At a time when it’s more important than ever to maintain the right of the American people to keep and bear arms for self-defense, law professor David S. Cohen is calling for repeal of the Second Amendment. “Americans’ rights are in mortal danger,” he says, unless Hillary Clinton is elected president and stacks the Supreme Court with progressive judges.
In the repeatedly discredited rag, Rolling Stone, Cohen writes, “sometimes we just have to acknowledge that the Founders and the Constitution are wrong. This is one of those times. . . . The Second Amendment needs to be repealed because it is outdated, a threat to liberty and a suicide pact.”
By “outdated,” Cohen means that the Framers of the Bill of Rights were unable to conceive of 19th century semi-automatic firearm technology. “When the Second Amendment was adopted in 1791, there were no weapons remotely like the AR-15 assault rifle (sic),” he said.
However, as the late, great Justice Antonin Scalia wrote in the Supreme Court’s decision in District of Columbia v. Heller, “Just as the First Amendment protects modern forms of communications and the Fourth Amendment applies to modern forms of search, the Second Amendment extends, prima facie, to all instruments that constitute bearable arms, even those that were not in existence at the time of the founding.”
And in any case, there is nothing outdated about the underlying principle of the Second Amendment: to prohibit the government from interfering with the ability of people to acquire, possess and develop proficiency with arms they might one day need to defend themselves and their loved ones.
Cohen’s rant is just one example of an astonishing amount of sheer nonsense that has filled the Internet since the terrorist attack in Orlando. Anti-gun politicians, and so-called opinion columnists and TV talking heads – who pretend to be “experts” on every topic under the sun, but who in reality know virtually nothing about even one topic – are confidently calling the AR-15 an “automatic” weapon, a “military” weapon,” and a “weapon of war,” and telling everyone that the most popular rifle in America should be banned.
Of course, the First Amendment protects the right of pundits to demonstrate that the size of their egos are only matched by the depth of their ignorance on firearms and the Second Amendment. And so it should be.
If history repeats itself, the recent slew of half-baked, culture-war-based, ideologically-motivated, attention-seeking statements against guns will only increase support for the right to arms, and additional support may develop as people increasingly realize that President Obama and Hillary Clinton, who are urging gun bans, are the very politicians most responsible for the rise of overseas terrorist groups who inspire and possibly direct evildoers within our midst.
All the more reason for the American people to protect their right to protect themselves.
Pro-Clinton College Professor: Repeal Second Amendment!

Friday, June 17, 2016

Monday, September 8, 2025
Close observers of the gun debate often see references to due process.
Monday, September 8, 2025
Pure gun control. As in disarmament and banning of firearms. It’s rare that anti-gunners get straight to the exact point that we have been warning of for decades.
Thursday, September 11, 2025
Yesterday, the Third Circuit Court of Appeals issued an opinion in Siegel v. Platkin, striking some of the carry restrictions New Jersey enacted in response to the NRA’s landmark Supreme Court victory, New York State Rifle & ...
Monday, September 8, 2025
California Governor Gavin Newsom (D) may have thought he had scored against President Donald Trump in a recent war of words over rampant crime and the deployment of federal law enforcement agents to Democratic-led cities
Monday, September 8, 2025
Today, the National Rifle Association filed an amicus brief urging the U.S. Supreme Court to grant certiorari in a case challenging Washington State’s ban on firearm magazines that hold more than 10 rounds.
More Like This From Around The NRA
