All the libs and democrats state that G.W. Bush is destroying our Constitutional rights, but yet he support the "Right to Keep and Bear Arms". A right that was formulated to prevent the government from becoming a dictatorship, to be used for self and common defence.
2007-04-18 06:51:38 · 17 answers · asked by timberland1952 3 in Politics & Government ➔ Government
Something I like to point out is that if the Bush Administration were a true tyranny, that would have been the first thing they would have done: if the populace has no weapons, there's no chance of an armed revolt. Therefore, Bush would be able to stay in power indefinitely, just through use of force. It's ridiculous what people come up with in the middle of the night, isn't it?
2007-04-18 06:56:07 · answer #1 · answered by Richard S 5 · 5⤊ 7⤋
He plans to wait until the cancelation of the rest of the Constitution is complete. Only when the people are ready to rise up. Only when violence against authority reaches an intolerable level, when he can proclaim martial law to "insure domestic tranquility", will the move to eleminate our rights under the Second Amendment begin.
2007-04-18 08:22:58 · answer #2 · answered by John H 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Because Bush like Clinton before him is a moderate President. The Repub Party spin doctors had a lot of rhetoric out there for voters who equate being a Republican with patriotism, cowboy life style, blah blah. Dems spin that to be a Dem makes you more intelligent, bigger feeling, like costmetic commercials and people fall for it. Neither Clinton or Bush made radical changes while in office becuase the country is moderate and what happens arrives for some good reasons rather than political cult baloney. Bush has been in office for eight years, abortion is still here on demand, gun control is still in effect (maybe even more so), welfare is still intact. Clinton was a law and order President who spent more money than Bush on law enforcement issues and thats supposed to be a Repub issue. Naw, people who think that this guy or that guy is their boy are usually to dim to pay attention to the reality of things, and the slogans and chants are good enough for them. "Tearing apart the Constitution" is just pre election spin from Dems who are trying to make people forget that Bush went to war with a Dem majority Congress who voted for it and the bad intelligence on WMDs, if there was bad intelligence, came from the Senate Intelligence committee chaired by the Dem majority (Sen Rockefeller). Gun control and gun ownership people are among the most looney of the political cultists around. Your question is a goofy reaction to a goofy question. See what I mean, political extremists equal nothing in the US, its a moderate country,.
2007-04-18 07:02:40 · answer #3 · answered by Tom W 6 · 0⤊ 3⤋
The splendid courtroom in basic terms ruled the second one is suitable to non-public gun possession, and jointly that no longer something contained in the second one prevented from there being guidelines and guidelines about guns, fashions, and purchases.
2016-12-04 06:20:17 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
liberals have found all sorts of hidden rights in the Constitution... the right for gay people to get married, the right for a 12 year old girl to get an abortion without her parents knowing, the right for lazy people to receive free health care, the right for atheists to not have to hear or see anything relating to God, etc.
yet, amazingly, they can't seem to find the "right of the people to keep and bear arms" anywhere in there. makes you wonder...it's almost like they have an agenda.
2007-04-18 07:10:05 · answer #5 · answered by Rat P... 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
It won't matter, when you cheapen one of the Bill of Rights you cheapen them all.
The Patriot Act is more likely to take your guns than Gun Control
2007-04-18 07:18:32 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Liberals like to re-write history to bend to their own demented vision and social agenda.
2007-04-18 13:54:57 · answer #7 · answered by Eldude 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
He still has a little less than two years left.
Just give him time. The war is taking most of his concentration at the moment, and I'm sure he's really pleased with the Supreme Court's anti-abortion ruling this morning.
Let's not spoil his day.
2007-04-18 06:57:44 · answer #8 · answered by Floyd G 6 · 2⤊ 3⤋
Because everyone knows the NRA supported his campaign. He wouldn't "shoot them in the foot". Besides, the image is a cowboy, and everyone knows that cowboys use guns.
He is only quashing the amendments that he doesn't like - you know, freedom of speech, the right to privacy, the right to a trial and to defend yourself against charges. You know, the ones that will further his agenda.
2007-04-18 06:57:52 · answer #9 · answered by volleyballchick (cowards block) 7 · 3⤊ 3⤋
I get really tired of reading questions from morons who have such an elementary grasp of government.
It's kinda like having a quantum mechanics debate with a crackhead.
He didn't attack the 2nd Amendment so he's OBVIOUSLY not dismantling the Constitution.
Does your braincell ever get lonely?
2007-04-18 06:59:51 · answer #10 · answered by Josh 3 · 3⤊ 4⤋