Colorado columnist uses newspaper to rant against 1st & 2nd Amend Rights

[ericire12]

Enjoy this loon, courtassy of The Tribune - A northern Colorado newspaper.

Essentially, he says that The Second Amendment, like the First, is a problem and that it is clear the government's role is to not only limit the Second Amendment, but free speech as well, which may have "negative political consequences".


Willard Jones


http://www.greeleytrib.com/article/20080612/READERS/318715066/-1/TRIBEDIT



Contact info:

The Greeley Publishing Co. · P.O. Box 1690 · Greeley, CO 80632
Phone: (970) 352-0211 · Toll Free: 800-275-0321
Email: web@greeleytrib.com

[DDMac]

When those who are intent on making soup of him arrive, perhaps he can pull back into his shell and survive.
When we get to the point where the regular military is ordered to move against the civilian population, the Constitution will already be dead. There will be no rules, no law and certainly no order. It would be a time for revolution indeed.
Mac.

[Hazcat]

WOW!  I think we have a serious case of senile dementia going on here.

I believe the first part of his babble about speech = money is talking about McCain Feingold.

The 2A part he has perfectly back wards.  "The first half of the amendment is independent, and the second part depends on the first for its meaning." 

Send this guy to the retirement home cause he ain't all there.

[Hazcat]

"A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state (our nation), the right to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed,"

The above quote is directly from the article.

Notice anything missing??

[Ron J]

Could be wrong but I would bet they call him dick-head at his nursing home. 

[Sponsor]

[tombogan03884]

Could be wrong but I would bet they call him dick-head at his nursing home. 

It's a lot more likely that you are right.

The above quote is directly from the article.

Notice anything missing??

 


   The People

[Hazcat]

   The People

Yep!  Those damn anti gunners can't even quote the 2A correctly in their arguments because if they do there is no argument!

[twyacht]

Give or take some bad storms, he could live in Burma where all his rights can be removed and he can just live in his state owned shack and grow dirt.

What an idiot.

[CurrieS103]

Give or take some bad storms, he could live in Burma where all his rights can be removed and he can just live in his state owned shack and grow dirt.

What an idiot.

A shack now full of flood water.  An idiot who forgets what this country is and has to offer...namley freedom most decidedly due to the 2A.

[Solus]

In reading this guys talk about the 1st Amendment, I took it as pro 1st A.   When he says   We have all the free speech we can afford, I don't think he meant all the free speech we can afford to allow folks to have...but rather that the McCain ruling now give free speech to folks in accordance with how much they can afford to pay for it...

If you can afford to be a broadcast entity, you can say what you wish when you wish (usual exceptions apply).  But if you are a average Jo(e) you have to watch what you say about politics as elections approach...


He does have a bit of mis-understanding on the intent of the Founders.  When he says that had they in visioned our standing armies and National Guards, they would not have found need for the 2nd A..   This is far from the truth...they arbored standing armies as the worst of government evils...and had they thought there would be one, they would have put more bite into the 2nd A.

A well regulated militia, being necessary to the protection of a free state against armies both foreign and domestic, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed   perhaps?