Ted Cruz: 2nd Amendment Is 'Ultimate Check Against Government Tyranny'

Statistikhengst

Diamond Member
Nov 21, 2013
45,564
11,756
2,070
deep within the statistical brain!!
Bet that title got your attention.

It may seem like fiction, but it's not. Ted Cruz just said that.

Ted Cruz 2nd Amendment Is Ultimate Check Against Government Tyranny


wnkalxlveekdvion6ew4.jpg


It's a given that every Republican presidential candidate will run for president as a strong supporter of gun rights.

But Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is arguing that the Second Amendment includes a right to revolt against government tyranny, a point of emphasis uncommon for mainstream presidential candidates.

"The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution isn't for just protecting hunting rights, and it's not only to safeguard your right to target practice. It is a Constitutional right to protect your children, your family, your home, our lives, and to serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny -- for the protection of liberty," Cruz wrote to supporters in a fundraising email on Thursday, under the subject line "2nd Amendment against tyranny."

This "insurrectionist" argument, as Second Amendment expert and UCLA law professor Adam Winkler calls it, is popular among passionate gun owners and members of the National Rifle Association. But major party candidates for president don't often venture there.

"Most presidential candidates who support Second Amendment rights focus on self defense. In the past many have also emphasized hunting," said Winkler, author of the 2011 book Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. "It's pretty rare for a presidential candidate to support the right of the people to revolt against the government."



Hmmmmm, interesting.

A declared presidential candidate who is for armed insurrection.


Hmmmmmmm, interesting.

Ted Cruz says that this 2nd Amendment remedy is for the protection of Liberty.

I wonder how he would exactly define "Liberty".

Either way, I think he just won the "We came unarmed --- this time" crowd.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Discuss. Is this maybe a bit extreme, or is this the necessary fight against the ebbil ebbil gubbermint?
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #2
And just for information, Lindsey Graham, the first Princess of South Carolina, thinks this is a bridge too far to go...

Graham Knocks Cruz On Guns And Tyranny We Tried That Once... I m Not Looking For An Insurrection

Republican presidential candidate Ted Cruz's argument that the Second Amendment provides the "ultimate check against government tyranny" is a bit too extreme for potential 2016 rival and fellow Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC).

"Well, we tried that once in South Carolina. I wouldn't go down that road again," Graham said, in an apparent reference to the Civil War. "I think an informed electorate is probably a better check than, you know, guns in the streets."

Speaking to a few reporters near the Senate floor Thursday, Graham was answering questions from TPM about the Texas firebrand and presidential candidate's argument made in a fundraising email that the Second Amendment confers a right to revolt against the government.

"The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution isn't for just protecting hunting rights, and it's not only to safeguard your right to target practice. It is a Constitutional right to protect your children, your family, your home, our lives, and to serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny -- for the protection of liberty," Cruz wrote in the email Thursday, with the subject line "2nd Amendment against tyranny."

Graham demurred. "I'm not looking for an insurrection. I'm looking to defeat Hillary," he said. "We're not going to out-gun her."
 
He's absolutely correct. Why do you disagree? There is a reason why Ferguson was a protest that was able to last for several days with only a few clashes with police that involved tear gas and some minor assaults as opposed to resembling the massacre at Tiananmen Square.
 
As for the OP, Cruz knows better. He knows that's a stupid thing to say. He also knows tee potties eat that stuff up.

He'll push the "gun grabber" lie for the same reason. Bet on it.
 
  • Thread starter
  • Banned
  • #9
He's absolutely correct. Why do you disagree? There is a reason why Ferguson was a protest that was able to last for several days with only a few clashes with police that involved tear gas and some minor assaults as opposed to resembling the massacre at Tiananmen Square.


In what way is he correct? That armed resurrection against the Government is right, or what?
 
Bet that title got your attention.

It may seem like fiction, but it's not. Ted Cruz just said that.

Ted Cruz 2nd Amendment Is Ultimate Check Against Government Tyranny


wnkalxlveekdvion6ew4.jpg


It's a given that every Republican presidential candidate will run for president as a strong supporter of gun rights.

But Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is arguing that the Second Amendment includes a right to revolt against government tyranny, a point of emphasis uncommon for mainstream presidential candidates.

