%
But theyll save democracy by running a candidate no one voted for 😅
As a Canadian I also agree she will never be a president. Majority of Canadians don't agree with what turdboy is doing in Ottawa either. He will be long gone very soon.
@@marcleblanc6293 WE can only hope
@@sorshiaemms5959 Oh we can, the boy in blue lost 2 major sectors and polls say he has a net zero chance of winning.
So they're just gonna ignore "Shall Not Be Infringed" until the damn stars burn out, huh?
You got it.
The 2nd Amendment is about the citizens--"state of the nature" by John Locke--having the power--Mao Zedong said that "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun": sounds like a paraphrased of the 2nd Amendment. Logically any arms--knives, howitzers, etc. if a person can afford it, he has the rights, since it can be used to check the government.
@@pemburuhutan2918 "That rifle on the wall of the labourer's cottage or working class flat is the symbol of democracy. It is our job to see that it stays there." - George Orwell
To politicians, the Constitution is an obstacle to be circumvented, not a goal to which we aspire.
@@johnbrobston1334 So traitors.
Im so sick of the government breaking the law.
Im more sick of them getting away with it.
@@davidthompson1529heck ya man
I'm not taking your gun. I'm taking your gun! WTF!
The 2A isn’t about Rifles IT’s about Military Equipment. “ARMS”MEANS Everything.
She got one thing right she will 100% not be taking anyone's guns away
Her website says forced buy back program within first 100 days .. and ar15 ban
@@Tetrahfy Biden couldn't do it, neither can she. 😃
She is 100% honest on that one, She (if given the power) will not personally go take anyone's guns she will have her armed goons take your guns away
@@mikeytee6821The difference is that Biden still understood there’s a constitution. He even stated such in a debate. He while annoying using that stupid executive action crap knew the limits. She on the other hand, thinks she can just do whatever she wants. So when she’s installed, expect war on our soil. She’s definitely stupid enough to try to force it.
They can have empty casings
Yeah they're not getting any of our stuff,!
yes sir!
The 2nd Amendment is about the citizens--"state of the nature" by John Locke--having the power--Mao Zedong said that "political power grows out of the barrel of a gun": sounds like a paraphrased of the 2nd Amendment. Logically any arms--knives, howitzers, etc. if a person can afford it, he has the rights, since it can be used to check the government.
Why doesn't someone ask her what the term " shall not be infringed" means.
Come and take it.
I can hear her cackling behind closed doors, putting people behind bars for smoking, getting her W in the courtroom, all while knowing full well that she's smoked before and thought it was cool.
THIS is why I don't like her. "Rules for thee, but not for me. Oh, and I'll ruin your life with these rules too!"
Ask anyone who says this "what guns are constiutionally protected and which are not" then ask them why some are and some aren't. it will destroy their argument
They don't have an argument. All they have are emotions and the fear mongering they use to manipulate them.
" SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED " !!
When guns are illegal ill be an outlaw
Exactly. They can ban whatever they want. I won't comply. Just like I didn't comply with the jibby jabby mandate they tried to push.
I thought you lot were law abiding?
@@anonymous.anonymity.Once the people become outlaws there is no point in being law abiding
@@anonymous.anonymity. We are until the government makes laws that go directly against our innate right. Then we will no longer comply to rules and laws that defy the Constitution.
@@anonymous.anonymity.not when it is a direct assault on our rights! Don't be a fool
An AR-15 is not assault weapon I don't know why these people keep calling them that they're semi-automatic rifle and I'd like to see if she owns a gun I don't believe she does she's got security guards
Kind of hard to fix stupid. Especially at that level.
They call it an assault weapon because it sounds scary to the public, has nothing to do with themselves
The secret service has fully automatics maybe not the ones that they're carrying on their person but you look in that car it's got them several but none for you
@@toxicdragon323they’re not stupid they know exactly what they are doing
@@toxicdragon323stupid can be fixed for about 50 cents per instance. But, it's frowned upon. 😂
She is right. Definitely not taking my guns. We finally agree!
