Fargo Mayor: 2nd Amendment Was Only To Protect Hunting

20090330_walakermeeting_33

Fargo Mayor Dennis Walaker is North Dakota’s lone member of virulently anti-gun New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg’s group, Mayors Against Illegal Guns. He’s also representative of the sort of historical illiteracy which is common among anti-gun advocates.

Despite a wealth of writings from the era of the revolution left to us by our founding fathers indicating that they supported gun rights because they wanted the populace to be able to protect themselves from the government, Walaker suggests that the 2nd amendment was only created to protect hunting.

“I don’t think that’s what the Second Amendment was. At that time it was for hunting and things like that and for bringing food to the table,” Walaker said. “It had nothing to do with what’s going on today. So to say that Second Amendment doesn’t need some revisions, I think the debate should continue until we can find out.”

The coalition sent a letter to President Barack Obama on Wednesday, urging him to outlaw high-capacity rifles and magazines, make gun trafficking a federal crime and require background checks for every gun buyer.

“Together, we urge you to put forward an agenda that is rooted in common sense and that will make it harder for dangerous people to possess guns, and easier for police and prosecutors to crack down on them,” the letter states.

Whether you’re for or against guns, whether you think we need more gun control or less, the simple historical fact was that our founders intended to protect the individual right to keep and bear arms because they didn’t want a society where the only people who had guns was the government.

“A government resting on the minority is an aristocracy, not a republic, and could not be safe with a numerical and physical force against it, without a standing army, an enslaved press and a disarmed populace,” wrote James Madison in Federalist 46. “A people armed and free forms a barrier against the enterprises of ambition and is a bulwark for the nation against foreign invasion and domestic oppression.”

So, no, the founders didn’t just view the 2nd amendment as protecting the right of Americans to shoot deer and ducks.

These were revolutionaries, after all, who had thrown off a tyrannical government with an army made up of citizens soldiers using, in many instances, their personal weapons.

Walaker is proof of the apocryphal saying that it’s better to keep your mouth closed and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt. If Walaker is this ignorant about the history of gun rights in America, he has no business speaking out about it.

Rob Port is the editor of SayAnythingBlog.com. In 2011 he was a finalist for the Watch Dog of the Year from the Sam Adams Alliance and winner of the Americans For Prosperity Award for Online Excellence. In 2013 the Washington Post named SAB one of the nation's top state-based political blogs, and named Rob one of the state's best political reporters. He writes a weekly column for several North Dakota newspapers, and also serves as a policy fellow for the North Dakota Policy Council.

Related posts

  • WOOF

    The second amendment is what a majority of
    Supreme Court justices say it is.

    • http://www.shockandblog.com/ Jay McHue

      “Living document” crap, right?

    • Bat One

      A “fundamental and individual right.”

      • kevindf

        It’s also a protection from the government.

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      I think the original wording of the 2nd amendment is pretty clear in that it explicitly protects “the right of the people to keep and bear arms.”

      And, thankfully, the Supreme Court has upheld that, much to the chagrin of liberal gun grabbers.

    • two_amber_lamps

      That’s about one of the most inane and obtuse things you’ve ever strung together into words.

    • WOOF

      This year 5,next year 9 or 3.

      • two_amber_lamps

        Maybe King Bamster can just stuff the court like FDR threatened to do?

    • Flamejob5

      Actually, it’s whatever the unorganized militia says it is.

  • DM

    as a side note; the mayor of Chicago does not trust cops at schools is a proper way to protect the children. Hmmmm, if you don’t trust your own cops with guns, why do you have them carry guns at your schools now?

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      Something tells me that the Mayor of Chicago is protected by cops with guns.

      Why wouldn’t he grant the same sort of protection to his city’s kids?

      • two_amber_lamps

        Because Rahm is an ideologue and believes in the sanctity of leftist dogma, right up until it’s his own a$$ that’s placed in jeopardy.

      • SusanBeehler

        Maybe they do? Do you know? We have armed police in the Bismarck High school; resource officers.

  • jhm47

    Another fact that is often overlooked is that the founding fathers considered EVERY citizen to be a member of the militia. Thus the phrase, “A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state”. This means that not just citizens in uniform are expected to defend our nation from enemies “both foreign and domestic”, but every Tom, Dick and Harry, and Jane and Nancy too. It’s high time that every citizen begin to defend our country from the enemies that currently inhabit Washington.

    • http://Sayanythingblog.com The Whistler

      Exactly.

      • SusanBeehler

        Except women.

        • camsaure

          I guess they really could use someone like you to scare off at least a whole platoon.

        • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

          That’s just something you made up.

  • http://www.shockandblog.com/ Jay McHue

    Not only are liberals hypocrites, they are ignorant, too.

    • Bat One

      The ignorance is willful. Not even a public/union school educated liberal is this stupid!

      • Roy_Bean

        Sadly, it’s not ignorance and it’s not stupidity, it’s a calculated exploitation of a tragedy to move the country away from freedom and towards tyranny. Before he was mayor he was the operations manager for the City of Fargo and did an outstanding job of managing a couple of floods where he kept people in their houses when the FEMA people wanted to evacuate the town. That hardly makes him a constitutional scholar.

        • two_amber_lamps

          Silly bolshevik. Sounds like he should stick to managing the plowing of city streets and picking up trash.

          • SusanBeehler

            Silly cat sounds like you need to be put in your litter box

          • two_amber_lamps

            Silly cat wouldn’t p!$$ on you if you were on fire…

          • SusanBeehler

            Good think I am fire resistant, I thought you were my hero and would come save me with your guns blazing.