"The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution isn't for just protecting hunting rights, and it's not only to safeguard your right to target practice. It is a Constitutional right to protect your children, your family, your home, our lives, and to serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny -- for the protection of liberty," Cruz wrote to supporters in a fundraising email on Thursday, under the subject line "2nd Amendment against tyranny."

This "insurrectionist" argument, as Second Amendment expert and UCLA law professor Adam Winkler calls it, is popular among passionate gun owners and members of the National Rifle Association. But major party candidates for president don't often venture there.

"Most presidential candidates who support Second Amendment rights focus on self defense. In the past many have also emphasized hunting," said Winkler, author of the 2011 book Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. "It's pretty rare for a presidential candidate to support the right of the people to revolt against the government."



Hmmmmm, interesting.

A declared presidential candidate who is for armed insurrection.


Hmmmmmmm, interesting.

Ted Cruz says that this 2nd Amendment remedy is for the protection of Liberty.

I wonder how he would exactly define "Liberty".

Either way, I think he just won the "We came unarmed --- this time" crowd.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Discuss. Is this maybe a bit extreme, or is this the necessary fight against the ebbil ebbil gubbermint?


Jesus, you're stupid. Ted Cruz is absolutely correct, you fool. Read the founding documents. My God, you clowns on the left, who claim such intelligence are certainly uninformed as a group.

Get it together, will you?

Thomas Jefferson:
  1. "When governments fear the people, there is liberty. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny. The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government."
 
Bet that title got your attention.

It may seem like fiction, but it's not. Ted Cruz just said that.

Ted Cruz 2nd Amendment Is Ultimate Check Against Government Tyranny


wnkalxlveekdvion6ew4.jpg


It's a given that every Republican presidential candidate will run for president as a strong supporter of gun rights.

But Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is arguing that the Second Amendment includes a right to revolt against government tyranny, a point of emphasis uncommon for mainstream presidential candidates.

"The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution isn't for just protecting hunting rights, and it's not only to safeguard your right to target practice. It is a Constitutional right to protect your children, your family, your home, our lives, and to serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny -- for the protection of liberty," Cruz wrote to supporters in a fundraising email on Thursday, under the subject line "2nd Amendment against tyranny."

This "insurrectionist" argument, as Second Amendment expert and UCLA law professor Adam Winkler calls it, is popular among passionate gun owners and members of the National Rifle Association. But major party candidates for president don't often venture there.

"Most presidential candidates who support Second Amendment rights focus on self defense. In the past many have also emphasized hunting," said Winkler, author of the 2011 book Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. "It's pretty rare for a presidential candidate to support the right of the people to revolt against the government."



Hmmmmm, interesting.

A declared presidential candidate who is for armed insurrection.


Hmmmmmmm, interesting.

Ted Cruz says that this 2nd Amendment remedy is for the protection of Liberty.

I wonder how he would exactly define "Liberty".

Either way, I think he just won the "We came unarmed --- this time" crowd.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Discuss. Is this maybe a bit extreme, or is this the necessary fight against the ebbil ebbil gubbermint?


Jesus, you're stupid. Ted Cruz is absolutely correct, you fool. Read the founding documents. My God, you clowns on the left, who claim such intelligence are certainly uninformed as a group.

Get it together, will you?



These words:

"serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny -- for the protection of liberty"


are not in the 2nd Amendment.

What part of illegal armed resurrection do you not understand?
 
Brilliant moroonie. That is brilliant at getting the maroonies to bite. He knows that the 2nd protects an individual's rightsv for lawful purposes, such as self-defense within a home, not armed insurrection.
 
Bet that title got your attention.

It may seem like fiction, but it's not. Ted Cruz just said that.

Ted Cruz 2nd Amendment Is Ultimate Check Against Government Tyranny


wnkalxlveekdvion6ew4.jpg


It's a given that every Republican presidential candidate will run for president as a strong supporter of gun rights.

But Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is arguing that the Second Amendment includes a right to revolt against government tyranny, a point of emphasis uncommon for mainstream presidential candidates.

"The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution isn't for just protecting hunting rights, and it's not only to safeguard your right to target practice. It is a Constitutional right to protect your children, your family, your home, our lives, and to serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny -- for the protection of liberty," Cruz wrote to supporters in a fundraising email on Thursday, under the subject line "2nd Amendment against tyranny."

