Cyborg | Designer-Babies | Futurism | Futurist | Immortality | Longevity | Nanotechnology | Post-Human | Singularity | Transhuman

Blue Dot Safes Second Amendment FireResistant Handgun Safe 30x20x20Inch
For more revws please chck Blue Dot Safes Second Amendment FireResistant Handgun Safe 30x20x20Inch The Second Amendment GS3…

By: cyril lawton

Read more:
Blue Dot Safes Second Amendment FireResistant Handgun Safe 30x20x20Inch – Video

Geraldo Rivera Goes Off on Second Amendment and Gun Nuts in Facebook Post
Geraldo Rivera Goes Off on Second Amendment and Gun Nuts in Facebook Post.

By: hartyhj8

Continued here:
Geraldo Rivera Goes Off on Second Amendment and Gun Nuts in Facebook Post – Video

Blue Dot Safes Second Amendment FireResistant Gun Safe 72x40x27Inch
For more revws please chck Blue Dot Safes Second Amendment FireResistant Gun Safe 72x40x27Inch The Second Amendment Gun Saf…

By: porter fischer

See more here:
Blue Dot Safes Second Amendment FireResistant Gun Safe 72x40x27Inch – Video

For The Second Amendment
Government. -All audio/images used are not owned by me, and belong to their rightful owners.

By: Kaveh Chong

Read this article:
For The Second Amendment – Video

D.C. Asks Federal Court to Erase Second Amendment Opinion Recognizing Right to Carry
D.C. Asks Federal Court to Erase Second Amendment Opinion Recognizing Right to Carry.

By: Jinal10121

Read this article:
D.C. Asks Federal Court to Erase Second Amendment Opinion Recognizing Right to Carry – Video

Assemblyman Brian Jones Speaks on the Second Amendment – Senate Bill 53 Floor Speech
Your Second Amendment Rights SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED.

By: Brian Jones

Read this article:
Assemblyman Brian Jones Speaks on the Second Amendment – Senate Bill 53 Floor Speech – Video

Fear of interference with Second Amendment rights and suspicion of elected officials have provoked a rise in self-described patriot militias

See more here:
Fearing for the Second Amendment, militia groups grow in number

A girl killed a gun instructor as he was teaching her to shoot an Uzi at this Arizona outdoor shooting range.


Editor’s note: Jay Parini, a poet and novelist, teaches at Middlebury College in Vermont. He has just published “Jesus: The Human Face of God,” a biography of Jesus. Follow him on Twitter@JayParini. The opinions expressed in this commentary are solely those of the author.

(CNN) — The gun outrages continue, the latest the shooting of a gun instructor in Arizona by a 9-year-old girl who was taken to the range by her parents so she could shoot an Uzi, an Israeli-made submachine gun.

The question that the whole world asks is this: Why was a 9-year-old girl allowed even to try to shoot a submachine gun?

Jay Parini

I have a further question: Why does anybody not on the front lines of the military in a war zone need to have access to a submachine gun?

It’s not as though we haven’t had plenty of evidence that this gun thing in America isn’t working. Since the ghastly massacre of elementary school children at Sandy Hook on December 14, 2012, by a deranged teenager, as of June there were at least 74 school shootings, on school grounds or in schools themselves. It’s commonplace in this country now: A deranged shooter appears, armed to the teeth, out of his mind. Everyone ducks or runs for cover. The shooter proceeds calmly through the building, taking out innocents.

What kind of country have we become? Was this what the Founding Fathers had in mind?

The NRA will scream: The Second Amendment! The Second Amendment! Please be aware that most of what you think you know about the history of this amendment is nonsense. Many good books and articles exist on the subject, all neatly summarized by Saul Cornell a couple of years ago. He wrote: “If the nation truly embraced the Second Amendment as it was originally written, it would be the NRA’s worst nightmare.”

Read the original post:
2nd amendment and 'gun rights' fraud

BELLEVUE, Wash., Aug. 25, 2014 /PRNewswire-USNewswire/ — The Second Amendment Foundation today won a significant court victory in California in which the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of California ruled that the Golden State's 10-day waiting period violates the Second Amendment "as applied to those individuals who successfully pass" the state's background check prior to the ten …

SAF Wins Silvester Case On Waiting Periods In California

In March 2008 I chatted with a silver-haired law school professor under the marble pillars of the U.S. Supreme Court building. He was very excited. The court was to about hear Heller v. D.C. The case would decide whether the Second Amendment to the U.S. Constitution protects an individual right to own and carry guns. He had 20 law students with him. He said anxiously, When I put in the paperwork to get seats months ago I didnt know wed get to see one of the last unresolved constitutional questions debated. He said this while looking at a line of people hoping to get seats that went down the block, around a corner and out of sight.

