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

[Spare_change]

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 ..."

Please do not intentionally misinterpret that oath .... I'm embarrassed that you might ACTUALLY believe your own nonsense.

 

[DarkFury]

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

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."

Lord help those poor morons if they ever read the Magna Carta and find ARMED insurection is LEGAL.

 

[RandallFlagg]

Earlier you said you have served in the military.

Are you now saying you would not abide by the oath you signed?

Do you really think the rest of the military are as lacking in integrity as you are?

What oath do you think is signed? It clearly states domestic enemies yet you fail to understand that means you, not us.

I quoted the oath above.

Who do you think gets to decide who is the enemy?

Reading the posts of the rabid RWs - you guys are just clueless.

Really, you need to move into the 21st century.

The people in the F-18's, Manning the ships, running the tanks etc. get to decide. I'm pretty confident they will make the right choice. Probably not a choice you will like.

Uh, no.

The grunts don't get to decide who to attack.

Bitch please. They are the ones pulling the trigger. And their leaders are with them in ideology. There's a fucking reason obie is hated in the military yet you think they would attack citizens for him? You've lost your mind.

Preach it Brother!!

 

[RandallFlagg]

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

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."

Lord help those poor morons if they ever read the Magna Carta and find ARMED insurection is LEGAL.

Indeed. If they were half as "smart" (or american) as they claim they are, they would figure it out. Unfortunately - they are not.

 

[DarkFury]

Earlier you said you have served in the military.

Are you now saying you would not abide by the oath you signed?

Do you really think the rest of the military are as lacking in integrity as you are?

What oath do you think is signed? It clearly states domestic enemies yet you fail to understand that means you, not us.

I quoted the oath above.

Who do you think gets to decide who is the enemy?

Reading the posts of the rabid RWs - you guys are just clueless.

Really, you need to move into the 21st century.

The people in the F-18's, Manning the ships, running the tanks etc. get to decide. I'm pretty confident they will make the right choice. Probably not a choice you will like.

Uh, no.

The grunts don't get to decide who to attack.

You obviously never served in the military. There is such a thing as a "Lawful order" you fool. Goddamn, if you are going to run your pie-hole learn a little about the military that you think is there to keep US under your thumb. Dumbass.

As I recall that oath is to the PEOPLE of the United States NO president OR party,

 

[Stephanie]

A thread like this brings out all the whackos.

How so? Fortunately , the majority of the responsible gun owners understand it's not only for protection against criminals. Just look what this government did to a RANCHER who only owed some monies. 200 ARMED Federal BLM Agents dropped on their Family, children. so who's the whackos?

 

[RandallFlagg]

And Cruz is right on. why do you think this Obama administration has been fighting so hard to take away that right in any way they can.

Stand up them or be SQUASHED by them more than we already are

OMG OMG OMG OMG

ROLL ON IT STUPID STUFF

BEFORE ITS TOO LATE​

How is it that you always forget you live on government largesse? Food stamps, Medicaid that you said you don't understand, all the fatty govt cheese, a check every month. You better be careful what you wish for.

I believe you fit the "Tranny" part, without question.

 

[Derideo_Te]

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.

Let me get this straight!

You are claiming that the only reason why the cops never gun down innocent protesters is because they are afraid that the protesters might shoot back?

Seriously?

 

[RandallFlagg]

A thread like this brings out all the whackos.

How so? Fortunately , the majority of the responsible gun owners understand it's not only for protection against criminals. Just look what this government did to a RANCHER who only owed some monies. 200 ARMED Federal BLM Agents dropped on their Family, children. so who's the whackos?

Or those assholes who murdered those 84 men, women and children, or Randy Weaver's Son and Wife.

 

[Uncensored2008]

[


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 ..."

So that means they will side AGAINST you, and fight along side the insurrectionists.

You really think Homeland Security can defeat the armed forces?

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

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?

Armed insurrections against abusive governments have been going on since the birth of society. Depending on the circumstances it can absolutely be the right thing to do.

I agree with that and I agree with what our Declaration of Independence says - that we have a responsibility to disagree with our government.

That doesn't mean the militia taking on the US military would be anything but a joke.

Why do you people always assume that a check against government tyranny means a militia taking on the U.S. military?

Look at the way protesters were treated in Ferguson by the local and state governments. That's tyranny. Look at how people in New Orleans had firearms confiscated from them in their own homes in the aftermath of Katrina by the local police and National Guard. That's government tyranny.

The protesters at the Bundy Ranch, who I personally believe were in the wrong, by the way, defeated the government in that stand off because dozens of them showed up with rifles and other arms and the government backed down once they realized those people weren't fucking around.

In 1946 in Athens, TN several hundred WWII veterans raided the local armory and stormed the county jail with guns and dynamite to stop the incumbent politicians who had seized the ballot boxes in that day's elections and barricaded themselves inside the jail in order to rig the elections. They succeeded in stopping the corruption.

Rudy Ridge was yet another example.

 

[Statistikhengst]

A thread like this brings out all the whackos.

How so? Fortunately , the majority of the responsible gun owners understand it's not only for protection against criminals. Just look what this government did to a RANCHER who only owed some monies. 200 ARMED Federal BLM Agents dropped on their Family, children. so who's the whackos?

"owed some monies"


:rofl.

 

[RandallFlagg]

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.

Let me get this straight!

You are claiming that the only reason why the cops never gun down innocent protesters is because they are afraid that the protesters might shoot back?

Seriously?

No - they wait until they have their backs to them and THEN shoot them.

 

[CrusaderFrank]

This is why I say that Stalin, Mao and Hitler are the Founding Fathers of modern American Progressives

 

[Uncensored2008]

Yep can see it now, goober t bodine shootin' off his 12 gauge fighin' off the gob'ment

What will you be doing Batshit, nailing church doors closed with people inside and setting fire to the church?

Allahu Akbar?

 

[Derideo_Te]

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

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."

Too bad Jefferson never said anything of the sort!

Status: This quotation has not been found in any of the writings of Thomas Jefferson.

Strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms Quotation Thomas Jefferson s Monticello

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

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.

Let me get this straight!

You are claiming that the only reason why the cops never gun down innocent protesters is because they are afraid that the protesters might shoot back?

Seriously?

No, I didn't say it was the only reason. You did.

But, I assure you, it's one hell of a deterrent, which is why you don't see the kind of abuses in this country that you see in places in like North Korea, Cuba, China, etc where only the government has access to that kind of force.

 

[RandallFlagg]

This is why I say that Stalin, Mao and Hitler are the Founding Fathers of modern American Progressives

I couldn't agree more. Thanks!

 

[Statistikhengst]

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

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."

Lord help those poor morons if they ever read the Magna Carta and find ARMED insurection is LEGAL.

The United States is not under the governance of the Magna Carta. The United States is under the governance of the US Constitution and the laws that have since grown out of it.

See how that works?

 

[Statistikhengst]

I just love watching this kind of crazy on display.

Looking into 2016, it is very heartwarming.