Gun rights groups are cheering the National Rifle Association for pushing back against President Barack Obama's negative connotation of the word "absolutism" in his inaugural address.
NRA chief Wayne LaPierre went on the attack Tuesday before a crowd of supporters, accusing Obama of trying to take away citizens' constitutional right to own and bear firearms.
"Absolutes do exist, words do have specific meaning in language and in law," LaPierre told members of the Weatherby Foundation, a hunting and wildlife conservation non-profit.
According to Chris Knox, communications director for the Firearms Coalition, LaPierre delivered the right message in the right way.
"There are absolutes and I have no problem with absolutism," Knox told Newsmax. "As soon as you start shading the Second Amendment, you start shading all of them."
Knox was particularly pleased with LaPierre's tough talk, especially since the coalition has been less than happy at times with the NRA's positions.
As an example, Knox pointed to the NRA's endorsement of a 1984 ban on armor-piercing "cop-killer" bullets.
"In the current fight, I'm very proud of the NRA," he said. "They're saying the right things and in an effective way."
More @ Newsmax
Thing is, even some of the Nazgul on the SCOTUS say out loud that rights are not absolute. Rights are in fact absolute, no matter what weasel words the overlords might choose to use to pursuede us otherwise, and I guess it is up to us to make that clear. Yes, you CAN yell fire in a crowded theatre, but for that there are consequences. There are consequences for mis using any right. The rights themselves are absolute.
ReplyDeleteRights are in fact absolute, no matter what weasel words the overlords might choose to use to pursuede us otherwise, and I guess it is up to us to make that clear.
DeleteAbsolutely, we have Natural Rights simply to defend ourselves and to be left alone, but of course that is too much to ask for a Collectivist.