What kind of Secretary of State or in the case of Condi Rice ex-secretary of state doesn’t grasp this freedom stuff? Condi said: “I don’t understand why civilians need to have access to military weapons.”
She should have studied the founding of America better and she would find out that not only should civilians have guns, they should have arms.
Rice argued there should be “a conversation about what the right to bear arms means in the modern world.” She added, ” I don’t understand why civilians need to have access to military weapons.” She doesn’t trust people and her attitude and statements prove she doesn’t.
Rice said men around her carrying firearms for protection when she was growing up in Birmingham was: “a pure version of the 2nd Amendment, as a matter of fact, the right to bear arms.” She continued, “…I think it is time for us to have a conversation about what the right to bear arms means in the modern world. I don’t understand why civilians need to have access to military weapons. We wouldn’t say you can go out and buy a tank. So, I do think we need to have that conversation. But I believe that the rights that we have in the Constitution are indivisible. We can’t throw away the 2nd Amendment and keep the 1st.”
Rice also discussed allowing teachers to carry guns. She stated she would not be armed as a teacher. Rice continued, “I don’t really like the idea, frankly, of a gun in my classroom. I think that we need to have law enforcement protect us. Look, if people need to train people to protect our schools, and perhaps even communities want to consider whether or not they need guards to protect the schools, it’s a sad thing to think that we might, then that’s something that we should look at. But I don’t think that just arming people in the classroom is going to be the answer.”
It would have been the answer in the case of Parkland High School.
Views: 24
