If ‘they’ will pry our weapons from our cold dead hands wouldn’t it be easier to abolish the 2nd Amendment?


Comment by Jim Campbell, Citizen Journalist, Oath Keeper  and Patriot. 

Then again let’s not and let them think we did.  Only fools are in favor of abolishing the Second Amendment or adding more restrictive gun legislation.  

In the rant below by author Donald Kaul you will immediately notice the verbiage of a truly disturbed individual, certainly one that should not have a gun of any kind.


H/T ParterningwithEagles

WND: We’ll ‘pry guns from cold, dead fingers’

When a person of my peers, or perhaps older, fails to recognize the lessons of history, I’m dismayed.  This time, I dare not “voice” my initial reaction.  If he likes gun control so much, send him to Britain or Australia.  Columnist proposes killing NRA members, dragging Republicans behind pickups.
But Donald what will we do with out all the hot babes packin?
Yep particularly ones with hand held rocket launchers.
That’s my story and I’m sticking to it, I’m J.C. and I approve this message. 
For 50 years, the left-leaning columnist Donald Kaul has raged against guns, but after the Sandy Hook.

Elementary School massacre, he says, it’s time for “anger,” killing gun owners and dragging legislators who disagree with gun control behind pickup trucks until they get the message.

The Pulitzer Prize-nominated columnist penned an alarming screed published in the Des Moines Register in which he further suggested the Second Amendment be repealed and the National Rifle Association be declared a terrorist organization.

“During my 50-year career,” Kaul wrote, “every time some demented soul would take a semiautomatic gun and clean out a post office, a school or a picnic, I’d get up on my soap box and let loose with a withering diatribe about guns, the National Rifle Association and weak-kneed politicians.

Did it about 75 times, give or take.”Yet each time, he lamented, the only result was a spike in gun sales.

Donald Kaul

“That’s obscene,” he opined. “Here, then, is my ‘madder-than-hell-and-I’m-not-going-to-take-it-anymore’ program for ending gun violence in America.

”His first step: “Repeal the Second Amendment, the part about guns anyway. It’s badly written, confusing and more trouble than it’s worth.

Surely the Founders couldn’t have envisioned weapons like those used in the Newtown shooting when they guaranteed gun rights. Owning a gun should be a privilege, not a right.”

Second: “Declare the NRA a terrorist organization and make membership illegal.

Make ownership of unlicensed assault rifles a felony. If some people refused to give up their guns, that ‘prying the guns from their cold, dead hands’ thing works for me.

”Third: “Then I would tie Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, our esteemed Republican leaders, to the back of a Chevy pickup truck and drag them around a parking lot until they saw the light on gun control.”

And if that didn’t work,” Kaul concludes, “I’d adopt radical measures.”

Kaul explains his dramatic measures this way:

“The thing missing from the debate so far is anger – anger that we live in a society where something like the Sandy Hook Elementary massacre can happen and our main concern is not offending the NRA’s sensibilities.” 

It would appear Kaul has supplied his missing ingredient.

About these ads

5 thoughts on “If ‘they’ will pry our weapons from our cold dead hands wouldn’t it be easier to abolish the 2nd Amendment?

  1. ” SHALL NOT BE INFRINGED UPON ” is the crystal clear explanation of our freedom to own firearms, NOT some of sorts…. Rememeber, When you have given up your right to own, use or possess a firearm you are no longer A CITIZEN… YOU ARE A SLAVE TO THE DICTATORIAL GOVT WHO CAN, AND WILL, BE your master….

  2. So owning a gun should be a “privilege” and not a right? Makes me wonder how Kaul feels about those other notions tossed around by the Founders in the Bill of Rights. Are free speech, right to a speedy trial, habeas corpus and freedom of religion also “privileges” or are they really rights?
    Or could it be that, just like the 2nd Amendment, these things must be referred to as privileges when Mr. Kaul and other self-important elitists find they afford too much power to the little people to be looked upon as actual
    After all, give the lower classes too much authority AND the necessary means of preventing it being reclaimed by the political ruling class and ANYTHING could happen. Hell…freedom might even break out!

  3. Wonderful article, Mister Kaul. On one hand you are angered about the violence performed by a disturbed individual. On the other hand, you are espousing violence even more severe against those that are trying to protect your rights.

    Before you ban guns, you should ban alcohol and automobiles. Twenty five times more people are killed by automobiles than by guns. Every year, there are several fools that do the same thing with a car than the person at Sandy Hook did with two handguns. Sometimes they run an ex-spouse or their new partner off the road. Sometimes they run them over. Sometimes they jump the curb and run into a crowd. Sometimes, they are drunk when they do these things, so we should also ban cars AND alcohol. Banning alcohol would even prevent a few gun accidents or crimes.

    Almost 33,000 people died due to automobile issues. Disturbed people have been killing others for the better part of a million years. A rock, a club, a spear, a rope or a meat cleaver. You don’t need a gun to kill someone. You just have to have the desire and lack of conscience to do so.

    Every teacher in Israel is armed. they do not have the problems that we have for that very reason. A criminal that wants a lot of victims in America simply goes to a GUN FREE ZONE, whether it is a school or a theater. They know that they are safe and will be able to make their statement. They will also be able to take many lives. This just goes to prove that society IS SAFER when the criminal do not know who is armed. The media always avoids the publicity about an armed citizen preventing a crime or disabling a shooter. There was a situation like that in Texas last week. there was another situation where a man walked into a Walmart and stabbed his wife, who was working there, nine times before a 72 year old armed citizen stopped him.

    Not everyone should have a gun, but that doesn’t seem to stop someone from stealing one and then following that up with even more serious crimes. You will not resolve a your like that by removing your possible protection in the form of an armed citizen. I had a concealed weapons permit for eleven years. I used my gun three times, but NEVER had to pull the trigger. I just held two people until the police arrive in two of those cases. In the third case, I just had to open my coat to make some gangbangers back off.

    Having a gun does not mean that you intend to kill someone. It just gives you a chance to stop someone that wants to kill you or another person.

  4. I invite that idiot to come and personally disarm me and try to kill me. I’m sure he doesn’t have the guts to try it himself but would depend on other armed people do it for him
    . The spineless bastard!

  5. Kaul already sounds “radical” enough; we should declare him “illegal” and “ban him from existence” Or, at least “ban” him from ever speaking “publicly”! If he’s had a “50 year career”, then he must be about my age (75-give or take?); give me a crack at him – -a few hard smacks upside the head and a long lecture, might “smarten” him up! I could make him read a few “old” (unrevised) history books and he might “really learn” something right!

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s