Hours later a mainstream reporter next to me in the press section gasped, Oh no, when Justice Anthony Kennedy hinted that he believed the Second Amendment to be an individual right while asking the governments attorney a question.Months later, when the high court ruled 5-4 that the Second Amendment protects an individual right from government infringement, the media was paying attention. Many, however, are missing whats happening now. The Second Amendment is having its defining moment in history. The decisions now percolating up to the Supreme Court are deciding what guns the Second Amendment covers, when requirements become infringements and more.

Gun-rights and gun-control groups understand that these court decisions illustrate how much elections matter, as the federal judges making these decisions are nominated by the president and voted on by the senate. However, two recent federal court decisions from judges appointed by former president Bill Clinton show how difficult these decisions can be to handicap.

In one just-decided case, California Senior U.S. District Court Judge Anthony W. Ishii found that 10-day waiting periods of Penal Code violate the Second Amendment as applied to people who fall into certain classifications. He found this arbitrary wait time burdens the Second Amendment rights of the plaintiffs. (The decision can be read here.) This court decision orders the California Department of Justice to allow the unobstructed release of guns to those who pass a background check and possess a California license to carry a handgun, or who hold a Department of Justice-issued Certificate of Eligibility and already possess at least one firearm known to the state. Basically, it says if someone already legally has a gun in California the state cant make that person wait 10 days for a second gun just because it wants to. If that sounds like common sense to you, youre right, but common sense isnt a given in the courts.

Brandon Combs, a plaintiff in the case who is also director of the executive director of the Calguns Foundation, said the decision clears the way for them to challenge other irrational and unconstitutional gun-control laws. We look forward to doing just that.

United States Supreme Court building. (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

A flurry of such challenges began right after Heller, led to McDonald v. Chicago (2010) and are still ongoing. In an important example, in February 2014 the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals confirmed that the Second Amendment protects an individual right to carry firearms for self-defense in public. The decision came in Peruta v. San Diego County. The majority opinion in Peruta said, We are called upon to decide whether a responsible, law-abiding citizen has a right under the Second Amendment to carry a firearm in public for self-defense.

The California Rifle and Pistol Association Foundation brought the case on behalf of five individuals who were denied the right to carry a handgun by the San Diego sheriff. According to California law, a person applying for their Second Amendment right to carry a concealed handgun must: (1) be a resident of their respective city or county; (2) be of good moral character; (3) have good cause for such a license; and (4) pass a firearms training course. Many rural California counties accept self-defense as good cause for a person to get a license to carry a handgun, but some urban sheriffs and chiefs of police disagreed. In those jurisdictions the few who attain permits had to beg, plead, and show imminent danger to their lives before they could exercise their right to bear arms.

The Ninth Circuit decided 2 to 1 that the restrictive good cause policy of the San Diego County Sheriffs Department was unconstitutional. The majority opinion accepted that the Second Amendment right is not unlimited. It is not a right to keep and carry any weapon whatsoever in any manner whatsoever and for whatever purpose. Rather, it is a right subject to traditional restrictions, which themselvesand this is a critical pointtend to show the scope of the right.

The majority decision in Peruta said, Our reading of the Second Amendment is akin to the Seventh Circuits interpretation [in Shepard v. Madigan] and at odds with the approach of the Second, Third, and Fourth Circuits. We are unpersuaded by the decisions of the Second, Third, and Fourth Circuits for several reasons. First, contrary to the approach in Heller, all three courts declined to undertake a complete historical analysis of the scope and nature of the Second Amendment right outside the home. As a result, they misapprehend both the nature of the Second Amendment right and the implications of state laws that prevent the vast majority of responsible, law-abiding citizens from carrying in public for lawful self-defense purposes.

View original post here:
The Second Amendment's Defining Moment

Joe Scarborough, host of MSNBCs Morning Joe more >

Former Florida Rep. Joe Scarborough said Wednesday that the Founding Fathers did not write the Second Amendment to allow children to fire semi-automatic machine guns.

