Allen West old school patriot gun

Who Determines the Law of the Land?

In Front Page, Second Amendment by Allen WestLeave a Comment

Well, it’s not even a week since the completion of the 147th NRA Annual Meeting and Convention, and we have another chucklehead alert regarding the Second Amendment. I find it rather perplexing that the progressive, socialist, left has a hard time with reading comprehension, because, obviously, they have no idea what “shall not be infringed” means. I guess the liberal, progressive, leftists suffer from what we call “selective compliance and enforcement.” It appears the left just kinda chooses what laws they will, or will not, abide by — ya know, like sanctuary states and cities.

Here’s a thought: how is it that we have former military veterans, who took an oath “to support and defend the Constitution against all enemies foreign, and domestic,” run as Democrats . . . progressive socialists? It seems to me that Pennsylvania Rep. Conor Lamb is either confused, or lying. He ran as a Democrat, but says he is pro-Second Amendment. That’s not exactly a congruent position. But, that’s a discussion for another missive, especially as we draw closer to the midterm elections.

But, check this out, courtesy of Breitbart:

“A housing developer with multiple properties in New Jersey is warning that tenants who possess, store, or carry firearms on their developments will face a “notice to vacate.” The developer, RPM Development Group, issued a notice of the policy to all residents and that notice was acquired and published by the New Jersey Second Amendment Society. Breitbart News spoke with RPM General Counsel David Steinberg, who confirmed that the policy says, “No one will be permitted to store, or carry a gun or rifle, or any other type of firearm of any kind in the building, or on the grounds.” The notice goes on to say, “If it is discovered that you do have a firearm of any kind on this property, you will received a Notice to Cease, followed by a Notice to Vacate.” Under this policy, law-abiding tenants would be unable to carry firearms on property for defense of themselves and their families. They would also be unable to keep firearms on property for sporting/target shooting events in which they may wish to participate off-property.”

Hmm, I’m not a Ivy League educated lawyer, but it would appear to me that the RPM Development Group is setting itself up for a lawsuit. First of all, any, and every, American that meets the legal standard has a right to keep and bear arms, and that right shall not be infringed. That is listed as the Second Amendment, which is the second of 10 initial amendments to our Constitution called the Bill of Rights. As well, there is something in the 14th Amendment called the “equal protection clause,” which applied to freed slaves the National Rifle Association ensured were able to exercise their Second Amendment right, as part of the Constitution, and being citizens of these United States of America.

Furthermore, there have been two landmark Supreme Court cases that have affirmed the Second Amendment. One is ten years old this year: Heller v. DC. The other came in 2010: McDonald v. Chicago, which affirmed the Second Amendment at the state and local levels of government.

Can someone explain to me how SCOTUS can establish a right? I thought the enumerated power given to the Supreme Court was to interpret the law, not establish rights. Click To Tweet

So, I ask: who determines the law of the land? Here we have all the evidence supporting the Second Amendment, yet we have these unconstitutional actions. Consider this: in the case Obergefell v. Hodges, the US Supreme Court established same-sex marriage as the law of the land. The Supreme Court, in a clear example of judicial activism, declared that marriage is a right, and used the 14th Amendment’s “equal protection clause” as justification. Can someone explain to me how the Supreme Court can establish a right? I thought the enumerated power given to the Supreme Court, under Article III of the Constitution, was the interpret the law, not establish rights, or laws. The enumerated power to establish laws is granted, in Article I, to the Legislative branch. It seems that there are some folks who need a lesson in Civics.

Ponder this point: Christian bakers, who under their First Amendment right of Freedom of Religion, and the free exercise thereof, refuse to participate, or provide their services, specifically, for a same-sex marriage ceremony that goes against their faith . . . and they had to go before the courts, be fined, lose their businesses. So, when will RPM Development Group be brought before a court for violating the Constitutional rights of American citizens? The Second Amendment is the law of the land . . . right?

It appears that the left selectively chooses which laws to uphold, according to their ideological agenda. They do not like firearms. Therefore, progressive, socialist, leftists will make insidious statements, and proclamations, such as what RPM Development Group has done. This is an obvious case of discrimination against law-abiding, legal gun owners.

What’s worse is that the leftists refuse to abide by the law — the Second and Fourteenth Amendments, and two court decisions that have affirmed the Second Amendment — so, why was that necessary, at the federal, state, and local levels of government?

Hey, chuckleheads, this is not Burger King, and you do not get to 'have it your way' when it comes to the rule of law. Click To Tweet

This leads me to ask: why do we need any legislation to be passed for national reciprocity? The right that we have is enshrined in the Constitution. Do we have a real constitutional crisis based upon the fact that the progressive, socialist, left picks and chooses when, and where, the Constitution applies . . . or the Supreme Court decides? Hey, chuckleheads, this is not Burger King, and you do not get to “have it your way” when it comes to the rule of law. Liberal progressives, you do not get to select what laws we uphold based upon your ideological beliefs. You cannot rule that a bar owner can force someone wearing a “Make America Great Hat” to leave their establishment . . . but a Christian baker must provide their services for a same-sex marriage. And, let me state this clearly, you cannot offer housing services, and then deny folks their Second Amendment right to their own self defense.

I’m not surprised, though. After all, it was the Democrats who dressed up in white robes, hoods, and pointed hats to coerce, intimidate, and threaten blacks seeking to enjoy their individual rights . . . including keeping, and bearing, arms to defend themselves. As the wise King Solomon once stated in Ecclesiastes, “there is nothing new under the sun.”

King Solomon also said in Ecclesiastes 10:2 (NIV), “The heart of the wise inclines to the right, but the heart of the fool to the left.”

Wise man indeed.

Notify of

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Inline Feedbacks
View all comments