Galt's Gulch

Washington, DC City Government: 2nd Amendment was for British Invasion

Posted by Zenphamy 9 years, 5 months ago to Government
10 comments | Share | Flag

You've gotta love this one. To get a gun carry permit in DC, well you can't--but don't worry. The clerk at the city's gun carry permit office assures you that the 2nd Amendment was only intended for when the British were coming.
SOURCE URL: http://johngaltfla.com/wordpress/2014/11/11/washington-dc-city-government-2nd-amendment-was-for-british-invasion-video/

Add Comment

FORMATTING HELP

All Comments Hide marked as read Mark all as read

  • Posted by ObjectiveAnalyst 9 years, 5 months ago
    Dunce... setting aside the fact that the Revolutionary war was over and won (1783) before the Bill of Rights (1791) was ratified, this is just appalling. How is it that law suits can be brought against people who deny someone their civil rights unless it is the government, even after the SCOTUS has weighed in?
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    -
  • Posted by CircuitGuy 9 years, 5 months ago
    If he thinks part of the constitution is outdated, he should call for an ammendment. Until they go through that process we have to respect the Constitution. It was written not for obvious decisions but for times when well-meaning officials think some basic right doesn't apply to a modern situation.
    Reply | Mark as read | Best of... | Permalink  
    • Posted by Zenphamy 9 years, 5 months ago
      He doesn't just think it's outdated, he thinks it was to help prevent a British invasion. He appears to be in his late 30's, early 40's and doesn't seem to have any idea of the what and why of the Constitution and isn't just a city employee. He is a bureaucrat in the Capital of the United States.

      But listen to Bruder explain that the ignorance and stupidity of the American voter was what the Administration relied on to get Obamacare passed. This guy is a perfect example.

      I'm sure he's a nice, well-meaning man (whatever that means), but he just participated in denying the young lady her natural and individual right in defiance of the Constitution, re-affirmed just a couple of months prior by a Federal Court and once by the Supreme Court. Apparently DC and it's employees don't think the Constitution applies to them.
      Reply | Mark as read | Parent | Best of... | Permalink  

FORMATTING HELP

  • Comment hidden. Undo