“Firearms stand next in importance to the constitution itself. They are the American people’s liberty teeth and keystone under independence … from the hour the Pilgrims landed to the present day, events, occurences and tendencies prove that to ensure peace security and happiness, the rifle and pistol are equally indispensable … the very atmosphere of firearms anywhere restrains evil interference — they deserve a place of honor with all that’s good.”
George Washington First President of the United States
lmaooooooooo!!!
This is so good – just shared on FB with a HT to the treehouse and to therightscoop.
Love this comment over at therightscoop:
I had a similar argument once with a lefty who thought he was clever. He said that the 2nd Amendment should only cover the types of weapons available at the time it was written. I told him if that was the case, then freedom of the press should only cover types of media available at the time, such as hand setting type, manual presses and the like. No electronic powered presses and certainly no radio or television (the Internet didn’t exist at the time of this discussion). He didn’t like my idea. (JeffWRidge)
LOL!!! So predictable, eh? Their way/idea is the ONLY way/idea…
Piers Morgan needs to be reminded that Americans fought two wars (Rev War and War of 1812) against his country to have freedom to govern themselves, including the right to bear arms. If British laws were so great we would still be singing “God Save The Queen” instead of the Star Spangled Banner. If Piers loves UK laws so much, I say go back home, Brit!
I agree selfdefenseadvocate. great comment.
Piers is just another liberal UK slacker, who apparently can earn more money in the US (such a horribly flawed country, eh chap?) than he can in the United Muslim Kingdom
I always find it hilarious that Europeans(and everyone else, to be honest) rail against the US so much but have no problems taking our dollars and lining their pockets. Hypocritical much? Naah!!
The boat runs both ways pal As we say in Canada I love those Brits to talk about over home but they are over here
The standard firearm in the American Colonies at the start of the Revolution was the .75 caliber British Land Pattern Musket, sometimes called the “Brown Bess”. It could be loaded with either a musket ball or with shot. Either way, this was a devastating weapon when used by a trained shooter. Another commonly used weapon on the frontier was the American “Kentucky” (or “Pennsylvania”) long rifle. Normally .45 caliber, again this was a very accurate and deadly weapon in the hands of a trained marksman. Both weapons are “high-powered”. I wonder whether Mr. Morgan would rather be shot with an M-4 (current, standard US military rifle) or a Land Pattern Musket? I’d take the M-4 in a heartbeat. The .75 caliber was a bone crusher and left dreadful wounds.
My .50 caliber blackpowder rifle will punch a much bigger hole than my .223 AR. Fact.
But with that said, my AR would be the firearm of choice if I need to defend myself. And the purpose of the 2nd amendment is for us to have the ability to protect ourselves from government overreach. I wish every law abiding citizen owned a firearm…muskets included.
http://sphotos-a.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-ash3/561446_395320610523456_1384666476_n.jpg
I love the fact that is proven over and over, the left only see what is relevant to them, never the past and the future bigger picture.
Thanks Treehouse!!
A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.
The 2nd Amendment contemplates arms of a nature, quantity and quality sufficient to protect a free state from a tyrannical government.
Another instant-classic example of playing Rope-a-Dope with a liberal.
So funny!
On the Washington quote see: http://www.saf.org/pub/rkba/general/BogusFounderQuotes.htm
Yep…nothing like a Brit trying telling us what our own Constitution says.
If I use liberal logic…since more people die from auto accidents than gun violence each and every day, shouldn’t we ban the use/ownership of cars?
I had a back and forth regarding banning the use of cars. It went something like this:
2nd Supporter: More people die from auto accidents than gun violence, shouldn’t we ban cars, then?
Opposer: No. Cars aren’t designed to kill people. Guns are.
2nd Supporter: That should tell you something, then. A device, designed to kill, as a gun is, is involved in less death than a device that is not designed to kill at all. Speaks volumes.
Opposer: Uh …
It was beautiful.
Correction: I didn’t have this conversation, “had” should be “heard”.
This video fits well here also.
caroljsroth, youz da puddy!
Way too funny. Cats do have a way of getting in the last word.
George Washington First President of the United States. I thought John Hanson was the first president.
At what point did militias stop having the same weapons used by our military?
The Founders intended for us to have the weaponry. They did not trust a standing army with good cause even today. They saw every free male over 18 as the army. That is why the Constitution only allows for a Navy. The States should have the Military and Political power.