Liberals begin to suggest repealing Second Amendment

Emboldened by their current position of power in the executive and legislative branches, which probably won’t last much longer, some liberals have begun to talk about repealing the Second Amendment.

“Who will say on this network or any other network in the next few days, ‘It’s time to repeal the Second Amendment’?” filmmaker Michael Moore said to MSNBC host Chris Hayes.

He admitted that his position was “hardcore” but needed.

“Look, I support all gun control legislation. Not sensible gun control. We don’t need the sensible stuff. We need the hardcore stuff that’s going to protect ourselves and our children,” the filmmaker said.

“Birthed in violence”

Moore then claimed that guns were involved in both slavery and “stealing” land from indigenous peoples, using that as a reason why they should be banned or confiscated.

“We won’t acknowledge that we are a violent people to begin with. This country was birthed in violence with the genocide of the native people at the barrel of a gun. This country was built on the back of slaves with a gun to their back…We do not want to acknowledge our two original sins here that have a gun behind our ability to become who we became,” he argued.

He continued the argument by saying the Founding Fathers had no concept of modern weapons and ammunition, and wouldn’t have supported the Second Amendment if they did–even though there is no evidence to support this position.

“I truly believe if Jefferson, Madison and Washington if they all knew that the bullet would be invented — some 50 years after our revolution, I don’t know if they would have written it that way. They didn’t even know what a bullet was. It didn’t exist until the 1830s. [If] they had any idea that there would be this kind of carnage, you have to believe that the Founders of the country would not support it,” he claimed.

 

MSNBC contributor Dean Obeidallah agreed with Moore, but for a different reason.

The Second Amendment, he claimed, doesn’t give individuals a right to own a gun unless it’s for the reason of being part of a “well-regulated militia.”

“The amendment connects the right to bear arms to a well-regulated militia, and between the ratification of the Bill of Rights in 1791 to the Heller decision in 2008, no federal court ever interpreted it as codifying an individual’s constitutional right to have a gun,” Obeidallah argued.

But even if he is right, it seems impossible that authorities would be able to take more than 300 million guns away from Americans at this point, since they can’t even manage to take them away from criminals.

Share on facebook
Share To Facebook

Welcome to our comments section. We want to hear from you!

Any comments with profanity, advocacy of violence, harassment, personally identifiable information or other violations will be removed. If you feel your comment has been removed in error please contact us!

Latest Posts