Senile Supreme Court Justice Calls For Repeal Of 2nd Amendment, Demonstrates Ignorance Of History
I hope that, at 97, dementia or Alzheimer's has addled the mind of John Paul Stevens.
Not, of course, because I wish him any harm. It would just be depressing to think an utter moron (or lying scumbag) could become a Supreme Court Justice.
In an op-ed (in the New York Times, of course) giving wet-dreams to fake liberal-"fauxgressives" (actual communists) everywhere, ex- Supreme Court Justice John Paul Stevens has called for a complete and unconditional revocation of the 2nd Amendment, which would revoke the right of all Americans to own a firearm over night.
Rest assured that in between cleaning his dentures and watching "Jeopardy", Moron Former Justice Stevens has given this a lot of thought. For example, he has forgotten more history than you'll probably ever know, since he's been around to experience half of it. That's what makes him qualified to make sweeping generalizations, based on no source material, facts, or any legitimate information outside of his swiss-cheese brain, such as the following:
"the threat of a tyrannical federal government is "a relic of the 18th century.""
Ah, ok, the "threat of a tyrannical government" is a "relic of the 18th century" (1700s). That really makes me feel a lot better! I guess all these governments and despots weren't real!
- Nazi Germany
- Fascist Italy
- Communist Russia
- Pretty much all of the Middle East
- Most of Africa
- North Korea
- Cambodia
- Pol Pot (I realize we're hitting some regime-overlap here)
- Pinochet
- Stalin
- Hitler
- Mussolini
- Franco
- Awww, fuck it.
Given the lack of an Alzheimer's diagnosis, I don't think any amount of senility could possibly explain this. Anti-Justice Stevens is deliberately lying to you, the American people, to attempt to ensconce you in a fascist "fauxgressive" nightmare world where you are defenseless to criminals and despotic governments.
Perhaps he was swayed by the compelling arguments of 13-year olds who have neither the right to vote or even a basic understanding of the adult world.
"Rarely in my lifetime have I seen the type of civic engagement schoolchildren and their supporters demonstrated in Washington and other major cities throughout the country this past Saturday. These demonstrations demand our respect."
Funny how they didn't demand too much respect at Kent State, or when protesting Vietnam, huh? Even though those were actual legal adults.
This man should be deported.
“And how we burned in the camps later, thinking: What would things have been like if every Security operative, when he went out at night to make an arrest, had been uncertain whether he would return alive and had to say good-bye to his family? Or if, during periods of mass arrests, as for example in Leningrad, when they arrested a quarter of the entire city, people had not simply sat there in their lairs, paling with terror at every bang of the downstairs door and at every step on the staircase, but had understood they had nothing left to lose and had boldly set up in the downstairs hall an ambush of half a dozen people with axes, hammers, pokers, or whatever else was at hand?... The Organs would very quickly have suffered a shortage of officers and transport and, notwithstanding all of Stalin's thirst, the cursed machine would have ground to a halt! If...if...We didn't love freedom enough. And even more – we had no awareness of the real situation.... We purely and simply deserved everything that happened afterward.”
― Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn, The Gulag Archipelago 1918-1956
Quoted From user "NoDebt" at ZH:
"Some additional ammo for you, from a Brit... Pass it on.
The UK basically banned guns in 1997.
The firearm crime rate went on to approximately double, over the following decade.
The homicide crime rate went on to increase by about 50% over the following 5 years, peaking in 2003.
The violent crime rate exploded after 1997.
Banning guns had zero effect on firearm crimes, on homicides and on violent crime rates in general.
Oh yeah. And we now no longer have freedom of speech. 3000 people were arrested last year for "hate" speech. Causing "offence"; hurting someone's feelings is a "hate" crime. Even the perception of causing offence can get you arrested and charged, so we're talking about actual thought crime here.
Do NOT let them take your guns!"
We also have a Radio Station! (click me)
...and a 10,000+ active user Discord Chat Server! (click me)
Sources: Google, The Gulag Archipelago, NewYorkTimes, ZH, Wikipedia, Amazon.com, u/NoDebt
Copyright: SmartSteem, PALNet, SPL, Aleksandr Zolszhenitsyn, atom-smasher.org
The latter is an absolute requirement.
Let me pretend in my utopian bubble.
This comment has received a 45.45 % upvote from @steemdiffuser thanks to: @stimialiti. Steem on my friend!
Above average bids may get additional upvotes from our trail members!
Get Upvotes, Join Our Trail, or Delegate Some SP
You got upvoted from @adriatik bot! Thank you to you for using our service. We really hope this will hope to promote your quality content!
Great post! You've earned a 16.03% upvote from @dolphinbot
You got a 33.33% upvote from @oceanwhale With 35+ Bonus Upvotes courtesy of @stimialiti! Delegate us Steem Power & get 100%daily rewards Payout! 20 SP, 50, 75, 100, 150, 200, 300, 500,1000 or Fill in any amount of SP. Click For details | Discord server
You got a 8.27% upvote from @thebot courtesy of @stimialiti!
Please delegate us Steem Power & get 97% daily rewards share!
20 SP, 50, 75, 100, 150, 200, 300, 500, 1000 or Fill in any amount of SP.
Click For details | Discord server
This post has received a $50.00 % upvote from @siditech thanks to: @stimialiti.
Here's a banana!
You got a 100.00% upvote from @greengrowth thanks to @stimialiti! You too can use @GreenGrowth by sending your post URL in the memo field to the bot. Minimum bid is 0.01.
If you feel this post is spammy or not worthy of @Greengrowth you can contact a moderator in our Discord Channel https://discord.gg/6DhnVTQ.
