Friday, June 17, 2016

Time to Stop Pretending that GUN NUT AMMOSEXUALS Care about THE CONSTITUTION.

http://www.rawstory.com/2016/06/lets-stop-pretending-like-gun-advocates-care-about-the-constitution/


en Edward Snowden leaked that the NSA was indiscriminately spying on all Americans by monitoring their emails and phone calls, there was very little blow-back toward the Obama Administration. The media quickly chose their preferred narrative that implied Snowden was a traitor instead of honing in on the fact that the government was clearly violating the Fourth Amendment of the Constitution.
Constitutional protections regarding privacy are pretty easy to interpret:
The right of the people to be secure in their persons, houses, papers, and effects, against unreasonable searches and seizures, shall not be violated, and no warrants shall issue, but upon probable cause,supported by oath or affirmation, and particularly describing the place to be searched, and the persons or things to be seized.
It was shocking that so many Americans were apathetic to their Constitutional rights being toyed with. Members of Congress who argue against big government have been the same politicians who vociferously support the spying program in the name of “national security.”
Even though there’s evidence proving that the bulk collection of data is  counterproductive and doesn’t help with intelligenceof terrorist threats, fear-mongering about Islamic radicals has succeeded in making Americans comfortable with letting go of their freedoms.
But the same can’t be said of the Second Amendment, which has been wrongfully interpreted as a Constitutional protection that gives the 10,000 people on the Terrorist Watch List access to deadly weapons.
I think it’s safe to say that mass shootings pose a gigantic threat to national security. Just recently 49 people were slaughtered at the Pulse nightclub in Orlando by a man who legally purchased weapons that closely resemble the AR-15.
He had been investigated by the FBI on two separate occasions for sympathizing with radical Muslims, and his ex-wife claims that she wrote a police report after he beat her repeatedly. In other words, there was reason to believe that he was not in the right mental state to own guns. But we have people arguing that he should’ve had access to them anyway.
That’s the sick country we’re living in.
Why should someone like the Orlando shooter have the ability to legally purchase assault weapons? Aside from this deranged man, why would anyone protect and support the idea of someone on the TERRORIST WATCH LIST to obtain guns?
Some would argue that there needs to be due process before someone gets their guns taken away. I would argue that there should be probable cause and warrants before Americans get spied on by the government. Plus, the Second Amendment calls for a “well-regulated militia.” When did those suspected of terrorism become part of that militia?

No comments: