The bleeding heart liberals are at it again, employing their emotionally-exploitative narratives in order to influence the young minds of America.
The left’s undying reliance on the youth vote is fairly simple to understand. As children living under our parents’ roof, we are part of a socialist system. Our meals, shelter, clothing, and education are provided to us, free of charge. During the transitional time between high school and a career, when our young people are supposedly thinking for themselves and being challenged by higher education, they are still working under an entitlement system of sorts. While they will eventually end up paying for the classes, meals, and dormitory lodging, they don’t quite see it yet. They have already borrowed against their name to stay “afloat” through the process, and have yet to fiscally grow up.
As they do, they become increasingly conservative if left to think for themselves. This is why it is imperative that the left gets to them while they are still young, and living the Bohemian, pseudo-socialist lifestyle.
Now, those who do become trapped in the left’s social justice snare, have the opportunity to grow into positions of power within this glorious country, and they are then able to spread this sideways rhetoric legally. For instance, in the case of Massachusetts’ district court judges, who recently announced that they don’t see any reason why an “assault” gun ban would be unconstitutional.
The United States District Court for the District of Massachusetts dismissed a complaint against the state’s “assault weapons” ban on Friday and expressly described similar bans as constitutional.
The court explained its decision to dismiss the complaint by stating that “the AR-15 and its analogs, along with large capacity magazines, are simply not weapons within the original meaning of the individual constitutional right to ‘bear arms.’”
Because a ban on the AR-15 and “large capacity magazines” is, in its opinion, constitutional, the court ruled that the question of whether a ban exists is one to be decided by legislatures, not judges.
Apparently Massachusetts’ court system has a psychic connection to the ghosts of the Founding Fathers, and were given this magical interpretation of what “bearing arms” is all about.
Maybe these liberal lunatics should take a look at another, not so abstract interpretation…this time of the word infringe.
By limiting the type of weapons that can be owned, Massachusetts is, by definition, infringing upon the Second Amendment.
And, for the record, the definition of infringe hasn’t changed over the course of the last 240 years.