reply to post by AboveTopSecret.com
I am very torn by your question regarding the best story given my personal experience with and ultimate belief in UFOs. However, I sincerely believe
the threats posed to our gun rights, and as another subject altogether to the Constitution are real.
The individual rights conferred by the Second Amendment and guaranteed by our Constitution have been under constant attack for many years. I would
suggest that any President since the sixties to current day could hardly throw a rock out a White House window without hitting an anti-gun group.
I also believe only through the diligence of gun owners, particular representatives, the NRA and certain Presidents have the anti-gun efforts been
Any interested person can find there are enumerable restrictive laws, bans and restrictions on the private purchase and ownership of gun as to be so
numerous as to defy mentioning in this post.
In case someone has never read my posts or discussed the topic of the Second Amendment with me personally, I want it to be crystal clear. I am on
record in the written word and in personal conversations that I no longer support either the donkeys or the elephants. Both parties long ago outlived
their usefulness as the overlapping centrist agenda and hypocrisy of both parties is unbearable.
My personal agenda in this case is clear, I support and protect the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, and the
individual rights conferred within it.
I would agree there is currently no direct attack on the Second Amendment per se, and I find it unlikely any President, Mr. Obama or those to come in
the near future will attempt what would be a futile, full frontal attack on the Second Amendment. As long as the Constitution remains safe, but that
although associated is a subject for another thread.
A direct attack is futile because of the 2008 decision by SCOTUS, who in their wisdom ruled clearly and concisely on the rights conferred by the
Second Amendment of the Constitution in the decision; District of Columbia v. Heller (2008), that the Second Amendment protects an individual's right
to possess a firearm, unconnected to service in a militia  and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within
the home. Additionally, the Court enumerated several longstanding prohibitions and restrictions on firearms possession that it found were consistent
with the Second Amendment. In McDonald v. Chicago (2010), the Court ruled that the Second Amendment limits state and local governments to the same
extent that it limits the federal government.
LOL.. I am very verbose on this subject so I must post the second half following this post.