Comments on: Inauguration 2013: President Obama, Vice President Biden Swearing In Ceremonies

By: YEAH RIGHT

YEAH RIGHT — Wed, 23 Jan 2013 08:06:54 +0000

Lyceum thinks SAUL ALINSKY’s RULES FOR RADICALS is a VALID RELIGION FOR A U.S. PRESIDENT. SHEESH!

THAT *IS* A RIGHT REASON, DOLT!

By: Lou

Lou — Tue, 22 Jan 2013 17:40:41 +0000

The next time I am in court and need to be sworn in to testify, I will tell them that I need to get my great -great- great- great – great grandmother’s bible who received it from her great -great- great- great – great grandfather

By: lyceum

lyceum — Tue, 22 Jan 2013 15:03:53 +0000

some of you people are acting as if religion should have any part in government. in a just world you wouldnt have to hollow out the bible to conceal your religion. im not suporting obama in any way with this comment; but if you dont like him, do it for the right reasons.

By: Another Veteran

Another Veteran — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 17:24:37 +0000

To: Mrs. Naval Aviator
Looking at your first post, did you make a oath to protect, preserve, and defend the Constitution? Did you take basic training? Did you serve in a war? No, you just married someone who did, that doesn’t mean you know what it is like to earn your rights. Is this how you treat Veterans? Belittle them to lower anything they say? Like Lenny suggested, go serve, then threaten to take my rights away.

By: Mrs. Naval Aviator

Mrs. Naval Aviator — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 14:58:43 +0000

DAVE | JANUARY 21, 2013, 2:01 AM posted: “The founders of the Constitution just got threw a rebellion against their own government with the help of the people…that is what I feel the second amendment is all about. The right of the people to defend themselves from tyranny both foreign and domestic.”

Well Dave, not everyone “feels” the same way about the second amendment. And, as I stated before, even conservative Justice Antonin Scalia interpreted the Second Amendment to read that handguns should not be banned, but it COULD ban other weapons — such as tanks, military hardware, and even assault rifles. Presuming you are OK with current regulations surrounding weapons like Stinger Missiles and biological weapons, then our nation should always evaluate where to draw the line with newer weapon technologies.

An updated report called Assessment of the Federal Assault Weapons Ban: Impacts on Gun Markets and Gun Violence, 1994-2003 (sponsored by the National Institute of Justice) it is noted that the ban’s exemption of millions of pre-ban weapons and large capacity magazines would only very gradually reveal the effects of that law. It also noted that semiautomatics – including AWs and other semiautomatics equipped with LCMs – result in more shots fired, more persons hit, and more wounds inflicted per victim than do attacks with other firearms. The report proposed more restrictions on sales to achieve the intended effects from the ban.

If you truly believe fear of Chinese tyranny is the justification to arm our nation with automatic weapons, please explain why after reading Sun Tzu’s The Art of War. (It’s on Army Chief of Staff Gen. Martin Dempsey’s new professional reading list.)

By: newcountryman

newcountryman — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 12:34:08 +0000

What Constitution? We don’t need no stinkin’ Constitution!

By: newcountryman

newcountryman — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 12:33:06 +0000

Gun control and immigration will be center stage. Along with the occasional debt ceiling crisis just to keep us all on our toes.

By: The Inconvenient Truth

The Inconvenient Truth — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 08:14:31 +0000

“I have earlier read the Constitution, including the 2nd Amendment. Years ago, according to the Supreme Court, the amendment conferred on state militias a right to bear arms—but did NOT give individuals a right to own or carry a weapon. Chief Justice Warren E. Burger (hardly a Liberal) declared the individual-rights theory of the amendment as “a fraud.” The Second Amendment’s interpretation has been contentious in the United States for decades before this President took office.” Posted by: Mrs. Naval Aviator | January 21, 2013, 12:38 am 12:38 am

Now hold on there! If the second amendment only speaks about the “state militia”, why then does it go on to say “the right of the people shall not be infringed”??? If you had bothered to check, everywhere the bill of rights speaks of individual rights, it always says, “the right of the people”! That includes the way the first amendment is written!
Also what is the logic behind the statement made by Chief Justice Warren E. Burger, why would he believe that a state militia would not be able to keep and bear assault weapons, tanks or other military hardware, as they are a arm of the military that we call the national guard today!
Its very clear, the second amendment does speak of individual rights, not just a militia! Justice Burger clearly got it wrong!

By: Laura

Laura — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 07:42:16 +0000

So… how can ANY president swear on a bible to uphold the constitution of the United States and then violate it to the point of the constitution no longer being recognizable? (George W. Bush isn’t off the hook either). He should be arrested & held accountable for war crimes. These con-artists should just be honest when they place their hand on the bible and say, “I plan on doing whatever the hell I want, without accountability, so help me God!”

By: Dave

Dave — Mon, 21 Jan 2013 07:01:14 +0000

Wow looks like some one is going to tell others to read history with out reading it them selves. Last time we had an assault weapons ban, Columbine happened and crime raised 10%. The founders of the Constitution just got threw a rebellion against their own government with the help of the people. Then it looks like you, Mrs. Naval Aviator need to read the constitution again. Article I explains the right of the people to rebel against their own government. That is why the second amendment states “the right of the PEOPLE”. When this was passed, civilians had “military style” rifles. With out this you are giving the power to the government.
1. Do you truly trust the government 100%? Then why are you giving them more power?
2. Do we not owe China Trillions of dollars? So why give up are defenses? There isn’t enough soldiers to protect you. If you were in the military, you would know this. Only 1% of the country make up the military.
Countries are afraid of the armed American people as they should be or they will no longer fear an opposition. No anger is intended by this and as a veteran, I only fear that with out such defenses a war could come on to our home land as many of us fought to keep from happening. And that is what I feel the second amendment is all about. The right of the people to defend themselves from tyranny both foreign and domestic.
If this ban passes, good luck to you all and I pray we don’t fall like every great civilization before us.