Mr. Scarborough, the Republican co-host of MSNBCs Morning Joe, was responding to the news that a 9-year-old girl lost control of an Uzi at an Arizona shooting range this week and accidentally killed her instructor.

SEE ALSO: Girl, 9, kills firing instructor with Uzi in Arizona range accident

Why are you putting an Uzi in the hands of a 9-year-old girl? It is sick, Mr. Scarborough said. What is wrong with these people? What is wrong with this culture?

NBC reported that shooting range allowed children as young as 8 years old to fire weapons.

I find it hard to believe that our Founding Fathers put together a Second Amendment to give 8-year children the right to fire semi-automatic weapons, and if you think that is what the Constitution of the United States, says you should really go back and read the Second Amendment, Mr. Scarborough said.

Follow this link:
Joe Scarborough: Second Amendment shouldn't open door for kids to wield Uzis

By Justine McDaniel, Robby Korth and Jessica Boehm August 29

Across the country, a thriving dissatisfaction with the U.S. government is prompting a growing spate of bills in state legislatures aimed at defying federal control over firearms more than 200 during the last decade, a News21 investigation found.

Particularly in Western and Southern states, where individual liberty intersects with increasing skepticism among gun owners, firearms are a political vehicle in efforts to ensure states rights and void U.S. gun laws within their borders. State legislators are attempting to declare that only they have the right to interpret the Second Amendment, a movement that recalls the anti-federal spirit of the Civil War and civil-rights eras.

I think the president and the majority of Congress, both in the House and Senate, are just completely out of touch with how people feel about Second Amendment rights, said Missouri state Sen. Brian Nieves, who has fought for bills to weaken the federal governments authority over firearms in his state.

In Idaho, the Legislature unanimously passed a law to keep any future federal gun measures from being enforced in the state. In Kansas, a law passed last year says federal regulation doesnt apply to guns manufactured in the state. Wyoming, South Dakota and Arizona have had laws protecting firearms freedom from the U.S. government since 2010.

A News21 analysis shows 14 such bills were passed by legislators in 11 states, mainly in Western states, along with Kansas, Tennessee and Alaska. Of those, 11 were signed into law, though one was later struck down in court. In Montana, Missouri and Oklahoma, three others were vetoed.

More than three-quarters of U.S. states have proposed nullification laws since 2008. More than half of those bills have come in the last two years after the shooting at Sandy Hook Elementary School in Newtown, Connecticut. All but three have been introduced since President Barack Obama took office.

Underneath the policy jargon lies a culture of firearms woven into the heritage and politics of states whose histories were shaped by guns.

(The federal government) is diving off into areas unchecked that theyre not supposed to be involved in, said Montana state Rep. Krayton Kerns, who introduced a bill in 2013 to limit the ability of local police to help enforce federal laws. Not only is it our right in state legislatures to do this, its our obligation to do it. Somebodys got to put a whoa on it.

Opponents say its not federal gun regulation thats unconstitutional, but laws to nullify it.

More here:
GovBeat: In states, a legislative rush to nullify federal gun laws

A Brief History Of The Second Amendment (AS TOLD BY MSNBC)
May 22, 2014 MSNBC News ONE TIME ONLY DONATION hosted_button_id=MHT8PM5BPSVC8 $1.00 ON…

By: wwwMOXNEWScom

See the original post here:
A Brief History Of The Second Amendment (AS TOLD BY MSNBC) – Video

[Download eBook] The Second Amendment: A Biography by Michael Waldman [PDF/EPUB]
Link Download : Today I'm sharing to you the link to download Free eBook [The Seco...

By: Alyce Pepper

Read this article:

For those of you who havent heard, Chipotle Mexican Grill, which for years allowed local laws to dictate policy for the restaurant chain regarding open or concealed weapons, has decided to ask customers not to bring firearms into its restaurants after some zealous gun owners paraded around with military-style assault rifles at a Chipotle in Texas. Whats more probable, though, is that well-funded anti-Second Amendment activists exploited a single unfortunate incident to badger a pliable corporation into a bad decision. This is neither new nor unexpected.

Cue the calls for a boycott from Second Amendment fans.