This "insurrectionist" argument, as Second Amendment expert and UCLA law professor Adam Winkler calls it, is popular among passionate gun owners and members of the National Rifle Association. But major party candidates for president don't often venture there.

"Most presidential candidates who support Second Amendment rights focus on self defense. In the past many have also emphasized hunting," said Winkler, author of the 2011 book Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. "It's pretty rare for a presidential candidate to support the right of the people to revolt against the government."



Hmmmmm, interesting.

A declared presidential candidate who is for armed insurrection.


Hmmmmmmm, interesting.

Ted Cruz says that this 2nd Amendment remedy is for the protection of Liberty.

I wonder how he would exactly define "Liberty".

Either way, I think he just won the "We came unarmed --- this time" crowd.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Discuss. Is this maybe a bit extreme, or is this the necessary fight against the ebbil ebbil gubbermint?


Jesus, you're stupid. Ted Cruz is absolutely correct, you fool. Read the founding documents. My God, you clowns on the left, who claim such intelligence are certainly uninformed as a group.

Get it together, will you?


Right on cue - one of nutters shows up to claim that a bunch of pop guns could go up against the US military and win.

Founding documents have nothing to do with today's reality. Nothing.
 
I don't get why the militia types think they could take on the US military and win.

And yes, the military would fire on US citizens. They swear an oath to do exactly that.


I don't get why the assclown retards think the US military would attack decent folk on behalf of them and their war on civil rights?


Read the Oath of Enlistment. Pay reeeel close attention to the part that reads " ... I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic ..."
 
As for the OP, Cruz knows better. He knows that's a stupid thing to say. He also knows tee potties eat that stuff up.

He'll push the "gun grabber" lie for the same reason. Bet on it.



Bet that title got your attention.

It may seem like fiction, but it's not. Ted Cruz just said that.

Ted Cruz 2nd Amendment Is Ultimate Check Against Government Tyranny


wnkalxlveekdvion6ew4.jpg


It's a given that every Republican presidential candidate will run for president as a strong supporter of gun rights.

But Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is arguing that the Second Amendment includes a right to revolt against government tyranny, a point of emphasis uncommon for mainstream presidential candidates.

"The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution isn't for just protecting hunting rights, and it's not only to safeguard your right to target practice. It is a Constitutional right to protect your children, your family, your home, our lives, and to serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny -- for the protection of liberty," Cruz wrote to supporters in a fundraising email on Thursday, under the subject line "2nd Amendment against tyranny."

This "insurrectionist" argument, as Second Amendment expert and UCLA law professor Adam Winkler calls it, is popular among passionate gun owners and members of the National Rifle Association. But major party candidates for president don't often venture there.

"Most presidential candidates who support Second Amendment rights focus on self defense. In the past many have also emphasized hunting," said Winkler, author of the 2011 book Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. "It's pretty rare for a presidential candidate to support the right of the people to revolt against the government."



Hmmmmm, interesting.

A declared presidential candidate who is for armed insurrection.


Hmmmmmmm, interesting.

Ted Cruz says that this 2nd Amendment remedy is for the protection of Liberty.

I wonder how he would exactly define "Liberty".

Either way, I think he just won the "We came unarmed --- this time" crowd.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Discuss. Is this maybe a bit extreme, or is this the necessary fight against the ebbil ebbil gubbermint?


Jesus, you're stupid. Ted Cruz is absolutely correct, you fool. Read the founding documents. My God, you clowns on the left, who claim such intelligence are certainly uninformed as a group.

Get it together, will you?



These words:

"serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny -- for the protection of liberty"


are not in the 2nd Amendment.

What part of illegal armed resurrection do you not understand?


Nor do they need to be idiot. If you are too stupid to understand the intent of the second amendment, perhaps you take a remedial course in Civics? Or move to Switzerland? Or basically, just shut the hell up.




What's it gonna be? You want tyranny or liberty? Well?
 
This is what these people are talking about, when they refer to the 2nd amendment being about resisting tyranny:

"The 2014 Las Vegas shootings occurred on June 8, 2014 in northeastern Las Vegas, Nevada, when a married couple, Jerad and Amanda Miller, committed a shooting spree in which five people died, including themselves. The couple, who espoused extreme anti-government views, first killed two Las Vegas police officers at a restaurant before fleeing into a Walmart, where they killed an intervening armed civilian. The couple died after engaging responding officers in a shootout; police shot and killed Jerad, while Amanda committed suicide after being wounded."

"June 8, 2014, the Millers first went to a CiCi's Pizza restaurant on foot at 11:22 a.m.,[1] finding Las Vegas police officers Igor Soldo and Alyn Beck, who were eating at the restaurant on their lunch break. Prior to the shooting, they had observed the restaurant. Jerad Miller fatally shot Soldo in the back of the head with a handgun, then shot Beck in the throat. Both Millers then killed Beck by shooting him multiple times after he attempted to fire back.[9] Afterwards, they dragged the officers' bodies out of their booth and covered Beck with a yellow Gadsden flag and a swastika. They also pinned a note on Soldo's body, which read: "This is the beginning of the revolution." They also stole both officers' guns and ammunition. Also, during the restaurant shooting, the Millers loudly declared to other patrons that it was the start of "a revolution"."

Don't tread on me. Or I'll kill you with the gun I have the sacred right to own.

Sic semper tyrannis, as conservative hero John Wilkes Booth put it.
 
Bet that title got your attention.

It may seem like fiction, but it's not. Ted Cruz just said that.

Ted Cruz 2nd Amendment Is Ultimate Check Against Government Tyranny


wnkalxlveekdvion6ew4.jpg


It's a given that every Republican presidential candidate will run for president as a strong supporter of gun rights.

But Texas Sen. Ted Cruz is arguing that the Second Amendment includes a right to revolt against government tyranny, a point of emphasis uncommon for mainstream presidential candidates.

"The 2nd Amendment to the Constitution isn't for just protecting hunting rights, and it's not only to safeguard your right to target practice. It is a Constitutional right to protect your children, your family, your home, our lives, and to serve as the ultimate check against governmental tyranny -- for the protection of liberty," Cruz wrote to supporters in a fundraising email on Thursday, under the subject line "2nd Amendment against tyranny."

This "insurrectionist" argument, as Second Amendment expert and UCLA law professor Adam Winkler calls it, is popular among passionate gun owners and members of the National Rifle Association. But major party candidates for president don't often venture there.

"Most presidential candidates who support Second Amendment rights focus on self defense. In the past many have also emphasized hunting," said Winkler, author of the 2011 book Gunfight: The Battle over the Right to Bear Arms in America. "It's pretty rare for a presidential candidate to support the right of the people to revolt against the government."



Hmmmmm, interesting.

A declared presidential candidate who is for armed insurrection.


Hmmmmmmm, interesting.

Ted Cruz says that this 2nd Amendment remedy is for the protection of Liberty.

I wonder how he would exactly define "Liberty".

Either way, I think he just won the "We came unarmed --- this time" crowd.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Discuss. Is this maybe a bit extreme, or is this the necessary fight against the ebbil ebbil gubbermint?


Jesus, you're stupid. Ted Cruz is absolutely correct, you fool. Read the founding documents. My God, you clowns on the left, who claim such intelligence are certainly uninformed as a group.

Get it together, will you?


Right on cue - one of nutters shows up to claim that a bunch of pop guns could go up against the US military and win.

Founding documents have nothing to do with today's reality. Nothing.


No one has ever said that dumbass. However, it will protect me against those like YOU. The military will uphold their oath to the Constitution, fool.

Time is drawing short bigshot....
 
I don't get why the militia types think they could take on the US military and win.

And yes, the military would fire on US citizens. They swear an oath to do exactly that.


I don't get why the assclown retards think the US military would attack decent folk on behalf of them and their war on civil rights?


Read the Oath of Enlistment. Pay reeeel close attention to the part that reads " ... I, _____, do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic ..."


Exactly, And those like YOU are the enemy. I served under that oath for 22 years. You?
 
As for the OP, Cruz knows better. He knows that's a stupid thing to say. He also knows tee potties eat that stuff up.


Which kind of bolsters the theory that Cruz doesn't even want to get nominated, that he wants to be the kingmaker for the GOP.


Most of the Clown Car Candidates know they have no chance and think they can make up for lack of experience by making a lot of noise.

Its not called "politics" fer nuthin'.
 

Forum List

Back
Top