Comments by egilbe

Earl Gilbert's picture

2nd Amendment

It's not about hunting. It's about the balance of power between the people and the government that's every bit as important as the balance of power between the Executive, Legislative and Judicial branches of government. Infringing on the 2nd amendment right to bear arms by the people is a sure way to be unemployed in the next elections. Supporting any limits on firearms or magazine restrictions is the very definition of "infringing" and will not be tolerated. When the Vice-President goes on record stating that the Federal government doesn't have the money to enforce current gun laws, what is the point of passing more laws? What is the point of penalizing law abiding citizens with more restrictions that are ineffective and just show that our politicians are doing "something". I would much rather our politicians do nothing than infringe on my natural rights protected by the Bill of Rights.

Earl Gilbert's picture

Armed revolution is a last

Armed revolution is a last resort. I'm ok letting issues work through the courts.

Earl Gilbert's picture

Armed revolution is a last

Armed revolution is a last resort. I'm ok letting issues work through the courts.

Earl Gilbert's picture

When it started becoming we,

When it started becoming we, the coorporations, instead of "we, the people" Somehow, our country's leaders became bought and paid for by big business.

Earl Gilbert's picture

I think they may care about

I think they may care about the 1st amendment rights to free speech so we would even have a forum to discuss political ideas. Some people may have need to the 4th, 6th, 7th, 8th amendment, specifically, including the two bozos who kicked off this discussion. I'm sure former slaves are pretty happy with the 13th, 14th and 15th amendments. Most women are happy with the 19th, I'm sure.

Earl Gilbert's picture

As much as you wish it, you

As much as you wish it, you can't legislate to prevent stupid people to do stupid things. I see you're a veteran. You swore the same oath I did to defend the Constitution from all enemies, foreign and domestic. If that enemy is your own government, it's your obligation and duty to defend the Constitution. Our founding fathers feared a strong central government and one of the tools to defend the Constitution was seen as a strongly armed general population. If your goal is to disarm the population, to follow the orders of your governenment, regardless if the orders are legal, or immoral and unjust, you are an enemy of the Constitution and breaking your oath. You can say you were "just following orders", but that defense didn't work in Nuremburg, either. And according to Germany's laws at the time, gassing six million jews was perfectly legal, but that didn't make it right, now did it?

Earl Gilbert's picture

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

Earl Gilbert's picture

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/

Earl Gilbert's picture

http://www.constitution.org/f