Theres really nothing inherently wrong with the idea of boycotting businesses that you dont like. Though, theres typically nothing very productive about the idea, either. On a personal level, if I participated in boycotts every time a company slighted my ideological sensibilities, I wouldnt be able to watch a movie, listen to music, read a novel or basically do anything but hole up in a bunker. I am far more inclined to support businesses that stand up to government meddling and ones that are targeted by boycotters whom I dislike. When or maybe if Im ever in need of silk flowers or affordable picture frames, Ill be sure to head to Hobby Lobby.

As a Second Amendment fan, I believe that Chipotle is making a mistake. Yet the company isnt exactly undermining our constitutional rights by asking consumers to keep their guns out of its restaurants. Though Chipotle acted for the wrong reasons, it has every right to create an experience for its consumers that it finds safe and inviting. The company has only asked that you not bring weapons, but if consumers bring their concealed weapons in the restaurants, there is little anyone can or would do. Precipitating conflict over the issue seems more appropriate for the Occupy movement than it does for a conservative.

Fact is, if the CEO of Qdoba Mexican Grill were a libertarian plutocrat supporting all my favorite organizations, Id still choose Chipotle, because when it comes to food, I owe more to a good product than I do to a philosophically sound owner. Chipotle was founded on an exemplary idea, and its execution and consistency have won my business even when I disagree with its choices. Now, if this company were forking over millions to some finger-wagging Michael Bloomberg-funded gaggle of authoritarians (the groups that nag these companies into compliance), I would probably have to reconsider. But as far as I know, thats not the case.

Moreover, boycotts are typically pretty ineffective or, when they are successful, they end up hurting people who have nothing to do with the decisions that have upset everyone. The combined compensation package for the two guys who run Chipotle, for example, is $50 million. Executive pay is, on average, allegedly 204 times that of the average worker. One CEO, Steve Ells, makes 778 times the median wage of his employees. He makes more than the CEOs of Ford, AT&T and a bunch of other colossal corporations. And the guy deserves every penny, in my opinion. (Yes, I like Chipotle … a lot.) Even if the boycott would have an impact, its the rank-and-file employee, folks who have absolutely no bearing on policy, who would end up suffering first. Ells would not.

And anyway, if conservatives are in the mood to boycott bad actors, there are plenty around who have committed far more egregious sins against America. You can start with companies that survive on taxpayer dollars and dont even have the decency to provide consumers with a decent burrito.

David Harsanyi is a senior editor at The Federalist and the author of The People Have Spoken (and They Are Wrong): The Case Against Democracy. Follow him on Twitter @davidharsanyi.

Follow this link:
David Harsanyi Why Second Amendment supporters should not boycott Chipotle

Blue Dot Safes Second Amendment 640×480 – Blue Dot Safes Second Amendment Fire-Resistant Gun Safe Review The Blue Dot Safes Second Amendment Fire-Resistant…

By: Angie Lee

Read the rest here:
Blue Dot Safes Second Amendment 640×480 – Video

Peter Schiff 2nd Amendment SMACKDOWN
Download Here: Mirror 1: The Second Amendment has nothing to do with hunting, it's to keep tyranny and the government in check” – Peter Schiff…

By: Economy Center

Peter Schiff 2nd Amendment SMACKDOWN – Video

Jim Howell talks about Second Amendment Laws Ib
Kansas State Representative Jim Howell – 2014 End of Session Interview on Kansas Second Amendment Legislation – Part 1b.

By: Jim Howell

Go here to read the rest:
Jim Howell talks about Second Amendment Laws Ib – Video

Jim Howell talks about Second Amendment Laws IV
Kansas State Representative Jim Howell – 2014 End of Session Interview on Kansas Second Amendment Legislation – Part 4.

By: Jim Howell

Read more:
Jim Howell talks about Second Amendment Laws IV – Video

Chapter 2 – Totalitarian Cattle Rustlers and the Second Amendment Chapter 2 is part of a series that leads up to Benghazi. There will be a DVD available soon “Benghazi, The Real Story” so that peopl…

By: Robert Exter

Visit link:
Chapter 2 – Totalitarian Cattle Rustlers and the Second Amendment – Video

FireFox! Start Your Own Web Hosting Company
Web Hosting Advertise Here $10 a Month Affordable web-hosting
Pierre Teilhard De Chardin

Designer Children | Prometheism | Euvolution | Transhumanism

Sign up below for the Prometheism / Designer Children Discussion Forum

Subscribe to prometheism-pgroup

Powered by