The campaign to seize control of the hearts and minds of our youth is so pervasive and widespread that even a blog site dedicated solely to this subject would be unable to handle the workload.
A father in Connecticut was shocked to find that the reference material with which his kid was being taught was fraught with somewhat clever twists of the truth and outright lies concerning the right to privately owned firearms.
-Firstly, by now nothing that the Left does, especially when it comes to the malleable and impressionable minds of children, should shock anyone.
“The courts have consistently determined that the Second Amendment does not ensure each individual the right to bear arms,” it purportedly reads. “The courts have never found a law regulating the private ownership of weapons unconstitutional.”
Note that the writer(s) cleverly utilized the fact that in fact some individuals, such as those convicted of crimes, cannot own firearms. They also played with the fact that laws that honestly regulated ownership of firearm's have been upheld. Both of these are examples of lying by employing facts; they are clearly presented in manner that would lead the reader to believe that the courts have not upheld the second amendment (Heller v. District of Columbia, McDonald v. Chicago). They also have lied concerning the facts as most, but not every law, that was made with the purpose of regulating firearms has been upheld.
"The worksheet, published by Instructional Fair, goes on to say that the Second Amendment is not incorporated against the states.
“This means that the rights of this amendment are not extended to the individual citizens of the states,” the worksheet reads. “So a person has no right to complain about a Second Amendment violation by state laws.”
According to the document, the Second Amendment “only provides the right of a state to keep an armed National Guard.' "
These are the more patently false and insidious charges. As Washington DC is not a state, the Left had high hopes that McDonald v. Chicago would be decided in their favor. Their hopes were dashed as the Court did absolutely apply the second amendment to the states, but this did not stop the writers from falsely claiming that it did not. Heller also put to rest the claim that no honest person ever believed; that the National Guard is the only criteria specified in the second amendment. The people are noted specifically in the amendment, and the literal mountain of evidence that was provided in amicus curiae briefs compelled the honest justices to admit that the writers never intended to restrict gun ownership to an official militia. It must also be noted that, at that time, the militia meant every male 15-16 of years or older, so the National Guard does not apply here, either.
No comments:
Post a Comment