Defensive Carry banner

Saf Calls Chicago Tribune Plea To Repeal 2a ‘unconscionable’

2K views 18 replies 14 participants last post by  SelfDefense 
#1 ·
NEWS RELEASE

BELLEVUE, WA – The Chicago Tribune’s call for repeal of the Second Amendment following the historic Heller Decision is an “unconscionable attack on the entire Bill of Rights and the freedoms it protects,” the Second Amendment Foundation said today.

In an editorial published on the day after the Supreme Court handed down its 5-4 ruling, the newspaper called the Second Amendment an “anachronism” that should be repealed. The newspaper supported its argument by falsely claiming that a 1939 case, U.S. v Miller, established the amendment as a “collective right” that applied only to service in some type of militia.

“The Chicago Tribune’s editors have demonstrated an appalling short-sightedness,” said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb. “If they are so willing to abandon one civil right for an entire class of American citizens, what’s next? Perhaps they would strip some citizens of their First Amendment rights to free speech or religion. Heaven help us should the Chicago Tribune editorial board one day decide that they don’t care for the editorial slant of their competitors at the Sun-Times, and call for a restriction on that newspaper’s freedom of the press.

“Once you make it acceptable to destroy one civil right,” Gottlieb observed, “it does not take a very big leap to embrace limitations on, or the abolition of, another civil right.

“Not once, in all the years that gun rights organizations have been vilified in the editorial columns of the Tribune and other newspapers did anyone from the firearms community suggest we should repeal the First Amendment,” he stated. “Unlike elitist newspaper editors, gun owners understand that the Bill of Rights is an all-or-nothing document, not a civil rights buffet from which we can pick and choose the rights we want to enjoy and those for which we have no stomach.

“We have always known the Second Amendment affirmed an individual civil right, and a truly objective reading of history by the Chicago Tribune would – if they had any notion of objectivity – lead them to the same conclusion,” Gottlieb concluded. “A generation of parents and grandparents of those now writing such nonsense in the Tribune risked, and all too frequently lost their lives to defend all of the freedoms enumerated in the Bill of Rights. The Tribune editors may as well just spit on their graves.”
 
See less See more
#5 ·
The really bad news is that we have four Supreme Court justices that agree. Does this year's election mean anything????
Oh, they both realize it...it's just that neither of them care. :mad:
 
#4 ·
Let them try to amend it out of the Constitution. They'll never get 2/3rds majority for it because most of the states in this country aren't full of retards.
 
#8 ·
I think it's GREAT!

After all these years of the Antis claiming that their agenda was not a total ban, the mask is off, they reveal their monster face, and they are screaming and gnashing their teeth advocating repeal of part of the Bill of Rights.

Scratch an anti, find a fascist.

Tweak them a little more and we can goad them into admitting they would love to herd people into extermination camps.

--Travis--
 
#9 ·
If your an AMERICAN in Chicago, CANCEL YOU SUBSCRIPTION!!!
If your an AMERICAN ADVERTISER in Chicago, CANCEL YOUR CONTRACT.
Hit em where it counts. IN THEIR WALLET.
Lets figure out who the parent corp. is and CANCEL THEM ALL.???
 
#16 ·
The original Pennsylvania Constitution predates the Second Amendment so that anyone that ever had any doubt as to the exact intent of the Second Amendment (which was not adopted until December of 1791) concerning the right of an individual citizen to keep and bear arms needs only to read the Commonwealth Of Pennsylvania Declaration Of Rights of the people.

Constitution of Pennsylvania - September 28, 1776

The original 1776 PA Constitution

> XIII. That the people have a right to bear arms for the defence of themselves and the state;
and as standing armies in the time of peace are dangerous to liberty, they ought not to be kept up;
And that the military should be kept under strict subordination to, and governed by, the civil power.

Later changed to:

Right to Bear Arms
Section 21.


> The right of the citizens to bear arms in defense of themselves and the State shall not be questioned.

And then also keep in mind that EIGHT of the original Signers Of The Constitution were from Pennsylvania.
 
#17 ·
I too think it is unlikely that DC v. Heller would be immediately overturned. There is, however, a path it could quickly be done. If one of the majority justices were to leave the court, and if the elections in November were to go a certain way, and if certain justices get nominated and confirmed, and if the liberal Ninth Circuit were to stay true to form on the almost certain appeal of whatever decisions are made regarding San Francisco's handgun ban, another case could get to the Supreme Court quickly.

That's a lot of ifs, but it is possible.
 
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top