TheBlaze Books Give You More!

CommentsDisplaying nelsonknew's 10 most recent comments.

• We Asked, You Responded: Blaze Readers Passionately Defend Their Ownership of So-Called ‘Assault Weapons’

  February 28, 2013 at 5:23pm

  1. The right of the people to keep and bear arms is unalienable. (2nd Amendment)
  2. The Federal Government is not delegated the authority to regulate arms to the people. (10th Amendment)
  3. The states are prohibited the authority to regulate arms to the people. (10th Amendment)
  4. Neither state’s or federal government may take property without individual, due process. (5th Amendment)
  5. No one may interpret (construe) anything (the enumeration) in the Constitution to deny, dissolve or attack (disparage) the rights retained by the people. (9th Amendment)
  6. All Amendments have the same authority and power as any other Amendment, the same authority and power as the original body of the Constitution and the states, upon ratifying the Bill of Rights, concede to the authority of the Bill of Rights. (Preamble to the Bill of Rights)
  Why do I own “Assault Rifles” because I CAN and I have the RIGHT to.

• S.E. Cupp Tells TheBlaze Why She Supports Gay Republican Groups — and How the GOP Should Handle the Issue

  February 28, 2013 at 5:07pm

  At issue….. the 10th Amendment.
  Marriage is a LICENSE, granted under the regulation of the STATES and so has been the case since BEFORE the Constitution was written (South Carolina being the first to regulate marriage in 1688).
  I’d LOVE for ANYONE to show me where the states are prohibited under the U.S. Constitution, to regulate marriage; (this ought to be good) or where the people of those states are prohibited on voting what regulations that those state should have.

• Megyn Kelly Panel Debates Firearm Ban on Vietnam Vet: ‘So Unfair To This Guy’

  February 28, 2013 at 4:18pm

  This is one of the MOST dangerous power grabs against our rights PERIOD……
  What’s to keep the states from saying you are barred from owning firearms if convicted of a traffic ticket or just by being arrested or detained by police even when no charges are filed?
  If you say this is conjecture, the ENTIRE Constitution is based on conjecture of what COULD be done to you without protection of your rights if a government so saw fit.

• Megyn Kelly Panel Debates Firearm Ban on Vietnam Vet: ‘So Unfair To This Guy’

  February 27, 2013 at 11:49pm

  In the case of Jeff Schrader, the veteran prohibited from buying a firearm; Three attorneys on Fox, 5 judges and Schrader’s attorney cannot understand that this is ex post facto law, prohibited to both state’s and federal government, then EVERYONE should be disbarred.

• Megyn Kelly Panel Debates Firearm Ban on Vietnam Vet: ‘So Unfair To This Guy’

  February 27, 2013 at 11:36pm

  THREE attorneys, several judges and NONE know that this is ex post facto? What does the Constitution say about ex post facto law in the U.S.???????? UNBELIEVABLE!!!!!

• Fury After Paper Publishes Names, Addresses of Legal Pistol Owners in New York

  December 26, 2012 at 2:47am

  Time for these folks in New York to start filing AO91 Federal Felony Complaints against Journal News:
  18 U.S.C. § 241 : US Code – Section 241: Conspiracy against rights:
  If two or more persons conspire to injure, oppress, threaten, or
  intimidate any person in any State, Territory, Commonwealth,
  Possession, or District in the free exercise or enjoyment of any
  right or privilege secured to him by the Constitution or laws of
  the United States, or because of his having so exercised the same;
  They shall be fined under this title or imprisoned not more than
  ten years, or both; and if death results from the acts committed in
  violation of this section or if such acts include kidnapping or an
  attempt to kidnap, aggravated sexual abuse or an attempt to commit
  aggravated sexual abuse, or an attempt to kill, they shall be fined
  under this title or imprisoned for any term of years or for life,
  or both, or may be sentenced to death.

• ‘Friday Changed Everything’: MSNBC’s Scarborough Goes on Epic Rant, Says He’s Changing His ‘Libertarian’ Stance on Gun Control

  December 17, 2012 at 2:19pm

  Someone PLEASE explain to me how ANYONE can legally be in possession of a Bushmaster M-4 Rifle in Connecticut when Connecticut banned the possession of Semi-automatic, centerfire rifles on October 1, 1993; The M-4 Carbine was not put into production until 1996 by COLT (M4A1) and Bushmaster was prohibited from selling rifles to the civilian market from September 13, 1994 to September 13, 2004, ELEVEN years AFTER these rifles were banned in Connecticut…..
  Possessing a LEGALLY registered M-4 carbine in Connecticut is akin to owning a 1952 Ford Mustang…..

• ‘Friday Changed Everything’: MSNBC’s Scarborough Goes on Epic Rant, Says He’s Changing His ‘Libertarian’ Stance on Gun Control

  December 17, 2012 at 2:11pm

  C’mon folks; Connecticut banned the possession of ALL semi-automatic, centerfire rifles on October 1, 1993. Claiming to have a “legally registered” Bushmaster rifle in Connecticut is akin to claiming to have a 1952 Ford Mustang on Uranus….. no such animal exists!

• Celebrities Demand Gun Control on Twitter: ‘Stop Defending Your Right to Bear Arms. You’re Stupid’

  December 15, 2012 at 4:06am

  HUGE problem with the CLAIMS of a “registered M-4 carbine” was used in the Connecticut murders on Friday…. A legally registered M-4 Carbine in the State of Connecticut is an oxymoron…. no such firearm exists!
  Connecticut banned sales and possession of Semi-Automatic rifles as of October 1, 1993. No one in the state of Connecticut may sell, purchase or possess an automatic rifle manufactured AFTER October 1, 1993. Also no one may purchase any semi-automatic rifle from any OTHER state and bring that rifle into the state of Connecticut after October 1, 1993.
  The first M-4 Rifle was manufactured by Colt (M4A1) went into production in October of 1994, the first civilian models delivered were to police departments and marked “Law Enforcement ONLY” in August 1996, no sales to the general public and could only be sold to police BEFORE The Federal Assault Weapons Ban expired on September 13, 2004.
  The first Bushmaster M-4 rifle was produced and delivered in 2006 AFTER the Federal Assault Weapons Ban had sunset.
  It is IMPOSSIBLE for ANYONE in the State of Connecticut to legally own a Bushmaster M-4 Carbine. It is impossible for a “legally registered” Bushmaster M-4 Carbine to exist.
  http://www.jud.ct.gov/lawlib/law/firearms.htm

• Watch Glenn Beck’s Emotional Tribute To His Dog, Victor

  December 12, 2012 at 11:53pm

  Mine and my family’s prayers to you and yours’ Glenn and most of all, to Victor, may God Bless him as much as God has blessed you with him.