          • two_amber_lamps

            Call a cop… since you’d be happy to have me disarmed, you’re on your own. Besides you can’t be trusted, you’d most certainly testify against me even if you were being raped. Not worth the aggravation.

            http://www.aaanything.net/wp-content/gallery/best-photos-of-the-week-13/thumbs/thumbs_usa_my_next_door_neighbor_wants_to_ban_all_guns.jpg

          • SusanBeehler

            Rape????! I am sorry you only own that one type of gun, you know the one I want to ban, the one that can shoot all those bullets really fast, I think it is the Bushmaster, maybe the government will let you trade it in for this pretty pink one that shoots one bullet at a time, don’t be rigging it to do something else> http://www.budsgunshop.com/catalog/product_info.php/cPath/915_801/products_id/18893

          • two_amber_lamps

            You really ARE obtuse… I wouldn’t touch you with a 10 foot pole. If you were halfway sane you’d understand that I said that if I walked in on you while you were being raped and I had a firearm with which to intervene, I think I’d probably leave you to said scumbag since I’d sooner trust you to make a statement AGAINST ME. Make sure you inform all your neighbors of your poisonous beliefs so they know you for the rattlesnake that you truly are.

          • Guest

            You really ARE obese… nobody could touch you with a 10 foot as the space between the sentient pounds of fat comprising you and the walls makes such a task impossible, let alone the horrid stench.

          • two_amber_lamps

            I’m sorry to hear that you got stuck working the midnight shifts at the 7-11 this holiday season. Perhaps someday when you get your high school diploma you can graduate from trolling conservative blogs and find a job that allows you the luxury of a more civilized schedule and perhaps affording your own internet instead of stealing bandwidth from the Starbucks across the street. It’s pretty obvious what you’re doing standing in the corner of your plexiglass cubicle since that’s the only place you get signal.

            Anyhow, try not to become too suicidal this Christmas… since you don’t own a gun or a car, you can’t shoot or asphyxiate yourself…. you’d probably have to steal a butter knife from your mom’s kitchen cupboard and you know that will just drive her over the deep end… again.

          • Guest

            I’d say that you should try to kill yourself too, but the obscene amount of sugar and fat you shovel into your mouth, asides from giving anyone around a brief reprieve from horrid rants of a stupid f*ck*ng b*tch, has also given you a significant head start in terms of diabetes and heart disease.

          • two_amber_lamps

            such colorful language 7-11 denizen… I leave you to your fate!

            BWahahahahahaahaaahahahahaaaaaa!

            Clean up Aisle 3 damn it… get on it!

            http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i188/dburdyshaw/Z%20Misc%201/7-11_Slurpee_Employee_of_the_Month.jpg

          • Guest

            Just because someone one doesn’t post for several hours doesn’t mean they’re working the late shift. Since you’re a vile c%$*nt who obviously has no friends, it’s clear why you make such an assumption though.

          • two_amber_lamps

            such colorful language 7-11 denizen… I leave you to your fate!

            BWahahahahahaahaaahahahahaaaaaa!

            Clean up Aisle 3 damn it… get on it! !!!!

            http://i72.photobucket.com/albums/i188/dburdyshaw/Z%20Misc%201/7-11_Slurpee_Employee_of_the_Month.jpg

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            That is a horrid thing to say to Susan,

          • two_amber_lamps

            Rob, what’s horrid is the fact that your friend is such a rabid ideologue that she’d sooner watch the founding principles of this nation bulldozed under in the name of some moronic pursuit of a utopian belief that getting rid of firearms will alleviate violence. Logic and reason doesn’t work, so let her learn via aversive therapy.

            As usual, fascists only learn the hard way. So be it.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            The Bushmaster shoots one bullet “at a time”—one shot per trigger-pull, like conventional semi-automatic hunting rifles. The term “assault weapon” was made up in the 1990s by other ignorant anti-gunners. See http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=XMg0FQS6Fqo

          • SusanBeehler

            Yes and you can have a magazine which has 30 bullets before you have to go get some more bullets, and What kind of instance is this necessary?

          • tony_o2

            A larger magazine is beneficial when using a gun in a combat situation. Don’t forget that we have the right to use guns to defend ourselves.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Defensibly speaking, multiple armed attackers. But that aside, one can carry several loaded “standard” clips. With practice, a shooter can replace the empty clip with a loaded one in 3 to 5 seconds, especially if he or she simply lets the empty clip drop to the floor. Large clips also have a tendency to jam, as I believe was the case with the Colorado shooter. It might even be argued that a fully automatic weapon with a large clip would do less damage due to the difficulties in holding target (the barrel climbs due to recoil) and, of course, there are many wasted shots. What if increased regulatory pressure drives the loonies into explosives? Much more effective, and they can be easily manufactured by a determined mass murderer. Cf. the Oklahoma City bombing, the 1927 car bombing of a school. Or deadly fires can be set. These can be far more effective in terms of body-count with more chance that the perp will get away with it and do it again another day.

            I believe that your whole approach to this is uncomfortably similar to that of those who voted against Measure 2; to wit, conforming your reasoning to irrational fears and ignoring the facts.

          • camsaure

            Self defense, as perscribed by the 2nd ammendment.

          • camsaure

            great answer

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      It would be one thing if Mayor Walaker had a well-reasoned position on gun control. I could at least respect that. But arguing from a place of ignorance is inexcusable.

  • nimrod

    All socialists think that the second amendment only has to do with hunting. I don’t think the founding fathers would have felt that hunting would need to be mentioned in the constitution; it would kind of be like saying we have the right to breath air, or some other requirement of life.

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      Yeah, I’m sure Washington and Madison were sitting around thinking, “After protecting free speech and religion and assembly and all that stuff, let’s make sure people have a right to shoot ducks.”

    • SusanBeehler

      I don’t think it had only to do with hunting, but I also do not think our forefathers had any idea “arms” would be used like they are today, for the just the “fun” of shooting, and the killings which are carried out everyday. What was their homicide record back in their day, may give us a clue of the attitude of gun ownership?

      • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

        In 1785 Thomas Jefferson wrote to his fifteen-year-old nephew, Peter Carr, regarding what he considered the best form of exercise: “…I advise the gun. While this gives a moderate exercise to the body, it gives boldness, enterprize, and independance to the mind. Games played with the ball and others of that nature, are too violent for the body and stamp no character on the mind. Let your gun therefore be the constant companion of your walks.”

        http://www.monticello.org/site/research-and-collections/firearms

        • SusanBeehler

          Yes and this same man gave birth to children with a slave and denied their birth right, times change; so does recreation and the way we do things. Mankind grows from the past and makes decisions on what is best for here and now.

