The Chicago Press, Always Eager to Oppress the Citizenry

[King 5.45]

http://www.foxbusiness.com/story/saf...nconscionable/

The Chicago Tribune's call for repeal of the Second Amendment following the historic Heller Decision is an "unconscionable attack on the entire Bill of Rights and the freedoms it protects," the Second Amendment Foundation said today.

In an editorial published on the day after the Supreme Court handed down its 5-4 ruling, the newspaper called the Second Amendment an "anachronism" that should be repealed. The newspaper supported its argument by falsely claiming that a 1939 case, U.S. v Miller, established the amendment as a "collective right" that applied only to service in some type of militia.

"The Chicago Tribune's editors have demonstrated an appalling short-sightedness," said SAF founder Alan Gottlieb. "If they are so willing to abandon one civil right for an entire class of American citizens, what's next? Perhaps they would strip some citizens of their First Amendment rights to free speech or religion. Heaven help us should the Chicago Tribune editorial board one day decide that they don't care for the editorial slant of their competitors at the Sun-Times, and call for a restriction on that newspaper's freedom of the press.

"Once you make it acceptable to destroy one civil right," Gottlieb observed, "it does not take a very big leap to embrace limitations on, or the abolition of, another civil right.

"Not once, in all the years that gun rights organizations have been vilified in the editorial columns of the Tribune and other newspapers did anyone from the firearms community suggest we should repeal the First Amendment," he stated. "Unlike elitist newspaper editors, gun owners understand that the Bill of Rights is an all-or-nothing document, not a civil rights buffet from which we can pick and choose the rights we want to enjoy and those for which we have no stomach.

"We have always known the Second Amendment affirmed an individual civil right, and a truly objective reading of history by the Chicago Tribune would -- if they had any notion of objectivity -- lead them to the same conclusion," Gottlieb concluded. "A generation of parents and grandparents of those now writing such nonsense in the Tribune risked, and all too frequently lost their lives to defend all of the freedoms enumerated in the Bill of Rights. The Tribune editors may as well just spit on their graves."

The Second Amendment Foundation (www.saf.org) is the nation's oldest and largest tax-exempt education, research, publishing and legal action group focusing on the Constitutional right and heritage to privately own and possess firearms. Founded in 1974, The Foundation has grown to more than 600,000 members and supporters and conducts many programs designed to better inform the public about the consequences of gun control.

POS editorial: http://newsblogs.chicagotribune.com/...l-the-2nd.html

[Carnes]

In an editorial published on the day after the Supreme Court handed down its 5-4 ruling, the newspaper called the Second Amendment an "anachronism" that should be repealed.

It boggles my mind that people are so ignorant as to so easily dismiss a core principal in our bill of rights that was very deliberately put into place by people that went to exhaustive efforts to debate all the issues, and ensure that they were congruous with the ideals and principals of the designers of our freedom based government.

The 2A has nothing to do with hunting. And really, not much to do with self defense as much as defense against tyranny. The idea of self defense was never brought into question in the old days... No one back then ever had to say, "when you need help, a cop is 5 mins away..." They 'took it for granted' that every person had a personal responsibility to defend themselves by whatever means necessary.

[Qtrborecrazy]

The Chicago Tribune should start looking in the rear view mirror. They have already started the attack on freedom of speach. They should take note that if they want the 2nd amendment, some one else will want the 1st gone and so on. Maybe they would be happy if the whole Constitution be repealled. I mean what did our founding fathers know about the 20th century. I would guess alot more than some report and a newspaper ever will.

Qtrborecrazy

[Pector55]

Originally Posted by Qtrborecrazy

The Chicago Tribune should start looking in the rear view mirror. They have already started the attack on freedom of speach. They should take note that if they want the 2nd amendment, some one else will want the 1st gone and so on. Maybe they would be happy if the whole Constitution be repealled. I mean what did our founding fathers know about the 20th century. I would guess alot more than some report and a newspaper ever will.

Qtrborecrazy

That's why liberals are such bitter people. When Stalin and Hitler wanted to deal with their paranoia, they resorted to controlling speech and firearms. However, those two used speech and firearms to seize power. Since liberals they fear firearms and the constitution gives everyone freedom of speech, today's liberals are on a paranoia treadmill and they can't do anything about it. It's driving them insane. LOL