So there are some in this country, we all know who they are, that have no problem with violating everyone's 2nd Amendment rights when they advocate confiscating all guns but become apoplectic at the notion of "Stop and frisk" because it might violate the 4th Amendment rights of a few?
Is it me or does this seem to be intellectually inconsistent? What is especially troubling to me is mayors like Martin O'Mally and Mike DeBlazio ended the highly successful "Stop and frisk" programs in Baltimore and NewYork City which has resulted in a huge spike in homocides. It makes me wonder if stopping gun violence is actually the goal.
Ken....it's all about control......
ReplyDeleteA bit rhetorical on my part. I agree with you that it is a control issue. Once they know the population can't resist then they will be free to take away the rest of our rights. They really aren't that keen on the 1st Amendment thus all the hate speech laws, PC stuff, and anti-religious freedom efforts. They also don't have a problem with violating the 5th Amendment. If they decide they don't like the outcome of a trial, they just charge the accused for the same incident as a hate crime or violating someone's human rights - double jeopardy be damned. They also love the idea of seizing property without compensation - another 5th Anendment violation. And the 10th? Well they see it as just the opposite of the Framers. The central government has the say so unless they specifically allow the states that privilege.
Delete