Second Amendment Under Continued Threat

Despite the recent rulings of the Supreme Court the Second Amendment to the US Constitution is still a target.

On Bill Maher's HBO show Alex Wagner, a Huffington Post contributor, had this to say when asked "What would you change in the Constitution?" Here's her answer:

"Well, I'm going to be pilloried for this. I think get rid of the second Amendment, the right to bear arms. I just think in the grand scheme of the rights that we have; the right of assembly, free speech, I mean, owning a gun does not, it does not tally on the same level as those other Constitutional rights. And being more discreet about who gets to have a firearm and right to kill with a firearm, I think is something that would be in our national interest to revisit that."

What does such a position portend when we add in Obama's own admission that he is working on gun control "under the radar" as I reported on May 26, 2011? Obama himself once admitted that he favored a 500% tax on guns and ammunition purchases. That surely sounds like working "under the radar," no?

What about when we add in the UN and their "International Gun Ban Treaty?" Of course any "treaty" a president signs on to must be confirmed and ratified by the US Senate, and when it comes to guns and the citizens, that ain't happening. But still, such sentiments do go a long way in telling us what radical leftists would do if they could get away with it.

And there have been many who have persuasively argued that Fast and Furious was a backdoor method of increasing gun crime on the border and putting public pressure on lawmakers to begin to rethink their stance on the Second Amendment. I would also argue Fast and Furious was hoped to create a wave of public sentiment that guns in the hands of private persons is an inherently dangerous position, thus time to rethink one's personal position on this most important issue. That is indeed an "under the radar" method, just as Obama admitted. Investigations into Fast and Furious may show the link…time will tell.

As for me, the issue is settled. It was settled in 1791 when the Bill of Rights was ratified. With the recent SCOTUS ruling in District of Columbia v. Heller, legally and for all time the issue is decided. It would seem despite the rulings of the nation's highest Court, there are some on the extreme left who still favor using some method to go after law abiding citizen's and our right to own firearms for recreation and personal defense. Anything else is just wishful thinking…UNCONSTITUTIONAL wishful thinking might I add!

Clearly it seems regardless of the law of the land there are some who will stop at nothing to have their personal will imposed on all of us. And doesn't this in fact put truth to the lie that it's Republicans' who want dictate the personal lives of citizens? Not too many Republican's wanting to deny anyone their Second Amendment, and I don't know any real conservative telling one what they can and can't eat or what to feed their kids. And who is it again who is demonizing those who are financially successful and arguing for confiscatory taxation, seemingly more out of anger and jealously than any sense of fair and equitable? That would seem to be the exclusive bailiwick of some on the left.

Only one measly year to go to send these people back to whatever hole from which they slithered.