          • two_amber_lamps

            This may be a reach on your part to understand the above mentioned link… the 2nd Amendment applies to “the People” as individual citizens to possess firearms, NOT a sanction for a militia. Hunting is a particular use for a firearm, but the reasons for the founders to enshrine the rights of the individual to own firearms were nothing to do with plinking squirrels.

            Don’t like it? Expat or get an amendment. Your mewling grows tiresome.

          • SusanBeehler

            Yes and Adam Lanza was one of those “the people”. He was exercising his constitutional right to be armed? Nothing to do with plinking squirrels but allowing our children to be murdered?

          • two_amber_lamps

            You’re no more capable of rational thought than Adam Lanza… he was autistic… what’s your excuse?

          • SusanBeehler

            There you go again with your potty mouth, you go back to your litter box.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Susan, it isn’t that you can’t think, it just seems you have extremely bad luck trying it.

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            Some people use their free speech to say terrible things. Should we be rid of the second amendment too?

          • SusanBeehler

            Now who is using a “distraction”. I thought free speech was the first. I never said we should rid of ourselves to “bear arms” but we surely can do better with gun regulations, and if it causes the “infringed” to be challenged or rewritten so be it.

          • $8194357

            Modern marxist social justice lenses applied to history is called “revisionism”..Social engeneering a leftist statist future.

            Communist think tanks attack on western society and its super structure..

            Watch and learn..

            http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EjaBpVzOohs

          • silverstreak

            Susan,since the Bible was begun about 3500 years ago.
            Should we just throw it out also for something more contemporary?
            After all…something that old could not possibly have any relavance in the modern day world.

          • tony_o2

            Jesus told us to give to the poor. They didn’t have EBT cards back then, so obviously he wasn’t talking about food stamps…/sarc

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Please give me evidence for the preposterous conceit that “mankind grows from the past.”

          • SusanBeehler

            “learn” rather than grow would have been a better word. We have come along ways from the guns of our forefathers.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            And what exactly have we “learned?” There is little evidence that we have learned much at all of significance. Well over 100 years of psychology and sociology and where is the improvement in behavior? Several thousand years of war, and where is peace? “Learned?” “Growth?” “Progress?” “Evolved?” Pure vanity and pure bullshit.

          • SusanBeehler

            Talking to you through a keyboard, I would say that is just one thing “we have learned.” Maybe you are ungrateful so you can NOT see what we have or where we came from.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Scientific knowledge and technological development have little or nothing to do with ethical and moral progress.

          • SusanBeehler

            Yet you would like to amputate emotion from the discussion on this blog?

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            The question at hand was what the founder’s intent with the second amendment was. We can find that in their contemporary writings and actions.

            What saddens me is that you, confronted by the truth, besmirch Jefferson’s character as a distraction. Which is just plain dishonest.

            Whatever Jefferson was – and he was no saint – he feelings about gun ownership weren’t what you think they were.

          • SusanBeehler

            And you know Jefferson personally? Those writing on this blog have alot of distractions in their posts too, cars, knives and more. We can only know what may have been his intent. As far as being dishonest, stating Jefferson fathered children with slaves is not “plain” dishonest; it is the truth. We all know how our society has changed since his time and this practice would no longer be acceptable. So maybe, just maybe some other ideas, beliefs Jefferson may or may not had are not what is best for our society today, and he realized this, this is why we can have amendments introduced, why we can have this discussion.

          • tony_o2

            Because society agreed that slavery was wrong, we passed the 13th Amendment and outlawed slavery.

            Until society agrees that gun ownership is wrong and passes an amendment to alter the 2nd Amendment, we have gun rights. There’s no harm in discussing what our society should do. But when your side loses and then decides to proceed anyways (unconstitutional gun bans), then we have a problem.

            One of the reasons our founders gave us the 2nd Amendment was to protect us from tyranny. How fitting that our modern tyrants want to take away our protection.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Prayer and Christianity-related activities (traditional Christmas) is no longer acceptable in many places. Abortion is. Progress? What is and is not popularly acceptable is no measure of social progress.

          • SusanBeehler

            I think no longer burning people at the stake for having a birth mark; no longer being able to lock up people because they were a Norwegian living in Minnesota during the late 1800’s and labeling them insane; for no longer being able to have a person live on your land and pick your cotton and you call them inhuman; for no longer having public hangings; these are just a few things I would say we have progressed from as a society. You don’t think abortions were going on since the beginning of “society”? You will find what you look for, I choose to see the many things which make our society better than the generation past and focus on what can be different.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Classroom example of an utterly irrelevant ad hominem argument. This Jefferson rumor might not even be true since, I believe, Jefferson had something of a libertine brother who hung around the place.

      • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

        Also, murder rates were much higher in Jefferson’s day (see attached). America has been on a long, downward trend despite a rise in the guns and gun attitudes you despise.

        • Roy_Bean

          These people don’t want the facts, they have an agenda. Step one is to establish that the 2nd amendment only applies to hunting, step two is for the animal rights branch of the nut case left to come back and outlaw hunting. That would leave no legitimate reason to own guns. Mission accomplished.

          • SusanBeehler

            I didn’t know this was a meeting, who is taking the minutes?

          • $8194357

            Ideological agenda driven
            “false moral high ground”
            to be exact…

          • SusanBeehler

            Yeah right!

        • SusanBeehler

          This is supposed to be a legitimate stat? Your graph looks as bad as the maps the city of Mandan draws for special assessments, no key to decipher what it means, 10,20,30,40,50,60 estimated what? per what?

          • Dave

            I find it funny, actually hilarious, Susan, that most of these fellas thought you were the greatest things since sliced bread and defended your arguments tooth and nail from the “libertard” horde during the Measure 2 debate over earlier this year. Now you’ve found yourself at odds with them. I don’t necessarily agree with you on this. But I do admire your hutzspuh to not back down.

          • SusanBeehler

            I warned some, I am very independent. I do not have Republican or Democrat behind my name.

          • two_amber_lamps

            Yup… just sorta goes wherever the winds of dementia happen to blow you…. dunno what’s worse, a rabidly emotional illogical independent or a low information makes-their-decision-on-the-way-to-the-poll voter?

          • SusanBeehler

            Low information? There you go again calling names because you have low information on others words to fill the white space.

          • two_amber_lamps

            Now you adopt the moniker of low information voter? I seem to remember my prior post as a either/or statement, but if you wish to play the martyr by all means, snivel away.

            Funny, I seem to remember you admitting time and again you don’t know all that much about “assault rifles” (oh!! scary!!). Therefore you’re making your conjectures based upon fallacious generalizations fed to you by the democratic A/V club (aka the media) and upon your overwrought emotional reaction to current events. So perhaps the second category WAS more fitting.

            No matter.

          • $8194357

            No you have emotional reactionary behind it on
            2nd amendment issues.

          • SusanBeehler

            So………”He Wept”

          • $8194357

            And said “Lazarath…Come forth”…
            You want to disarm folks who have done nothing because
            of emotional reactions to a tragity..
            Reactionary political correct cause advocasy…
            Anti American in origin

          • Bat One

            That doesn’t make you right. Only stubborn.

          • SusanBeehler

            Doesn’t make me wrong

          • camsaure

            communist???

          • $8194357

            Anti 2nd amendment political correct populist.

          • SusanBeehler

            Anti Christ

          • $8194357

            Well susan..
            All of the power players supporting “you”r cause against guns sure
            had a global one world facist agenda that cost 100’s of millions thier lives for not jumping on the “ideological bandwagon”, huh..
            Yes anti christ would fit;
            Disarm them and slaughter them….

          • SusanBeehler

            “Disarm them and slaughter them”, isn’t this what you support with the armed teachers idea. Yes anti christ would fit

          • $8194357

            Your logic is flawed.
            Because the ideology they
            both come from is flawed.
            You have been expousing taking away collective innocent
            peoples private property because of individuals actions
            That is facist communist ideology…
            And then you claim Jesus as your motive….
            That is “marxist social justice false morality”…
            But we on the right are the propblem for you on the left
            because we won’t just yeild to your fantasies…
            Deception is strong in the world as the end times global government is close to fruition and many will fall prey to its fallicies……

          • SusanBeehler

            You are the one with Jesus as your avatar. Thank you for confirming I am a human. All humans have flaws even you. The end times is never ending because all of our lives will end here on earth some day, no one not even you knows the day or the hour.

          • $8194357

            The end times started with Christs ascention
            and will end on His Return in like mannor…

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Flawed? It isn’t even present.

          • $8194357

            2 tru flame.

            Hows the weather
            down in your parts?

            Hope you have a Blessed Christmas..

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            70 degrees, drizzling, possible thunderstorms.

            They take Christmas very seriously down here. It would amuse me to see the ACLU & related groups try to pull a stunt in Costa Rica.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Huh?

          • SusanBeehler

            cammy???

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Your independence is not reflected in your thinking. It is quite conventional among the ill-informed. Quite stereotypical.

          • SusanBeehler

            Getting all technical again? Better stating what you are focusing on: I do not belong to any party and rarely vote for a candidate or an issue based on the political affiliation, so this is how I could believe in Measure 2 which seemed to be a minority very conservative group following and for the what you term “ill-informed” idea we can improve safety with guns, with better background checks, limiting some types of guns available to the general public. What is your definition of independence; CHAOS?

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Gobbledygook. Re-read my comment. Respond to it rationally. I am not talking about “independence.” I am talking about “independent thinking” based on knowledge of the facts and personal experience—not strings of unsupported assertions and vague generalizations with no clear solutions proposed. I can get that sort of junk from the MSM. If I wanted chaos, I would be overjoyed with the way things are now and would be pushing the Liberal agenda as hard as I could.

          • Onslaught1066

            but you are a fine example of a retard.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Wowser! Not having a party designation certifies you as an independent thinker? OK, best for you to stay in the wading pool.

          • SusanBeehler

            I am sorry I thought you were talking party affiliation Independent thinking, no one else here in my brain with me. We as people are interdependent and I am not sure where you get the idea my thoughts are someone else’s. I do not watch tv news to see whatever is being said and start parroting what was said. If any my ideas sound similar it is a coincidence.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Emotion-based “thinking” is stereotypical, it follows the same collective river channel, it requires no outside information to conform in substance to what other low-information, fear-driven people are “thinking.” Feeling and emotion are not the same. Feeling and thinking are both rational. Thinking takes the facts and organizes them; feeling evaluates them. They can be complementary, but errors arise when one overrides the other. A pure thinking-type can talk about the statistics of nuclear megadeaths without blinking an eye; the feeling-type (whose feeling isn’t over-ridden by emotion) can say: “I know and agree with the facts, but what are we going to do about it in human terms?” Fact and feeling have to be in balance. I hope this makes things a bit clearer.

          • SusanBeehler

            And somehow you are the authority on the perfect balance of emotion, feelings and thinking? Says who? YOUR mirror mirror on your wall?

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Are you a real idiot, or do you just play one on blogs? Where in hell do you see such claims in my posting? Or do you just hallucinate them in the House of Mirrors in your head?

          • SusanBeehler

            Maybe you want to rewrite your other blog post about that balancing act you were describing “Feeling and emotion are not the same. Feeling and thinking are both rational. Thinking takes the facts and organizes them; feeling evaluates them. They can be complementary, but errors arise when one overrides the other.”

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Why should I rewrite it?

          • SusanBeehler

            I am sorry you were saying you are the authority on the perfect balance of emotion, feelings and thinking?

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            I said nothing of the sort, though I am flattered that I impress you so much that you imagined that I was an authority.

          • Onslaught1066

            So, you are a retard on a parallel, rather than intersecting, wave length with other retards.

            Isn’t that special.

          • $8194357

            Right is right and wrong is leftist.

      • tony_o2

        You people continue to make claims of what the forefathers were thinking, but their actual writings contradict your claims. If you people want to change what the second amendment allows, then you are going to have to follow Article V of the United States Constitution. Until that time, all the gun control laws that you guys can come up with are unconstitutional.

        • SusanBeehler

          You people? I just be one. I think property tax is unconstitutional, along with requiring liability insurance on my car, along with being required to buy health insurance just to name a couple things.

          • tony_o2

            You are just one of many. You people do not agree with the rights guaranteed by the 2nd Amendment, so you seek to circumvent those rights using unconstitutional methods. You cannot amend or repeal the 2nd Amendment unless you use the methods allowed by Article V.

          • SusanBeehler

            2/3 vote by Congress, you guys can amend it

          • tony_o2

            2/3 vote to propose the Amendment. 3/4 of the States must ratify it. That last part is always missing in gun control laws….

          • tony_o2

            “you guys can amend it”
            Unless you’re talking in third-person, you’ve got it backwards. The Constitution, as written, already supports our gun rights. If you want to take those rights away, it is up to you (the gun control advocates) to amend the Constitution.

          • $8194357

            And your right on that and “wrong” on the 2nd Amendment.

      • silverstreak

        Does this gve you a clue about what Madison was thinking?

        “[The Constitution preserves] the advantage of being armed which Americans possess over the people of almost every other nation…(where) the governments are afraid to trust the people with arms.”
        –James Madison, The Federalist Papers, No. 46
        I figure since Madison wrote most of The Constituyion,he should have a pretty good idea what he meant!

        • SusanBeehler

          That was then; many in other countries think America is “strange” and “unsafe” because of the gun rights.

          • silverstreak

            Honestly…I don’t really care what most Americans think and no foreigners at all!

          • SusanBeehler

            So, why even blog, if you don’t care.

          • silverstreak

            Because it is my right just as it is to own a gun for protection.
            Just as they are your rights if you chose to exercise them.

          • SusanBeehler

            So you just exercising your rights for no real purpose?

          • silverstreak

            Well…it does seem to pi$$ off liberals.
            Which,I consider a worthwhile endeavor. lol

          • Dave

            Seems to work both ways on here, which the rest of us find mostly comical. (popping more corn, ’cause this is gonna get good)

          • silverstreak

            Some people get really panicky when they hear the term assault rifle and full auto.
            Remember the North Hollywood shootout?
            That only went that on for 44 minutes because libs had taken away the cops firepower and their service weapons wouldn’t penetrate the robbers body armor.
            I find it ironic that the cops eventually stopped the robbers with semi-automatic weapons that they borrowed from a local gun store.
            Which would be banned if the liberals have their way.

          • 308T

            N. Hollywood shootout also took place during the last AWB, how’d that one work out?

          • silverstreak

            Connecticut already has an AWB in place.

            http://www.chattanoogan.com/2012/12/22/240929/Connecticut-Already-Has-A-Ban-On.aspx

            Adam Lanza tried to buy a rifle at a Dick’s Sporting Goods Store 3 days before the massacre.
            Lanza did not want to undergo the background check and the waiting period.

            http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/12/daniel-zimmerman/adam-lanza-tried-to-buy-rifle-three-days-before-massacre/

            So…he goes and shoots his own mother 4 times in the head and steals her guns.

            I this doesn’t prove my point that if someone wants to kill badly enough,they will find a way!

            Nothing will!

          • two_amber_lamps

            Ms. SuzyB said: “many in other countries think America is “strange” and “unsafe””

            There you go Comrade… you think the Constitution is supposed to be viewed though the eyes of some nebulous “world view.” You’re infected with the same idiocy that taints Justice Ginsberg who thinks that international law trumps those of THIS country.

          • $8194357

            The modle of the modern politicaly correct brainwashed
            liberal cause advocate.
            And how does that make you “feel” Susan?

            http://pbskids.org/rogers/video_madFeelings.html

          • two_amber_lamps

            Priceless… lol!

            I don’t know if she pounds clay or dough when she gets mad… but she can certainly pound sand.

          • $8194357

            Public education is creating a nation of sheople.

          • two_amber_lamps

            Public education has created a nation of sheople…

            There, fixed that fer ya! :)

          • $8194357

            Yup

          • tony_o2

            We’re supposed to dismiss one of our rights because people in other countries think we’re strange? What about the people that think our 1st Amendment is strange? What about people who think it’s strange that women have the same rights and privileges as men? Should we abide by the will of the American people, or should we give up our sovereignty to the people who think we are strange?

          • SusanBeehler

            Just saying. No, I think we need to change the constitution so it is rooted in common sense and that will make it harder for dangerous people to possess guns and easier for police and prosecutors to crack down on these dangerous type people like Adam Lanza.

          • joeb

            The most dangerous people who possess guns are not private individuals, even if you add in the crazies. At the behest of totalitarian dictators in the last century, over 100,000,000 people were killed. Stalin (30-40 million) , Mao (50 million), Hitler (20+ million), and Pol Pot (1.5-2 million), just to name a few. Add up the most heinous nutcase shootings, and despite the press coverage, they only number a few hundred victims. What Hitler (actually the Wiemar Republic), Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot have in common is that they made it illegal for the people they slaughtered to own firearms, and thus, made it impossible for them to resist their own slaughter.

            Similarly, almost all events involving a psychopath with a gun in this nation which have resulted in mass death have also involved an area where guns were prohibited: the persons there were rendered helpless. It might be better to consider ceasing the practice of sending children into an area for 8 hours a day where it is illegal to carry the means to prevent some nut with a gun, a machete, a sledgehammer, or their weapon of choice from perpetrating slaughter. Let those teachers, parents, and school staff who choose to do so and who have been appropriately trained carry a weapon. Lanza broke a slew of laws, from killing his mother, stealing her firearms, shooting his way into the building (a gun free school zone), to killing people there. More laws aren’t going to make a difference to someone like that–what stopped him was a bullet. Pity one of the teachers was not able to administer that cure.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            What is this mythical “common sense” that you subscribe to? It seems quite hidden in your comments.

          • SusanBeehler

            I forgot the quotation marks, I was quoting the above article

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            A suggestion please? Oh yes, let’s make things as easy as possible for the government and the police. That’ll work just swell.

          • camsaure

            well… she probably would look better in a burqua.

          • SusanBeehler

            Are you sure you just don’t want me to be Islam so I would not be seen or heard?

          • camsaure

            Heh, I have yet to hear anyone on your side or of your ilk condem sharia law. Most likeley because you are actually for it and don’t think it will pertain to you if it happened because you have been such good useful idiots.

          • SusanBeehler

            “ilk”, Sharia law? how does that pertain to America and our gun laws

          • $8194357

            Jihadist for the past 1400 years plus disarmed the populace of every nation they did the caliphate thing they do..
            Take away the victims weapons and make them pay the “jizya” tax to stay alive…

          • camsaure

            then go there, you surley don’t fit in here.

          • SusanBeehler

            Maybe in your small view of the world, you go somewhere else.

          • camsaure

            No, I think I will stick around and fight for my Constitutional rights, thereby helping screw up your small minded communist utopian dreams.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            America is 4th among developed countries in gun homicides and 14th world-wide. Subtract the insane high gun-control urban areas such as Washington, D.C. and Chicago and the American gun-homicide rate plummets.

      • $8194357

        http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tMso12zeYDQ&feature=player_embedded

        78 of 80 gun related deaths would be nullified if the liberal court systems would leave the perps in jail instead of letting them out to commit more crimes…
        Just the facts mam
        Just the facts
        Sargent Friday

      • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

        I very seriously doubt that guaranteeing the use of firearms for hunting ever even entered the minds of people in 18th century America. Even in Europe throughout the 19th century and into the 20th the casual carrying of firearms was scarcely a topic of conversation. University students routinely carried pocket-pistols for sport and plinking. The weapons of the 18th and much of the 19th century were generally inadequate for mass killings by a single individual.

        • SusanBeehler

          You made my point

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            You’re the one who brought up history. I have no idea how I made your point. You know nothing about the nature, use, and history of firearms, nor anything about homicide statistics nationally or internationally. Your position is purely emotional and … definitely low-information. School yourself on the history and distribution of mass-murder by guns and otherwise, school yourself on the relationships between citizens and government and the significance of firearm regulation. Without one fact-based logical argument to your name, you’re a clay pigeon in this shooting gallery.

          • SusanBeehler

            “Fact-based logical” and you are calling me a clay pigeon. Sorry, I am human and base my ideas not only on fact and logic but the human characteristics of things like love, empathy, and the desire to seek change.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            Seems to be the fad these days … I believe the old expression for this delightful concoction of thought and emotion was “wishful thinking.”

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            Right. Who needs facts when you can just feel things.

          • Guest

            She can also do the classic Rob move of claiming it’s self-evident, like when you refused to proffer one sentence from the common core to support your contention that it contained propaganda.

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            That’s not at all an accurate summary of my argument in that matter.

          • Guest

            Now you can’t even give an accurate summary of the debate. If you don’t recall, you completely failed to proffer even one sentence from the materials. If you did, please do us all a favor and provide a link to that sentence.

            Oh wait, you can’t, because you’re a complete hack.

          • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

            I pointed out the materials I found objectionable, and I noted that I object to the notion of the federal government imposing such standards on the whole.

            You disagree with how I characterized the materials, and that’s fine, but you never acknowledged how problematic it is to have the white house dictating those standards,

            The potential for abuse is enormous, and I’m right,

          • Guest

            What a surprise, Rob once again fails to proffer one sentence from the materials to support his claim! Characterizing them as propoganda to support your claim that is propaganda is circular and tantamount to claiming it is self-evident. Thanks for yet again completely failing to support your argument, hack!

          • Guest

            Derp I characterized them as propaganda without so much as proffering one sentence to support my conclusion. Derp.

            To support my conclusion you are a sh*thead, I’ll characterize you as a sh*thead. You may disagree with how I characterized you, and that’s fine. Derp.

          • SusanBeehler

            You need both

          • SusanBeehler

            YOU made my point the use of guns and guns themselves have changed since the constitution was written.

          • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

            The uses to which guns are put have not changed. Like virtually everything else, however, they have developed greatly from a technological point of view. This is all quite obvious. Now then, so what? There are already strict limitations on the use of particularly deadly weapons. Where do you think further restrictions need to be applied and why?

      • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

        There were infamous mass slaughters of animal life by certain individuals quite early on in American history. (I am not referring to buffalo.) The stench of the rotting flesh could be smelled for miles. Were there people then around then who were capable of mass murder? Yes. Were there dependably large groups of unarmed people available for killing? Not so much. Were there mass murders using set fires and explosives? Might check that out. The worst school killing in the U.S. was in 1927 and used what was essentially a car bomb loaded with shrapnel and dynamite. 38 dead.

  • sbark

    He better read up on the likes of Alexander Hamilton in Federalist papers 28

    If the representatives of the people betray their constituents, there is then no recourse left but in the exertion of that original right of self-defense which is paramount to all positive forms of government, and which against the usurpations of the national rulers may be exerted with infinitely better prospect of success than against those of the rulers of an individual State. In a single State, if the persons intrusted with supreme power become usurpers, the different parcels, subdivisions, or districts of which it consists, having no distinct government in each, can take no regular measures for defense. The citizens must rush tumultuously to arms, without concert, without system, without resource; except in their courage and despair.

    ……good thing nobody is trying betray us to this point huh…..so far we are just being pacified steadily but surely.

    • Wayne

      Jefferson believed that a democracy must go through violent revolution periodically. The founding fathers had just gone through a revolution against the government. The second amendment is not about hunting.

      • Flamejob5

        “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.”

        Thomas Jefferson

        • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

          “The highest number to which, according to the best computation, a standing army can be carried in any country, does not exceed one hundredth part of the whole number of souls; or one twenty-fifth part of the number able to bear arms. This proportion would not yield, in the United States, an army of more than twenty-five or thirty thousand men. To these would be opposed a militia amounting to near half a million of citizens with arms in their hands, officered by men chosen from among themselves, fighting for their common liberties, and united and conducted by governments possessing their affections and confidence. It may well be doubted, whether a militia thus circumstanced could ever be conquered by such a proportion of regular troops.”

          James Madison, Federalist 46

  • kevindf

    This is the same clown who sends city payroll slackers to do house-to-house searches under the guise of “sump pump inspection.”

  • Penn

    He is truly an ignorant individual. He’s also a big advocate of gay rights, displaying the more of the mentality cherished by liberals as advanced culture. He probably thinks the Earth is flat and humans are causing global warming, too.

    • http://sayanythingblog.com Rob

      Well, to be fair, I probably agree with him on homosexual issues.

  • camsaure

    II always thought this idiot looked like he just escaped the drunk tank and is hoping to find a bed in the homeless shelter.

    • Bat One

      Looks more like an over-the-hill chicken hawk to me. ‘Course the two aren’t mutually exlcusive by any means.

      • SusanBeehler

        Name calling because you have nothing better to say?

        • Bat One

          Au contraire! As usual I have plenty to say, and nearly all of it is pertinent, rational, and factually correct. The problem I have is wording it in such a manner so that even you will at least start to comprehend just what I’m saying. Obstinacy and obtuseness clearly aren’t mutually exclusive either.

        • camsaure

          Keep talking, you are giving everyone a better description of yourself then any “name calling” could.

    • SusanBeehler

      Degrading people is where a domestic violence offender begins.

      • camsaure

        So, what would you call it if I just let you degrade yourself on your own? You are doing a heck of a job. LOL

  • Bat One

    There no end to the inadvertent humor here. The “coalition” wants to make gun trafficking a federal crime, And as soon as Holder and his ATF arrest themselves for Fast and Furious we’ll all sleep a lot safer.

    • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com Goon

      I guess we better go arrest the AG Holder…

      • schreib

        He should have been in jail a long time ago.

  • http://www.facebook.com/don.pfaff.3 Don Pfaff

    Someone need to read their history….. Independence being declared in 1776, the states began adopting bills of rights, several of which recognized “the right of the people” to have arms for various purposes, such as self defense and the common defense

    • Lianne

      self- defense against the buffalo ;-)

  • Radniecki

    Denny also has a “man-crush” on Bloomberg. I remember shortly after he was first elected, he attended a Mayoral global warming conference hosted by America’s Nanny, Mayor Bloomberg of NY. Now Denny wants to jump on the idiot wagon because it’s so much easier to react without thought and principle, and just blame the guns.

  • http://randysroundtable.blogspot.com/ Randy G

    I don’t think I have ever heard more off the wall stupid words come from his or anyone else’s mouth with regard to the second amendment ever.

  • banjo kid

    The Mayor has a reading disability , along with being stupid not ignorant but stupid , you can not fix stupid./ Bloomberg has a reading disability also because he read that it was the right of the militia to bear arms not the people .

  • headward

    So the Fargo mayor has trouble reading? I thought the 2nd amendment was the easiest to understand.

    Maybe Penn & Teller can explain it better for him since he has trouble reading.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1GNu7ldL1LM

  • banjo kid

    Amendment2. A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed . There are also many papers Written by Jefferson and others that explain that the amendment was for the protection of the people from a evil corrupt government.Any one who can turn that amendment into, it was just to protect hunting, needs some kind of award for not understanding what they read.

    • SusanBeehler

      “things like that”

  • Hal637

    Do mayors take an oath to uphold the Constitution? Does he even know what the Constitution says and means? At least we know the path he is on.

  • sbark

    What fraction of our elected officials……from local city/county up thru our POTUS could pass a civics test?………

  • OldConserv2011

    the true test of the level of stupidity in Fargo will come in the next election. Will the citizens of Fargo recognize his stupidity by voting him out? Or will the citizens of Fargo show their own stupidity and keep him around for another term? Given the evidence I’ve seen in Fargo, my guess is the latter.

  • http://Sayanythingblog.com The Whistler

    The term “militia” has a legal definition which may be useful.

    http://www.law.cornell.edu/uscode/text/10/311

    (a)
    The militia of the United States consists of all able-bodied males at least 17 years of age and, except as provided in section 313 of title 32,
    under 45 years of age who are, or who have made a declaration of
    intention to become, citizens of the United States and of female
    citizens of the United States who are members of the National Guard.

    (b)
    The classes of the militia are—

    (1)
    the organized militia, which consists of the National Guard and the Naval Militia; and

    (2)
    the unorganized militia, which consists
    of the members of the militia who are not members of the National Guard
    or the Naval Militia.

  • schreib

    Fargo is Minnesota-West, but comments as ignorant as his should erase all doubt of him ever being re-elected. Fargo is still in North Dakota

  • http://www.facebook.com/tim.eppen Tim Eppen

    I totally disagree with him. The second Amendment was design to help protect people from tryannical government.

  • Matthew Hawkins

    The purpose of the 2nd amendment was to be able to raise an army. Their is no provision in the constitution for a standing army, while there is for a navy. The founding fathers did not plan on having a standing army. The plan was to raise an army through militias.

    • camsaure

      please read below in regards to a civics test.

  • Mike

    He is expressing his opinion, not as a constitutionalist, but as an egotist.

  • VocalYokel

    “…making gun trafficking a federal crime…”

    I agree.
    ‘Illegal’ guns could wind up in the hands of Mexican drug traffickers who might use them to shoot American law enforcement officers.

  • Marcus Larson

    Fargo Mayor Dennis Walaker has very little respect for individual or property rights.
    This is just another example of his passive aggressive bully nature postulating discussion on his pre-determined politics.

  • silverstreak

    Does the Mayor Walaker have a criminal history ?
    Many of Bloomberg’s group can’t even legally own a firearm.

