There’s a candidate running in California with this as a major platform. To be honest, these folks don’t annoy me that much because they at least recognize the Second Amendment as an obstacle. They are at least honest in what needs to be done. Suggesting we need to repeal the Second Amendment is at least taking the Constitution and the Bill of Rights seriously, even if I might believe repealing the Second Amendment would disparage the document.
17 thoughts on “Repeal the Second Amendment”
Comments are closed.
Even though I disagree with the candidate (and would not vote for him), I respect his honesty.
“Already his proposals are drawing fire from critics on his blog at mikeb303000.blogspot.com”
Nice to put a face with a name. Politics aside, I cannot believe a public figure would interact publicly (japete’s comments) as he has.
If you googled for “mikeb303000” comments, you could build up a smear campaign in about 3 minutes.
These people offend me far less than the ones who pretend they don’t need to repeal the 2nd before taking my guns.
I hate the people who say – “I believe in the 2nd Amendment, but…”
The right to keep and bear arms cannot be repealed. People in Poland have that right. People in Kenya, and Myanmar too. Oh sure their governments might not recognize that right.
You can write the 2nd out of the Constitution, but you cannot repeal the right.
I don’t find a blog at that address, but this isn’t the other anti-gun troll Mikeb, is it? There’s only one digit’s difference in address.
It’s not the same MikeB, Just Mike Barkley has been trolling liberal blogs looking to stir up interest and the Mike B from Rome ran with the bait…and the idiot from the paper somehow missed the ball.
Also I agree with you Sebastian, this guy is far more honest than the mainstream gun-grabbers because he’s right, to restrict guns we need to repeal the 2A first….the others just want to ignore the 2A…and 1A, and 4A, and 5A, and 10A etc etc etc…
“Barkley credits President George Bush’s Tax Reform Act of 1986 for making it possible to sell his East Oakland apartment complex at a profit and re-invest in a complex in Manteca that he still lives at and owns to this day.”
1986? Bush?
Ummm, remember when I said that our opponents are morons, I meant it.
His seat belts on public transpo position alone will sink his campaign.
I do like the “sweep the Pacific clean of plastic” and “sweep the oceans clean of Somali pirates” alliteration(?).
I’m sure glad they typoed mikey’s address. Hate to think off that jack ass getting any traffic off of this.
I know that I’ve always been told a different last name for the troll, but I never verified it myself.
Thanks!
jt bolt: Yeah, but try telling the State that when they take your guns.
Natural rights language is nice, and philosophically sound, but it’s really bad at restraining state power.
Constitutions and the like have no magical power to do so, either, but they’re at least explicitly there in words the State has to pretend to obey, so it makes it a little harder to simply ignore ’em.
Politician, short rope, long drop. Some assembly required. That man just might be in the running for the first constitutional traitor of the year.
Hang him?
For proposing a Constitutional action?
He didn’t say disregard the 2nd, he didn’t say find some sort of executive branch work-around, he proposes following Constitutional means to repeal an Amendment he doesn’t like.
Regardless of whether you agree with him he’s technically in the same class as the folks who repealed Prohibition and the ones calling for an end to the income tax or direct election of Senators.
The only proper ethical and Constitutional response to people like him is countering their Constitutional speech with more speech and voting against him.
He’s following the law and Constitution, vigilantism against him is pure thuggery.
I hope his political career is brief.
Actually, that tax idea has some promise. But instead of taxing every firearm, we should tax every adult who cannot demonstrate that they possess a working firearm.
Article 9 of the Vermont Constitution’s declaration of rights lays it out.
“That every member of society hath a right to be protected in the enjoyment of life, liberty, and property, and therefore is bound to contribute the member’s proportion towards the expense of that protection, and yield personal service, when necessary, or an equivalent thereto … nor can any person who is conscientiously scrupulous of bearing arms, be justly compelled thereto, if such person will pay such equivalent”
If you are unwilling to keep and bear to do your part towards the protection of every member of society’s right to life, liberty, and property, it is only right and proper that you pay an equivalent in cash.
The funds could go towards subsidizing those who want to keep and bear, but can’t afford to.
Sounds like he wants to refight the American Revolution because he didn’t like the outcome. I don’t suppose that we could persuade him to accept a one-way plane ticket to the UK and to stay there until he dies of old age. Crackpots never seem to want to go away willingly – they’re always having too much fun tormenting their victims. Some people take greater advantage of the laws against murder than others.
His antics should be good for a few thousand more NRA memberships.
“Hang him? For proposing a Constitutional action?”
If someone proposed an amendment that would allow the government to infringe on the rights to habeas corpus, to prohibition of double jeopardy, to free speech and free assembly, or to warrants for arrest, would it not be appropriate to call for the hanging of such a politician? We have these rights independently of the Constitution, and to remove the protections of these rights from the Constitution would be in violation of the Constitution itself–it would make the government based on such a so-called “Constitution” illegitimate, since the purpose of the Constitution, indeed of government itself, is to protect our rights.
And so it is with the Second Amendment as well.