This is a lawyer.

Forget the Second Amendment and anything else: He is plainly stating that there is no right to possess an item. Anything you may “own” is only by the grace of almighty Government to give you that privilege and that can be removed at any time.

And that is why we have a Second Amendment.



Spread the love

By Miguel.GFZ

Semi-retired like Vito Corleone before the heart attack. Consiglieri to J.Kb and AWA. I lived in a Gun Control Paradise: It sucked and got people killed. I do believe that Freedom scares the political elites.

14 thoughts on “No right to Personal Property.”
  1. this is the problem with uneducated ignorant morons who think they know it all… the ORIGINAL militia was ordinary citizens…. fuk this guy and fuk his family and his fukkin dog.
    I have no time and no sympathy for any liberal asshole any more

    1. added to that,
      the original militia was comprised of ordinary citizens who were expected to muster, when called upon, with their own PERSONAL gear, arms and ammunition.

      1. Saw a video yesterday of a case where neighbors called police because a guy was shooting his shotgun towards their homes and threatening to kill them. The police asked the guy to drop the gun and come talk to them — he decided to shoot the officers. Caught both of them in the head with bird shot, they returned fire to no effect.

        The neighbors had their guns, gave covering fire, pulled the officers to safety and rendered first aid.

        That’s one of the reasons for the 2nd. That’s the militia.

        1. Was that the one in Whatcom County, Washington State where the sheriffs officers were hit by the bird shot? If so, there is a bit more to the story… Not good, either.

  2. This guy has been around, working mainly in Business Law, Trademarks, Product Liability, and Employment Employee Law. Absolutely no experience with Constitutional Law and has worked only in the Virginia, Maryland and DC and it seems he cut his teeth at NYC Court Administrations. Has done extensive work for liberal rags and leftist causes. Business must be slow to be involved with social media.
    There was a period in this nation’s history where a person was arrested if they did not own and carry a firearm at all times and there was a certain rounds requirement as well. For this guy to be correct, the constitutional framer’s contextual setting must be completely ignored and rejected and replaced with the leftist contextual setting of modern-day Elitism.

  3. Typical anti-gun moron.
    First of all, I do not see the word “gun” in the 2nd Amendment. It says the Government will not infringe on the right of the people to keep and bear arms.
    In fact, the 2nd grants no rights at all. It says the government cannot restrict your right. A lawyer should understand that based solely on the plain language.
    If a right is involved, it is the fundamental human right to self defense against threats, both political and personal.
    As to the militia stuff… I am sure that if the Founding Fathers knew how far intelligence levels were going to drop over the next 200 years, they would have left the prefatory statement out. There is a reason it does not say musket, or guns. It says arms, and that is because they saw how weapons advanced in their own lifetimes, and they were fully aware that the term “arms” would continue to be applicable in the future, whereas gun, musket, rifle, cannon, or any other specific arm may no longer be the correct name.
    In this case, I think ridicule is the correct response.

  4. Lawyers, judges and lawgivers are NOT the stalwarts of Justice and Freedom.. Lawyers, judges and lawgivers are the USURPERS of Justice and Freedom.

    This is why EVERY lawyer, judge and lawgiver, will gat a fair, 3 minute tribunal. some,,though very FEW, will walk our free. Most will keep their appointment with the gallows or the cross (depending on their level of crimes), ten minutes later.

  5. As Mencken points out, lawyers are “men professionally trained in finding plausible excuses for dishonest and dishonorable acts”.
    Apart from that, lawyers are mostly like plumbers: people who went to a trade school to learn the practice of how their trade operates today. Some have an interest in, and knowledge of, the principles of law. But a lot of them just want to know how to write contracts that they can get past a judge, or how to craft an argument in court to get a defendant off.

    This particularly lawyer is obviously far stupider than the norm, and/or far more dishonest. It’s trivially easy to find SCOTUS precedents that show he’s full of it. For extensive details showing just how wrong he is, Stephen Halbrook and L. Neil Schulman will do nicely.

    1. To give just a few examples of older SCOTUS rulings where the individual right to keep and bear arms appears: Miller (1939), Presser (1876), and Dred Scott (1857). Not to mention Madison’s observation in Federalist #46.

  6. So yeah, about that whole unalienable rights thing…

    Q: What’s the ideal weight for a lawyer?
    A: About three pounds, including the urn.

Only one rule: Don't be a dick.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.