“The prohibition is general. No clause in the Constitution could by any rule of construction be conceived to give congress a power to disarm the people. Such a flagitious attempt could only be made under some general pretense by a state legislature. But if in any blind pursuit of inordinate power, either should attempt it, this amendment may be appealed to as a restraint on both.”

Ahhh yes, another one of those clear and lawful absolutes that Mr. Obamunist Goodwrench, his czars and stars, and otherwise liberal control freaks intensionally ignore.

Obama sure didn't mention anything last night about disarmment-he didn't dare!

Historically speaking, anytime we have seen a government disarm its people it has been followed up with a genocide. Nazi Germany, the Ukraine, Rwanda, Uganda, Cambodia....Our governments have no legitimate business disarming us or engaging in social engineering. None.

Yes, but back then they never could have imagined a black rifle with a pistol grip that could fire 30 bullets in a row. Thirty men could have fired simultaneously perhaps, and thirty lead balls could be loaded into cannon and fired at once, but certainly not all of those guns would have been black.

There is no right to take up arms against law enforcement. It has been tried. Have you ever heard of Ruby Ridge, The Possee Comitas etc?. You guys should take up your guns and quit talking about your pie in the sky BS philosophy that never reaches in level of reality or fruition. According to most of you the US Govt if not also your States have been and are now tyrannical. Have guys stopped this tyranny, hell no they have not! So the evidence is every where before you that guns don't work for this avowed purpose, and yet you still keep mouthing and writing your inane platitudes. Grow up guys! Obviously you have to much vested in your faimiles, communities, society and government to take the step as "brave" Loughner did in Arizona. No hypocrite him. You guys are the biggest hypocrites I know!

Our present government is trying every backdoor trick if can discover or invent to circumvent the Constitution with regard to both the First and Second Amendments. The Second has always been a target of those who blame an inanimate object for the behavior of a person. We are too lenient on crime and too protective of the criminal at the expense of every law-abiding person. We are expected to be helpless victims rather than strong, capable citizens.

Waffler, this has been explained to you often. Law enforcement is an oxymoron. Tyranny or despotism can be used with enforcement (Waffler's god / tyranny enforcement = Ruby Ridge for example). Man can not make law, only God can make law. It is man's duty to discover those laws and place definitions to them for man's understanding. It is then man's duty to put into place as few of those definitions, in the form of codes, ordinances regulations, rules, statutes, etc. as shall secure sacred man's life, liberty (inclusive of unalienable rights) and property. The law will enforce itself. For those laws that are broken, as defined by man's statute(s) etc. it is the agents of justice that administer a given procedure. Enforcement of compelled compliance, license, victimless crimes, larceny with impunity and any form of infringement of inalienable rights is tyranny enforcement, not law enforcement. If someone claims to be a law enforcement officer, a free sovereign individual has an absolute right to take up arms against such despot when life, liberty, or property are threatened. Waffler, the Union of Socialist Amerika (USA) and its subservient districts (States) are now tyrannical, infested with despots. The non-statist theocracy patrons, i.e. individual free sovereigns have apparently not suffered yet sufficiently the evils of tyranny to resort to arms to impel their separation and institute new government, assuming once again the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them.

Hey Waffler, ever heard of the War of Independence? Oh yeah, you seem to think the colonists could have "voted" tyranny off of the continent.

too stupid for comment.

When are you going to start your war Carlton. You and Mike are all mouth and nothing, zilch else.

Waffler, the war has begun. Now is the time for a grass roots effort to find the noble freemen and lovers of liberty. Now is a war of concepts (your god's dogmas vs.the laws discovered by the founders), I hope and pray that the seemingly inevitable war with guns will never come. Such hope and prayer neither makes me all mouth or nothing. Until then, it is abundantly clear that history is repeating itself and, "The time is near at hand which must determine whether Americans are to be free men or slaves." (George Washington)

Thank goodness, the majority of Americans are not so ignorant as to trust those armed officials attempting to disarm the rest of us.

Don't be so hard on yourself, dick, you are not that stupid.

Mike you claim tyranny has lasted a long time here in our beloved country, and yet all you do is mouth off about it. I don't believe we live in tyranny. I still think you are a mouthy hypocrite.

I have said before and many agree that Waffler is as useful as tits on a boar. Perhaps that government agent would go away if someone repeated my words above every day. But if he uses a false name, you cannot insult him or make the B*S*T*R*D feel bad.

Waffler, I've told you of all the court that I've done and countless meetings that I've attended, that makes you a liar, knowing that I do more than just mouth. As you parrot your socialist god, I would expect you to make statements such as calling me, or other lovers of liberty, mouthy hypocrites. You think your socialist god is the most powerful entity on earth so you try to provoke or goad non-statist theocracy individuals into such actions as will justify greater pain infliction by your god. Waffler, I know you do not believe you live in tyranny, you are an obsequious lackey that enjoys immorality, slavery (of yourself and others), masochism, and a lack of law and justice; you really are a sick individual. As I wrote above, its about timing and determined events.

Mike claims guns protect us from tyranny but says that we do now and have for some time live in tyranny. Mike, Mike, Mike for goodness sake wake up. You double talk, misspeal and or lie. How in hell are our guns helping us? Please please be honest here. Love and regards Brother Waffler. Mr Winston Smith maybe you can chime in here and such a simple question, hell if you know about tits and boars you ought to be able to saying something appropos about guns and tyranny, like do they work or don't they? Are we now in tyranny or are we not? If we are what the hell good are our guns etcetera. This ain't rocket science!.

Waffler, I never said guns prevent tyranny (that's your statement so, you're arguing against yourself - another progressive misdirection agent provocateur tactic), I've simply stated, in many different ways, that guns slow tyranny's growth. America's progressing tyranny has been growing for at least 100 years. When guns are taken from individuals, history has shown over, and over, and over again totalitarian tyranny becomes an almost immediately implemented reality. That is but one way our guns help us. If you remember the LA riots when Korean store owners protected their property with automatic weapons, after the police vacated the area. I understand today, that with so many armed Korean Americans in that same area, the streets are much safer there than they are just a few blocks away. That's another way guns help us. Once tyranny has grown sufficiently that the people will accept no more, history has also shown that an armed citizenry are much more capable of righting the wrongs and changing their form of government (hopefully getting rid of the tyranny in the process). P.S.; FYI, the term 'brother' precursory to a given name was a title of acknowledgment, declaring a sacred fellowship with the author of the greeting. I'm not all that sure the use of 'Brother' here is all that appropriate since, you are an admitted patron of the statist theocracy infesting this land and, I profess a fellowship with the Constitutional freemen of a once representative republic.

In the Federalist #29, it is clear that the people are to be allowed the same weapons that the standing army have, so that one is not too much stronger then the other, makes the issue of gun control a bit dificult.

Can this be any clearer?

Only the deranged insist on armaments, the sincere demand the wise course of peace and accountability.