Our 2nd. Amendment and Biden

[guohua]

Can you even guess what Dementia Joe said about the 2nd, Amendment of the Constitution of the United States.
Sit down, my friends.

Biden Repeats False Attack on the Second Amendment That Even the Washington Post Debunked.

On Thursday, President Biden gave public remarks where he renewed his calls to ban “assault weapons.” (A vague term that generally refers to scary-looking guns.) To justify this ban, Biden argued that the Second Amendment isn’t absolute—and in doing so, the president falsely claimed that the Second Amendment banned cannons in early American history. 





“[Banning assault weapons] doesn’t violate anybody’s Second Amendment rights,” he said. “There is no amendment that is absolute.”

Then Biden got into historical analysis that was… interesting. 
“When the amendment was passed it didn’t say anybody can own a gun and any kind of weapon,” Biden claimed. “You couldn’t buy a cannon when this amendment was passed, so there’s no reason you should be able to buy certain assault weapons.”

That is what that Idopt Joe Biden said.

The rest of the article is:

This bizarre aside is more than a non sequitur. It’s actually false. As Washington Post fact-checker Glenn Kessler noted in September 2021: 



“You do not have to look far in the Constitution to see that private individuals could own cannons. Article 1, Section 8, Clause 11 gives Congress the power to declare war. But there is another element of that clause that might seem strange to modern ears — Congress also had the power to ‘grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal.’
What’s that? These were special waivers that allowed private individuals to act as pirates on behalf of the United States against countries engaged in war with it. The ‘letter of marque’ allowed a warship to cross into another country’s territory to take a ship, while a ‘letter of reprisal’ gave authorization to bring the ship back to the home port of the capturer.

Individuals who were given these waivers and owned warships obviously also obtained cannons for use in battle. We have no idea where [Biden] conjured up this notion about a ban on cannon ownership in the early days of the Republic, but he needs to stop making this claim.”

That’s right: Biden’s wrong about the history of the Second Amendment and the facts. Don’t forget that guns are used more times in self-defense annually than in violent crimes. Oh, and don’t forget that we already had a ban on “assault weapons” for over a decade and even liberal-leaning outlets like Vox have admitted it didn’t work.  

So, it’s easy to see why Biden keeps stretching the truth to push his anti-gun policies. None of the facts are on his side.
Source to Mr. Stupids statement

How long has he been in Washington DC?
There needs to be Term Limits and an IQ/Age limits for our POTUS.  JMHO

[Ninurta]

That's correct - there was no ban on private ownership of any "weapon of war" in those days.The residents of Boonesboro, KY actually built their own cannon during a siege of the fort by the British and Indians. Since they had no foundry to cast one, they built it out of a hollow oak log bound with iron bands. it burst on the third shot, but no one ever got arrested to manufacturing their own weapons of war, because it was not illegal.

The first weapons to undergo any ban were not firearms of any kind, nor even military weapons - it was understood that military weapons were explicitly allowed by the Second Amendment, and not to be tampered with by government. They were knives, "dirks" specifically. Many of those bans continue to this day. In my state of Virginia, for example, bans on dirks are still on the books, although I know of no one who has been arrested for possessing one. Also banned here, I know not why, are "throwing stars", nunchaku, and butterfly knives. I know not why - they banned them some time when I was elsewhere, because those items were not illegal here when I was growing up. A consequence of that is that I own some that I bought legally as a teenager, but which are now illegal to possess. The stars/ shuriken are not particularly effective for anything other than to distract an attacker with, and the butterfly knives are so complex to operate that no one bothers to learn how any more. I'm one of the few people in this state that I know of that can used one.

Butcher knives out of your kitchen are far more dangerous than any of the above, yet they are paradoxically still legal here, which tells me weapons bans are never about deadliness of the object. They are instead only about control, and the unreasonable fears of cowards for "scary-looking", but ultimately less lethal, weapons.

I can think of nowhere in the US that cannons were banned before 1934 by the passage of the GCA of 1934 which also banned private possession of machine guns, which would have been an unthinkable ban just ten years previous to it's enactment, since machine guns are explicitly "weapons of war", and therefore the very kind of weapons explicitly protected against banning by the Second Amendment.

The fact is, that a semantic focus on "gun violence" - or "knife violence", "crowbar violence", or even "claw hammer violence" is intended to shift the focus from the real problem, which is "violence" in any of it's forms, to an inanimate object that can do no violence at all without a violent person wielding it. It seems to me that focus should be on violence and the perpetrators thereof rather than whatever tool they chose to project their violence with at the moment. Until that focus is re-acquired, violence will always be on our streets, simply because the people who perpetrate it are condoned to live there.

As an example, in the UK I am given to understand that firearms are heavily restricted. Has that eliminated the violence in, for example, London? No. The violent people, since they are allowed to still walk among us unfettered, have simply shifted to other implements of destruction. Until the root cause - violent people - is addressed, violence will remain a fact of daily life as one by one the implements used are focused upon and eliminated rather than the root cause, until we are down to bricks and pointy sticks. Even then, the violent people among us will make use of those.


.

[ABNARTY]

The more I listen to what that puppet is saying, the more I am convinced it is pure theater. 

Over the last year or so, 2A issues have netted positive ground nationwide. Granted, it's ground they should not have to take but we are where we are.

Quite a few states have moved forward with Constitutional Carry. So while the Regime, it's toadies in the media, and hordes of useful idiots will babble on about weapons of war this or that, it's not all doom and gloom.

I will concede the ATF is still ATF-ing. They are moving in the same direction as the FBI, just doing their own STASI thing regardless of what the law says. Ever notice they only show up in large, well armed groups these days? They know they are out on a limb.

[727Sky]

Biden is a pathetic excuse for an American and a total disgrace as a president.