A Quote by Jerry Falwell, Jr.

I don't understand why it's controversial for law-abiding citizens protecting themselves under the Second Amendment. — © Jerry Falwell, Jr.
I don't understand why it's controversial for law-abiding citizens protecting themselves under the Second Amendment.
It is divisive politics to infringe upon the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding citizens after a national tragedy.
We all share the same goal to keep guns out of the hands of people who should not have them, while fully protecting the Second Amendment rights of law-abiding, responsible Americans.
What I don't want to do is restrict law-abiding citizens from their Second Amendment rights, which are focused on freedom. I point out all the time. Remember, bad guys aren't stupid, they're just bad.
If we're going to change the laws, let's change them in ways which makes it easier to catch criminals, and yet at the same time protect the Second Amendment rights of our law-abiding citizens.
If were going to change the laws, lets change them in ways which makes it easier to catch criminals, and yet at the same time protect the Second Amendment rights of our law-abiding citizens.
What we've seen in Louisiana - the breakdown of law and order in the aftermath of disaster - is exactly the kind of situation where the Second Amendment was intended to allow citizens to protect themselves.
I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment and believe that law-abiding Americans have the right to self-defense.
The NRA isn't a boogeyman, it's a grass-roots organization made up of 5 million law-abiding Second Amendment supporters.
When you have law-abiding citizens who are actively ready to protect themselves and their family, that reduces crime.
Ideally, informal social controls, above all the family, preserve public order. But when the family disintegrates, the police are the second-best solution for protecting the law-abiding.
The gun control mentality is ruthlessly absurd. It suggests that you pass a law which will bind law-abiding citizens — they won't have access to weapons. Now, we know that criminals, by definition, are people who don't obey laws. Therefore, you can pass all the laws that you want, they will still have access to these weapons, just as they have access to illegal drugs and other things right now. That means you end up with a situation in which the law-abiding folks can't defend themselves, and the crooks have all the guns.
The National Guard fulfills the militia mentioned in the Second amendment. Citizens no longer need to protect the states or themselves.
As a freedom-lover and avid outdoorsman, I understand the importance of protecting the Second Amendment, which has been under attack by liberal special interest groups funded by elitist billionaires.
I think ultimately that the rules that you make for gun control, people who are intent on killing themselves aren't too concerned with the rules. Law-abiding citizens are.
As citizens of this democracy, you are the rulers and the ruled, the law-givers and the law-abiding, the beginning and the end.
I simply cannot stand by and watch a right guaranteed by the Constitution of the United States come under attack from those who either can't understand it, don't like the sound of it, or find themselves too philosophically squeamish to see why it remains the first among equals: Because it is the right we turn to when all else fails. That's why the Second Amendment is America's first freedom.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!