Something is indeed ‘scary’ here

I haven’t really been following case of Kenneth Webster, who was arrested in Massachusetts with what the media is (predictably) describing as an “arsenal,” or “massive cache” of weapons, in defiance of Massachusetts law. One article breathlessly describes his “massive cache” as including “more than 1,000 live rounds” (should he have stocked up on dud rounds, instead?).

As stated, I haven’t really been following the story, but according to the above-linked article, he doesn’t sound like any kind of terrorist or mass shooter I’ve ever heard about. That’s not really what I’m writing about today. Instead, I want to look at this column:

When he was arrested on July 1 Webster reportedly told police that he had a constitutional right to own those guns. If that sounds scary, here’s something scarier. There are a lot of people out there who agree with him.

I think columnist Joe Burns is talking about “extremists” like me, here. But wait! It gets even better.

Second Amendment literalists have long held that the phrase “the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed” means just that.

Imagine! People thinking that the Constitution means what it says, rather than what Joe Burns and Sarah Brady tell us it means–simply terrifying, isn’t it?

“Second Amendment literalist”–I kind of like that term, but I don’t want to give up my “extremist” creds–“Second Amendment extreme literalist,” maybe? Kinda awkward, I guess. I’ll keep working on it. I wonder if Burns is a “First Amendment literalist.” That, of course, would be perfectly alright–thinking that the First Amendment is just a figure of speech is plainly ridiculous.

I have to wonder–would those who oppose publicly speaking about the purpose of the Second Amendment prefer to be called “Second Amendment figurativists”?

Advertisements

8 Responses to “Something is indeed ‘scary’ here”

  1. Snowflakes in Hell » Scared by English Says:

    […] reporter in Massachusetts is apparently getting his panties in a bunch because some of us believe the Second Amendment means exactly what it says.  I guess the prospect […]

  2. guy Says:

    I wonder if Burns is a “First Amendment literalist.” That, of course, would be perfectly alright–

    Probably not. I’d bet he interprets the First Amendment phrase “Congress shall make no law…..abridging the freedom of speech” to add “unless I don’t like what they’re saying or maybe it offends someone”. So that argument probably wouldn’t fly.

  3. 45superman Says:

    I have little doubt that he thinks as you describe, but I doubt he’d come out and admit it.

  4. Claude Says:

    Thanks for the post.

    http://claude.betancourt.us/blog/about/

  5. 45superman Says:

    Thank you, for the link, Claude.

  6. Right Wing Nation » Stuff You Can't Make Up Says:

    […] Armed and Free has a lot of well-deserved snark, but I’m pretty near speechless. […]

  7. HandGun Podcast » Blog Archive » Revolver Love - 008 Says:

    […] Apparently, my opinion is scary […]

  8. WhatBubbaKnows Says:

    How is the 2nd Amendment different from the 1st?
    The first amendment protects our right to free speech, our freedom of worship, the freedom of the press and the right to assemble. But who does it protect those rights from?

    Congress. (Note the period)

    Amendment I.
    Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, or of the press, or the right of the people peaceably to assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances.

    That’s it. That is the total of the first Amendment. It protects those rights from Congress.

    Look at the 2nd Amendment:
    Amendment II.
    A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.

    The difference? My right to bear arms is protected from anyone and everyone. My right to free speech is protected only from Congress.

    Consider that when the next time some ignorant, lefty reporter tries to use their limited rights to free speech and free press to tell you that you only think you have the right to own and carry a gun.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: