C Howard Diaz
Margaret Sanger, George Bernard Shaw, Adolph Hitler all wanted to eradicate people who were mentally challenged. While Margaret Sanger and Shaw were far more lenient in their ideas of weeding out the mentally challenged, Hitler took it to the extreme.
In the late 1930’s Hitler instituted programs to exterminate mentally challenged, retarded and other humans he considered abnormal by killing them, nicely. With this as a backdrop and knowing that all the shooters of the latest mass shootings in America were in fact mentally challenged, I must ask this question.
What in the world did Dr. Janis Orlowski, the COO of Medstar Washington Hospital Center, mean when she said what she said while being interviewed on the day of the Washington Naval Yard shooting?
Listen to her:
When she ends with “because we just can’t have one more shooting with so many people killed,” what does she mean? As a doctor, she certainly must know the only way to stop these mass shootings would be to eradicate the mentally disturbed in America. Is she suggesting we must eradicate the mentally challenged in America?
Now I know she wasn’t implying we must eradicate the mentally ill, anyway I hope she wasn’t. She’s probably an anti gun nut, like all the rest who are using this tragedy to again start a debate on gun control. They should all look to Colorado, and the recent recall of the two state senators for voting for stricter gun control in that state, before they start talking.
The idea that there are those who would like to take away weapons in the hands of honest law abiding Americans is just a none issue. Like them, she must not know what she’s talking about or must not remotely understand the Constitution.
Our Constitution does not give the federal government any authority to even voice an opinion on the subject. There is no mention, anywhere, in the Constitution that gives the federal government the authority to discuss any kind of gun control. The People are not only protected by the Second Amendment, but by the fact that there is no mention of that authority in the original Constitution, prior to the Bill of Rights being enacted.
That is what makes our forefathers thought process so brilliant. They were saying, if the authority is not stated in the Constitution, the federal government doesn’t have it. After that, they made sure they would not be misunderstood by enacting the Bill of Rights where in the Tenth Amendment they stated:
“The powers not delegated to the United States by the Constitution, nor prohibited by it to the States, are reserved to the States respectively, or to the people.”
—Tenth Amendment to the United States Constitution
In today’s English that means if the authority (power) is not authorized (delegated) to the federal government (the United States) that authority (power) belong to (are reserved to) the people, (the States and the People.)
Therefore the federal government does not have any authority to enact any laws concerning any weapons, the control of any weapons or the registration of any weapon. The federal government cannot enact any law limiting ammo, the size of magazines or anything related to weapons. Nothing, nada, zero, zip.
The federal government can’t even amend the Constitution. That power was left to the States and the People. So who do you think our forefathers wanted to run our country? The PEOPLE!
Who’s been increasingly usurping power and authority in defiance of our Constitution for the past one hundred years? The federal government!
For the record, our Constitution also does not allow the federal government to eradicate any mentally challenged American either and our doctor friend should watch what she says, it could be misinterpreted.
If any reader doesn’t believe what I’ve written, about our Constitution, you had better read my book, “A Charter of Negative Liberties, Defining the Bill of Rights and Other Commentary,” or start re-learning our Constitution.
You should also read an earlier post on this subject,”Al Sharpton, Marc Morial and My Opinion on Gun Control,”