Assembly Majority Leader Scott Suder (R-Abbottsford):
“The Second Amendment doesn’t stop at the entrance to the Capitol, and people should have the right to exercise their constitutional freedoms when they visit the statehouse,”
Apparently Rep. Suder’s support for “constitutional freedoms” doesn’t extend to the first amendment rights of citizens who’ve been escorted from the Assembly Gallery by law enforcement at the behest of Assembly Republicans for sitting silently while wearing copies of the Constitution around their necks.
So here’s my question for Rep. Suder and Republicans: why does the First Amendment stop at the entrance to our state’s Capitol – and particularly in the Assembly Gallery – while the Second Amendment can be exercised within the Capitol and the Assembly Gallery.
Some amendments are just more valuable that others…
That certainly seems to be the case among many Republicans.
Because the 1st amendment isn’t nearly as manly as the 2nd.
DFH’s v John Wayne, ya know.
Because you can’t pry the First amendment “from my cold dead fingers”. LOL. It is an intangible and not easily understood.
except this really has nothing to do with the 2nd amendment. If they only follow one, they should at least know the history behind it eh?
The history
http://www.guncite.com/journals/vandhist.html
whoeever wrote that took some serious liberties and stretches to prove their point. The thing is Jefferson and other Founding Father did NOT want a standing army. They wanted all men armed to allow for a quick gathering in times of need.
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.
Jefferson was adamant that we not have a free standing army in time of peace because he felt that the military industrial complex would grow out of control which is why the 2nd amendment.
While there was debate about if we should have a free standing army, there was NO debate as to whether or not people should be able to have weapons to protect themselves from the Government. It was unanimous amongst the Founders that this was absolutely NOT the case. They would have been abhorred by the thought of that.
Yes, the US government should not have a standing army. We agree. In its place, citizens should be armed.
There was no MI complex in his day to be afraid of.
Well actually Jefferson and others had a good idea what would happen if they were allowed to have a standing army in times of peace, that it would evolve into one.
They had seen throughout the history of Europe where standing armies that were not at war, were the ones who overtook the civilian government and took over the country.
When Jefferson came into office in 1800 there were over 300,000 men in the military and when he left there were fewer than 6000. He tried to end the standing army