Goodbye to the 2nd Amendment?

imported post

Chuck Baldwin of the Constitution Party outlines the dangers of a possible "Constitutional Convention" in the near future.

You can read the article here: http://wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=86092

He makes a very good point about the dangers of influences coming from powerful special interests and globalists that are working against the sovereignty of the United States for their own benefit.This isa very interesting read.

imported post

dear lord, he pulled out wnd as a source. can't wait to hear this backlash.

imported post

DKSuddeth wrote:

dear lord, he pulled out wnd as a source. can't wait to hear this backlash.

Click to expand...

Save the backlash, I got that link from a non partisan third party political blog.

imported post

DKSuddeth wrote:

dear lord, he pulled out wnd as a source. can't wait to hear this backlash.

Click to expand...

What's wrong with WND?

imported post

I am not so sure that a constitutional convention would hurt the 2A as much as it would hurt other liberties and rights which the 2A relies upon to be effective.

imported post

PayMeNow wrote:

I am not so sure that a constitutional convention would hurt the 2A as much as it would hurt other liberties and rights which the 2A relies upon to be effective.

Click to expand...

I wouldn't hold my breathe on that one. There are a host of idiots in congress and state legislatures who would love nothing better than to remove an vestage of the Second Amendment.

As for its prominence, it is the most important of all ten amendments in the Bill of Rights. Without it, the document is nothing more than a curious bit of history.

imported post

DKSuddeth wrote:

dear lord, he pulled out wnd as a source. can't wait to hear this backlash.

Click to expand...

Baldwin is the source; WND is merely the conduit.

I agree that a constitutional convention would be a dangerous thing. It would undoubtedly be staffed almost exclusively with professional leeches who want to guarantee a "right" to universal healthcare, a living wage, subsidized housing, free higher education, guaranteed this, guaranteed that, etc.

It would be hundreds of pages long and would include UN treaties that the globalists have been salivating over for decades.

No thanks.

imported post

Oh noes! Not the scary "Globalists"!!! :uhoh:

Just more proof (as if their stance on pornography wasn't enough) that the Constitution Party is really quite insane.

imported post

marshaul wrote:

Oh noes! Not the scary "Globalists"!!! :uhoh:

Just more proof (as if their stance on pornography wasn't enough) that the Constitution Party is really quite insane.

Click to expand...

FYI, I did not vote for Baldwin, and was thoroughly perplexed that Ron Paul endorsed him. I am not a member of the CP, nor do I support them in any way; we've had enough theocrats in office already. I don't worry about Bildebergers, Rothschilds, Tri-Lateralists, the CFR, or Zionist banking cartels.

However, I do worry about those who are actively trying to turn the UN into a governing body that would rule over all nations, including us.

imported post

Funny thing, and no I'm not a Constitutional Party fan, that you should mention the "Globalists" and all. Truth be known, I truly believe that is the long term agenda for the Liberal Socialist Party. (Let's call em what they really are huh? Political correctness be damned) And what's this old BS about "Redistribution of wealth?? Where does it say ANYWHERE that I'm supposed to redistribute my income? I'll always be one of the first to give a fellow human being a "Hand Up" but never a "Hand Out"
No matter what you believe it's spelled itself out everywhere so don't stick your head in the sand and say "It can't happen here" Because it already is.