Not having a firm stance on this, I'd like to just point out that the fact that an idea hasn't been implemented correctly in the past, that doesn't mean it can't be implemented correctly in the present. I'm only making this point so that people consider alternatives and don't succumb to cognitive dissonance when at least entertaining those other options.
" the fact that an idea hasn't been implemented correctly in the past, that doesn't mean it can't be implemented correctly in the present."
This is technically, true, but it still remains strong evidence against the success of such a thing.
I have gone backwards and forwards on this. I would say I am still on the fence. I'm not American so my opinion isn't really valid.
A couple of things:
People don't understand that it's just not a matter of banning a gun as an item. I think for a lot of American citizens they view the gun as a symbolic representation of their freedom.
Instead of just opposing guns, why don't people come up with a viable solution. Anyone can march and say 'no more guns' but just like protesting climate change, why don't you come up with a viable solution?
I actually don't think that there is much opposition from gun enthusiasts to make some legal changes around ARs, I think if the focus is on a certain type of gun there can be some consensus.
Those are excellent points. On your third point though, the fear is that if you start restricting, you open the door for more and more until all are banned. That is often the way the government gets what they want; a little bit toward the goal over a long period of time...
Yes! I was going to mention this. I was thinking something that could perhaps work is once new legislation is passed, their is a clause that no further legislation pertaining to guns can be penned until x date or with x factors. This would provide some more comfort. In theory sounds okay but not sure how it would go in practice.
How can you possibly be "on the fence" about a policy that takes away your rights, gives it to people who want to hurt and steal from you, increases crime and renders you a hopeless victim to same?
When you see a red light in traffic, are you "on the fence" about stopping and not fucking killing yourself and others?
I should be more clear, I am most certainly against this proposal, on the broader topic I am on the fence re; some form of legislation but not outright banning.
No. 3 is incorrect. The national media claims this to be true, but the fact is that the AR is by far the most popular gun in America. There is huge opposition to further restrictions of that particular gun, and it is the first to sell out at gun stores every time there is another push to restrict it. That is why there are now many companies that produce it, including some companies that produce ARs and AR accessories exclusively.
Interesting, I didn't know that thanks.
Being free is the state of mind one has to explore it
That's a hard sell to those in solitary confinement.
This is somewhat true in that second amendment can no longer defend us from governments. 10 million people with AR-15s would get slaughtered by the modern warfare that governments have to offer. This was not the case 100 years ago.
This is irrelevant, unless you think the US is going to Nuke and deploy the army against civilians.
You have no data to make this sweeping generalization, you say it only because it sounds right.
Read the Gulag Archipelago. It puts the lie to your unsupported generalization above.
You lose credibility when you artificially inflate your argument with impossible scenarios. Of course we wouldn't nuke our own land.
At the same time of course we would deploy the army against civilians. That's the whole point. A big justification for the second amendment was so that a militia could be formed to fight against (or even with, if invaded) the government.
Now we have air strikes that can level entire cities and cavalry (tanks) that are immune to rocket propelled grenades and even other lesser tank fire. The second amendment was created when we had horses... lol.
The Gulag Archipelago is totally irrelevant to this conversation. You can't stop a government from being a prison state with guns. We already live in a prison state and if it gets worse an AR-15 isn't going to help anything.
I'd like to point out that you still have no idea what my stance on gun control even is. My only point here is that a civilian militia force stands zero chance of winning any real battle against the government. This isn't an opinion, it's a fact. How could you possibly argue otherwise?
Spot-on. If we're going to mobilize any serious opposition to the imminent threat of a GLOBAL oppressive State, we're going to have to pick our battles. Defending the 2nd amendment simply isn't one of those battles IMO.
"Defending the 2nd amendment simply isn't one of those battles IMO."
The fact that you can say BEING DISARMED is not a battle worth fighting tells me you are on the wrong team.
I didn't say "being disarmed" is not a battle worth fighting for. I said the right to own guns is not a battle worth fighting for. There's a big difference and the pen is indeed mightier than the sword.
Its hard to write after youve been shot dead!
You can write about whatever you want while held in a concetration camp like guantanamo bay nobody is going to be able to read it!
To bad we can't get rid of the corruption in politics by ignore it...
A lot of people trying that approach..
Alltogether people on 3...
Is going to be the call sign, is it going to be bullets or letters/petitions,and ballets.
If 25% of the non voters joined the 15% who will not vote Dem/Rep ,we could root out the traitors,set term limits and start to fix things...
I don't know what % it is going to take with guns,and I don't see non voters picking up guns and overthrowing the corruption...
I say vote because that is your say in Gov. We can vote for less Gov.!
Less Gov. is called more citizens doing there part!
I would love to see what happened if we did manage to work together.
Namaste
You know what they say about the boxes, first use the soap box, then the ballot box, then the bullet box.
Thomas Jefferson: “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and tyrants.”
He knew what he was on about.
He had an intelligence I happily doff my cap to.
He's a useful idiot prick I wouldn't piss on if he was on fire.
I am suspicious of the increasing attacks on the 2nd. They need to leave it alone.
I have one cosmic truth for all of humanity, and that is think ..
The ones that advocate taking guns and the ones that pass the laws taking guns I can guarantee you will not be the ones walking up to your door demanding them ...
I agree with you. I do think that 2nd amendment should be studied in its pure form. What we see now is the compromised version. It's really interesting to read it in its original form and learn about the compromises and deals made to get it adopted. Politics is nothing new. The thoughts of those in power at the time are far different than what we presently claim them to be. I spend a lot of time studying history and it is extremely difficult to find it in the books we use to teach it lol. You really have to dig deep into primary sources to make any sense of it.