Eric Holder: Obama Decides Who Deserves 2nd Amendment

Holder was in Atlanta recently, not far from where I live, giving a talk at Clark Atlanta University about civil rights, voting, and gun violence. He “spoke out” against gun violence and referred to the recent shootings that took place at nearby Atlanta schools as evidence that we need to do more to curb gun violence.

Why is it always about gun violence? Why don’t they care about all forms of violence? Well, I don’t think they actually care about violence at all. They don’t talk about violence and murders committed with knives, bats, hammers, fists, etc. because they don’t care about those items…yet. They’ve been working hard to blame guns for violence so that they can justify taking them away.

So far, they’ve been successful in barring those with histories of felonies or mental illness from being able to own a gun. But Eric Holder said that he’s been tasked by Obama to see if he can expand that list to other groups:

 “We have 2nd Amendment rights, and there’s nothing what the President is trying to do that will affect those 2nd Amendment rights. But there’s certain people, people who have mental health issues perhaps, people who have felony records. These are all categories of people who are not entitled to carry a gun, and I think we have to make sure that continues to be the case.  One of the things the President has asked me to do is to look at that list, those categories, and see if we need to expand it to make sure that, again, the wrong people do not come into possession of guns.”

 He wants to make sure the “wrong people” don’t end up with guns. “Wrong people,” as in Mexican drug cartels? “Wrong people,” as in Al-Qaeda and other terrorist organizations like the Free Syrian Army? Curiously, he didn’t mention those “wrong people.” I guess foreign terrorists and drug lords have far more rights than ordinary American citizens.

More and more, it’s becoming clear the “wrong people” to whom Eric and the Obama administration are referring are those that are opposed to their ideologies. Sure, they’ll start off with people that most might agree shouldn’t have a gun like those with felony histories or mental illness. But once most people have accepted that principle that the government can basically decide who should or shouldn’t have a gun, it creates a slippery slope that will lead to a complete disarmament of the populace.

They do it by redefining “mental illness.” If you question the government’s policies or decisions, if you’re pro-life, opposed to high taxes, critical of the Federal Reserve System or supportive of the Bill of Rights, you might be suffering from paranoid delusions. Therefore, you are mentally unfit to carry a gun, because you might potentially commit a crime with it.

Those who have been tasked to represent us in Washington have truly proven themselves to be mentally unfit to serve. They’re power hungry, and they suffer from intense delusions of grandeur. Those people should not carry guns, nor should they be around “security” that carry guns. Taking their guns away would protect American citizens.

[js-disqus]