  • $8194357

    Historical revisionism agenda of UNESCO.
    Helps with statist leftist social engineering a brave new world, huh…

  • DakotaKid

    It seems to me hunting was never mentioned in the second amendment. If Dennis Walaker would read the second amendment he would actually know this. It is time to remove this proudly ignorant politician from office.

  • silverstreak

    The same day that the Connecticut were occurring a nutcase in China slashed 22 children with a knife at the front gates to their school. Recent knife and axe attacks on schoolchildren in China has left dozens dead and dozens more injured.

    http://worldnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2012/12/14/15901085-villager-slashes-22-kids-with-knife-at-elementary-school-gates-in-china?lite

    Should we put a ban on knives,institute a training program and a waiting period to buy an axe?

    In 1999 Mark Barton went on a shooting spree after losing hundreds of thousands of dollars day trading stocks in two securities firms near Atlanta killing nine people but not before bludgeoning his wife and children to death with a hammer.

    http://criminalminds.wikia.com/wiki/Mark_Barton

    Should we have banned carpentry tools?

    After Timothy McVeigh murdered and maimed hundreds in Oklahoma City with a truck bomb.
    Should we have banned diesel fuel,ammonium nitrate and rental trucks?

    After Eric Rudolf was able to kill and maim people in Birmingham Alabama and Atlanta Georgia with homemade pipe bombs wraped with concrete nails.
    Should we have banned plumbing supplies and nails?

    In the aftermath of the 911 attacks which killed thousands should we have banned box cutters and just to be on the safe side should we also ban airplanes and tall buildings?

    Or….should we accept the unpleasant fact that if someone wants to kill badly enough,they will find a way.

  • silverstreak

    In a gun free zone
    Call 911 first,then crawl to the nearest exit.
    If help is delayed in arriving,then you can kiss your defenseless butt goodbye.
    Remember…when seconds count,the cops are only minutes away.

    • camsaure

      Most honest cops will tell you right out that, they are not there to prevent crime(because they can’t), they are there to investigate and clean up the scene.

      • silverstreak

        That’s about the truth of it.
        Legaly the cops can’t even do anything but watch until a crime is commited.

  • Prometheus

    Even Australia’s Bureau of Crime Statistics and Research acknowledges that the gun ban had no significant impact on the amount of gun-involved crime:

    In 2006, assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
    Sexual assault — Australia’s equivalent term for rape — increased 29.9 percent.
    Overall, Australia’s violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
    Moreover, Australia and the United States — where no gun-ban exists — both experienced similar decreases in murder rates:

    Between 1995 and 2007, Australia saw a 31.9 percent decrease; without a gun ban, America’s rate dropped 31.7 percent.
    During the same time period, all other violent crime indices increased in Australia: assault rose 49.2 percent and robbery 6.2 percent.
    Sexual assault — Australia’s equivalent term for rape — increased 29.9 percent.
    Overall, Australia’s violent crime rate rose 42.2 percent.
    At the same time, U.S. violent crime decreased 31.8 percent: rape dropped 19.2 percent; robbery decreased 33.2 percent; aggravated assault dropped 32.2 percent.
    Australian women are now raped over three times as often as American women.

  • joeb

    Apparently the Fargo Mayor has never read the Federalist Papers. Had he done so, he would realize the purpose of an armed citizenry is to keep the government from ever having such an advantage militarily over the people that it could forcibly remove their liberty. In the discussion of whether there should even be a standing army, and of how large that army should be, it was noted that the Federal Army should be powerful enough to prevent any one or two state militias from dominating the others, and that the people, if necessary, by force of their privately owned arms would constitute a force superior to both State and Federal armies. (After all, a Militia was an army–that was the dictionary definition).

    In order to control the army (A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state) to keep it from being an abusive power: The right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

    Keep in mind the Founders had just overthrown what amounted to a Military Government imposed by the British, and it was fresh in their minds that tyranny is imposed by force of arms. An armed population serves as a deterrent to the attempt to impose tyranny.

    Now, I wonder if the Mayor is going to ban the Big Gulp in Fargo, too.

  • 308T

    If Mr. Walaker or anyone else can find the words hunting or sportsman in the 2nd Amendment I’ll give them one of my evil assault rifles…happy hunting

    • slackwarerobert

      And if it is for hunting. Why do they ban hunting with an assault weapon?

  • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

    Has anyone asked Walaker if he believes that too many people on Guam might tip it over?

  • http://ndgoon.blogspot.com Goon

    These politicians should go back and read the constitution, doesn’t say anything about hunting.

  • http://proof-proofpositive.blogspot.com/ Proof

    Mayors Against Guns, Gunowners Or Their Supporters
    M.A.G.G.O.T.S.

  • http://flamemeister.com flamemeister

    The racist basis of the Sullivan act and the prevalence of illegal firearms in other countries: http://reason.com/archives/2012/12/22/gun-restrictions-have-always-bred-defian

  • http://www.facebook.com/don.pfaff.3 Don Pfaff

    He owns stock in gun companies! Data from the North Dakota Retirement and Investment Office show the agency’s $3.79 billion portfolio includes about 3,100 shares worth more than $39,000 in two gun-makers: Sturm Ruger and Smith & Wesson.

  • cylde

    Yes, he really is as stupid as he looks, way to go Fargo.

  • LibertyFargo

    Not much of a student of history is our mayor here in Fargo? Rather just a progressive politician sitting in a “non-partisan” office… Why do we keep electing this guy?

    “The strongest reason for the people to retain the right to keep and bear arms is, as a last resort, to protect themselves against tyranny in government.” – Thomas Jeffferson

  • slackwarerobert

    Yes, the 2nd was written for hunting tyrants in government. If hunting animals for food it would say, the right to keep and bear arms to stop hunger shall not be infringed.

    An army overthrowing a tyrant in the white house would be a military coup shall not be infringed. Since they haven’t removed the tyrant in the white house there is all the proof you need it is for the people to do it. There is no way the army could mistake an illegal military campaign in libya with no congressional authorization as anything but an out of control tyrant oppressing people.

    If they are military weapons then why do your police have them?

Top