She was just with Oprah saying she's pro 2A. What a clown.
tarring and feathering is pretty consistent with american tradition as well
Shall. Not. Be. Infringed.
What shall not be infringed is our God given right to life and our constitutional rights to life
Amen.
@@RobGensonwhich is the exact reason why gun ownership is in the Constitution
@@RobGensonstay strapped then
@@elliottbaker201 you don't have a clue
They will never understand the phrase Shall Not Be Infringed any more than they understand the term illegal,or freedom or justice.
SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED! What does she not understand?
These people are sick.
You are 100% one of the most brilliant people I’ve ever listened to on the topic…guns, 2A, and politics.
We the people should have whatever the government has because we the people are the government
Again impressively done sir! Continue your work!
I believe she also said sometime’s the sun rises in the north.
It also can be rising in the west. You know, depending on the debate and chanel, like she said, her policies haven't changed,... so
Lmao. I think she got the sun and North Star confused 😂
@@steventaylor6881 same way she is pro 2A and a gun owner
Tyrant
Damn right.
I read the 2nd this way; if they have a certain weapon we should also have access to it. The 2nd was put there to give the citizenry the possibility to confront a tyrannical government. Throwing rock just won't do it.
Joe already said all of our guns wouldn't do anything because he has f-16s and nuclear missiles
Of course all of Joe's weapons have been purchased using our money so
Exactly right. The fundamental purpose of the Second Amendment is to ensure that the average man remains free to arm himself for war, with weapons on par with (if not superior to) what he might reasonably expect to face in battle in the hands of professional soldiers. In light of this fact, all firearms are protected under the Second Amendment.
Absolutely correct. If the big one starts, it won’t be pretty. Fortunately armed US citizens outnumber everyone. No army has enough supplies, air support, drones, missiles or tanks. Not even our our government. They have to get the guns first. The bad guys will be starve out long before they made a dent on American soil
"were not gunna take your guns away, but were gunna take your guns away"
She is unintentionally correct. She isn't taking shit from anyone. Because we aren't giving up shit to anyone.
It's Unconstitutional to ban any weapon.
Democraps routinely violate 7 Amendments of the Constitution without consequences. The Constitution is TP along with any other laws they don't like. Unless those laws are upheld, this country will fall.
its unconstitutional to ban weapons that can be used defensively, but bombs can't be used for defense so you don't have a right to bombs.
@@JasonRector-nd4li tell me you dont know what grenades are without saying you dont know what grenades are.
@@JasonRector-nd4liexcept the 2nd amendment was written right after a bloody revolution. Written to give citizens the right to own weapons to fight a war with should it happen again.
Tell Washington State.
She just says things, that's how they operate
Absolutely correct!
Things which are of the imagination or just plain falsehoods.
If so, we can charge her with Treason and Sedition for deliberately trying to undermine the COTUS, to include the MANDATED Bill Of Rights. She has a right to a trial by a jury.
Or DOES she?
Govt authorities who don't respect/obey the SUPREME law of the land have no authority.
Hold my beer. Yep, LOCKED and LOADED. Thanks for holding my beer . I just wanted to check and make sure.
Lol dude it doesn't matter what you have loaded. They are showing up to your door with 6 heavily armed men with body armor...you aren't going to contest them.
*But she’s a gun owner and isn’t coming for anything…* 😂 🤣😂
Shall not be infringed! So banning an AR15 would an infringement
We are way past that now... We have had infringements for a century now.
@CD-vb9fi time to overturn the infringements... time to reset to the original meaning of the Constitution.
@@briankapnick5414 You and I may be ready but not enough of America is ready. Most of them want these infringements thinking they can be kept safe by them. They are the very definition of trading essential liberty for farts worth of temporary safety.
@@briankapnick5414 that's never going to happen, you think the feds will let you undo all their hard work they've put in over the years to strip you of your rights?
Collin ... you are awsome...